Alternative Title: The Parable of the Crimp

If you watch really proficient rock climbers, you’ll see they can hold themselves up, dozens of feet above the ground, with just the tips of their fingers on the tiniest ledge of rock, about the width of a pencil, called a crimp (example image above). If I had not seen it, I would have said it was impossible. When I tried to do it myself, I became convinced that it’s impossible. The feeling! The aching in your fingers, and the awkwardness of the angle tearing at your finger-bones is unbearable. (When I go climbing, I have to hang on to massive, handle-shaped-handles called Jugs which are literally the easiest of the options.)

I think the crimp holds a few valuable lessons. The first is just how tough people can be with the right experience and training. People can do pretty incredible things, things that look impossible if you haven’t seen it, and things that feel impossible if you try them. And the truly weird thing is that you too can do things which look and feel impossible. Let me repeat that for emphasis; there are things which right now look impossible to you, which when you try them will feel impossible, which you can someday, with the right experience and training, accomplish routinely

The second is about humility; just because people can do some things which look and feel impossible, doesn’t mean that people can do all things that look and feel impossible. No matter how much experience and training they get, no rock climber can defeat a flat, vertical wall. To use a phrase my father is quite fond of, “that dog just don’t hunt.” You can waste a lot of time trying to learn to climb flat walls, I know I have. Please do better than me. Furthermore, just because I know that it is possible for someone to hang on to a crimp, just because I know that I too can eventually do it, doesn’t automatically mean that I can do it right now. No amount of focusing or analyzing or meditating on the Sequences is gonna change those facts; some problems are training and experience shaped, and the shortest path is the one without fake shortcuts. In these situations, patience is a useful and underrated skill. 

In one of his recent films, as Sherlock Holmes is coming down from a drug and stress induced vision quest, his brother tells him that, for Sherlock, “solitary confinement is locking you up with your worst enemy.” In that moment, I related a lot with Sherlock (sans the drugs, #straight-edge punk). I have experienced a lot of depression, anxiety and insecurity over the years.  I have self-sabotaged more times than I can count. I have made more dumb mistakes than I think I will ever be comfortable admitting. I have disappointed people’s expectations of me, and almost always I had only myself to blame. I have had all kinds of feelings towards myself, but “my own worst enemy” is certainly in there. I have been incredibly hard on myself, and I’ve been a very difficult person for me to live with. Part of my mind says that it’s this hardness that has been critical to me accomplishing what I have. Like an overbearing parent, “I’m hard on you because I believe in you” is the story I told myself. I think that the truth is somewhere in between, somewhere subtly different but far better than all this, but that is to be addressed in a different post.  

It has often seemed impossible to learn to manage myself. It has often seemed impossible to be better. When I tried, it often felt impossible. And many times, just reading the right thing didn’t help. Just knowing, intellectually, that it was possible didn’t help. Lots of concrete plans and attempts didn't help. But other things did. Training and experience helped, and now I can do things routinely which once felt impossible. It took patience and strategy and a fair amount of panic, but it got better. I didn't feel like it would, but it did. 

I don’t mean to collapse this metaphor to only “mental health”. That’s just the most emotionally vivid aspect of my experience with it - and I don’t really know how to separate my feelings from my mind from my decisions from the world I live in. They’re all entangled in strange causal webs, and to talk about one in sufficient detail demands I talk about the others. But the metaphor applies to lots of things. Until we have fulfilled our heroic responsibility, I imagine there will be things we must face which look impossible, and which feel impossible. Maybe they will be impossible, but maybe they won’t be. Either way, we’ll be needing both hope and humility in great abundance. I only wish  that this story provides you with a little of each, from one internet weirdo to another. 

Comments4


Sorted by Click to highlight new comments since:

I liked this post. Thought it might be improved with a visual example of a 'crimp.'

Ah yes excellent point, I have included above!

EA could use more climbers and rock climbing analogies. Appreciate this post :) 

