Naïveté and Network—The Almanack of Naval Ravikant.
‘Read what you love until you love to read’- Naval Ravikant.
I can imagine the words rolling out of Naval’s mouth like an old spiel. His whole frame affirming the words. His eyes slightly sunken, a depth showing wealth of vast knowledge, pain and freedom.
Then I imagine taking a screenshot and sending it to my brother with the caption ‘How many things will someone now read?’. I will be giddy and slightly overwhelmed waiting for his reply.
Thank goodness that I am realising I can read whatever I want although Naval thinks it is important to start from the basics— arithmetic and microeconomics as opposed to other advanced concepts. However, some of Naval’s recommendations are startling—from ‘Sapiens’ to ‘Thinking Physics’. I hate physics.
In ‘The Almanack of Naval Ravikant’, I am struck by two things.
The first is in Tim Ferris’s foreword —apart from the fact that Tim says that he had committed many years ago to never write forewords. He says that Naval will not want you to accept everything at face value.
He would like you to challenge him. I smile. Typical Naval. From just reading the book and observing him for three years now, it seems I can permeate his thoughts. I wonder why.
The second is that Naval and I both share being impatient, a major flaw which I think is a weird thing to be fond of.
Naval has a lot of things to share in this almanack—and now I have added it to the list of recommended books to read for those who may not like to read and would like something short and quick. Like an expansion of tweetstorms, bite-sized, and powerful. From one of the wisest people in the world.
I eventually remind my brother what Naval said and he replies with his favourite sticker of a girl laughing with her head tilting towards the back, and her eyes closed. She is very beautiful but I do not save the sticker. I observe it.
I text him again ‘I’m serious, is it until someone dies?’. He tells me about a new book he is reading instead. It is not ‘The Black Swan’ by Nassim Taleb. It is not ‘Blink’ by Malcolm Gladwell. It is not any of these books that have been on my mind and his shelf.
He is reading articles on a website that remind me of Encarta Kids when I was younger and I see the categories —Travel, Science, Artificial Intelligence. No. I will pass.
I remember most references when I think. When I have a thought, I can say ‘Oh Napoleon taught me that’. ‘It was Stephen Levitt that said this ‘ or Ash and Hassan in Unfair Advantage’. Sometimes, it is a reiteration of the things I know. It makes it stick.
Naval has advised us to read the best 100 books in the world over and over. Sometimes it feels impossible. I am not even comfortable rewatching movies. How can I reread a book? But I reread ‘The Almanack of Naval Ravikant’ and now, I am even more confused.
You see, Naval thinks this is a good sign. He thinks your brain is going to expand—although he does not say it like this but his point is that you are building mental muscles. I wonder how.
I am shoved around with difficult and painful concepts. I am sitting, wondering how to internalise happiness. The longest I have gone without my phone is 15 minutes. Naval suggests an hour. There is something we both agree on, seamlessly that makes me happy—read out of curiosity.
Although mine has been watered, Naval has expanded his. I see why he says ‘Learn to love to read’.
Naïveté feels like a disease, a big lump in one’s throat, putting you aside and labelling you differently. It’s bothersome. In fact, one of the synonyms is gullibility and the word irritates me —maybe because growing up, my mum used it to describe people who made the worst decisions.
Now, the way I am going to look at naïveté is different. It is an opportunity. You can evolve, grow, learn, unlearn, relearn. There is a safer synonym—childlikeness. Or innocence. It is serene, almost evocative because the world is evil. The world is vile.
Many conversations about happiness that I have listened to or read claim that it stems from within, but eventually the concept of Network feels like an important factor. Your people, your support system, your circle.
There is so much buzz around it. You have to carefully pick them, your life is a sum of the people you are around, this and that. All valid.
If you sit in a state, not desiring, not regretting and you are not suffering, you are happy. Happiness is peace in motion—Naval.
So I decided to try it. I’m all about experimenting now. So I sat once, watching a little child struggle to open the door. I was not thinking of the next step, the bloody new year, or the refinement ahead of me.
Looking back, I did not regret the exorbitant bolt fees to be where I was or the text I failed to send. I sat and felt ‘okay’. I was okay. It reminded me of the word ‘copacetic’. And then it made me curl inside.
There is no profound thing I have to say about networking. I am terrible at it. It almost seems like it has to depend on who you are—your demeanour or persona. Again, Naval says something that I almost want to hug him for, not because it coddles my insecurity of social interaction. It is because it displaces it.
He says that business networking is a complete waste of time. If Naval, an entrepreneur and Angel investor can say this, my attention is fixed. He continues, ‘trying to build relationships in advance of doing business is a complete waste of time’.
His philosophy is ‘be a maker who makes something interesting and the right people will find you’. It is not a new philosophy, however it is profound. It is almost like a mini version of ‘The Backwards Law’ by Alan Watts which is the law of reversed efforts.
Again, Naval says ‘I think the solution to making everybody happy is to give them what they want —let’s get them all rich, let’s get them all fit and healthy then let’s get them all happy’
I slightly disagree but I do not know how to disagree because I know why he said it. When you make money, you can have a certain kind of freedom. Then, you can have the time to pursue internal peace and happiness.
Still, I am uncomfortable with this statement. It may be because of the recent criticism of Utopianism I listened to from Jordan Peterson—he read an excerpt from the ‘Notes of Underground’ by Fyodor Dostoevsky. His point was in the form of a question ‘What if being dissatisfied is part of what satisfies you?’
There are one billion things to know. Maybe a gazillion. It may never change. Now, that is something maybe you and I can agree on.