Curated and popular this week
Paul Present
 ·  · 28m read
 · 
Note: I am not a malaria expert. This is my best-faith attempt at answering a question that was bothering me, but this field is a large and complex field, and I’ve almost certainly misunderstood something somewhere along the way. Summary While the world made incredible progress in reducing malaria cases from 2000 to 2015, the past 10 years have seen malaria cases stop declining and start rising. I investigated potential reasons behind this increase through reading the existing literature and looking at publicly available data, and I identified three key factors explaining the rise: 1. Population Growth: Africa's population has increased by approximately 75% since 2000. This alone explains most of the increase in absolute case numbers, while cases per capita have remained relatively flat since 2015. 2. Stagnant Funding: After rapid growth starting in 2000, funding for malaria prevention plateaued around 2010. 3. Insecticide Resistance: Mosquitoes have become increasingly resistant to the insecticides used in bednets over the past 20 years. This has made older models of bednets less effective, although they still have some effect. Newer models of bednets developed in response to insecticide resistance are more effective but still not widely deployed.  I very crudely estimate that without any of these factors, there would be 55% fewer malaria cases in the world than what we see today. I think all three of these factors are roughly equally important in explaining the difference.  Alternative explanations like removal of PFAS, climate change, or invasive mosquito species don't appear to be major contributors.  Overall this investigation made me more convinced that bednets are an effective global health intervention.  Introduction In 2015, malaria rates were down, and EAs were celebrating. Giving What We Can posted this incredible gif showing the decrease in malaria cases across Africa since 2000: Giving What We Can said that > The reduction in malaria has be
Rory Fenton
 ·  · 6m read
 · 
Cross-posted from my blog. Contrary to my carefully crafted brand as a weak nerd, I go to a local CrossFit gym a few times a week. Every year, the gym raises funds for a scholarship for teens from lower-income families to attend their summer camp program. I don’t know how many Crossfit-interested low-income teens there are in my small town, but I’ll guess there are perhaps 2 of them who would benefit from the scholarship. After all, CrossFit is pretty niche, and the town is small. Helping youngsters get swole in the Pacific Northwest is not exactly as cost-effective as preventing malaria in Malawi. But I notice I feel drawn to supporting the scholarship anyway. Every time it pops in my head I think, “My money could fully solve this problem”. The camp only costs a few hundred dollars per kid and if there are just 2 kids who need support, I could give $500 and there would no longer be teenagers in my town who want to go to a CrossFit summer camp but can’t. Thanks to me, the hero, this problem would be entirely solved. 100%. That is not how most nonprofit work feels to me. You are only ever making small dents in important problems I want to work on big problems. Global poverty. Malaria. Everyone not suddenly dying. But if I’m honest, what I really want is to solve those problems. Me, personally, solve them. This is a continued source of frustration and sadness because I absolutely cannot solve those problems. Consider what else my $500 CrossFit scholarship might do: * I want to save lives, and USAID suddenly stops giving $7 billion a year to PEPFAR. So I give $500 to the Rapid Response Fund. My donation solves 0.000001% of the problem and I feel like I have failed. * I want to solve climate change, and getting to net zero will require stopping or removing emissions of 1,500 billion tons of carbon dioxide. I give $500 to a policy nonprofit that reduces emissions, in expectation, by 50 tons. My donation solves 0.000000003% of the problem and I feel like I have f
LewisBollard
 ·  · 8m read
 · 
> How the dismal science can help us end the dismal treatment of farm animals By Martin Gould ---------------------------------------- Note: This post was crossposted from the Open Philanthropy Farm Animal Welfare Research Newsletter by the Forum team, with the author's permission. The author may not see or respond to comments on this post. ---------------------------------------- This year we’ll be sharing a few notes from my colleagues on their areas of expertise. The first is from Martin. I’ll be back next month. - Lewis In 2024, Denmark announced plans to introduce the world’s first carbon tax on cow, sheep, and pig farming. Climate advocates celebrated, but animal advocates should be much more cautious. When Denmark’s Aarhus municipality tested a similar tax in 2022, beef purchases dropped by 40% while demand for chicken and pork increased. Beef is the most emissions-intensive meat, so carbon taxes hit it hardest — and Denmark’s policies don’t even cover chicken or fish. When the price of beef rises, consumers mostly shift to other meats like chicken. And replacing beef with chicken means more animals suffer in worse conditions — about 190 chickens are needed to match the meat from one cow, and chickens are raised in much worse conditions. It may be possible to design carbon taxes which avoid this outcome; a recent paper argues that a broad carbon tax would reduce all meat production (although it omits impacts on egg or dairy production). But with cows ten times more emissions-intensive than chicken per kilogram of meat, other governments may follow Denmark’s lead — focusing taxes on the highest emitters while ignoring the welfare implications. Beef is easily the most emissions-intensive meat, but also requires the fewest animals for a given amount. The graph shows climate emissions per tonne of meat on the right-hand side, and the number of animals needed to produce a kilogram of meat on the left. The fish “lives lost” number varies significantly by
Recent opportunities in Community
59
John Salter
· · 4m read
6
2 authors
· · 3m read