I keep on reading about people who are concerned of the fact that "steem" seems to be a popularity contest. I totally get it, I mean, most of us have a collection of experiences dating back to school days, and the negative hot cognition no doubt comes from those days. I submit to you however the outrageous possibility that the thing we are reactionary to reject, might actually be a good thing.

We are all special

The beautiful idea that every single human is special, powerful, valuable is an amazing goal to strive for and a spiritual compass to always keep in mind. I say all this knowing full well that defining the lines, attempting to add nuance to this conversation seems to always trigger the the most self righteous among us.

It's my personal belief that no one who has spent considerable time thinking about this subject with a lens of honesty can or at least should hold this idea to be immutable truth. The concept itself crumbles before the sentence is over, thus making the logical impossibility blatantly apparent. To have some fun with this conversation and to drive my point home, allow me to present some statements using the same logic:

• "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." - George Orwell
• "It will always be the same, except when its not" - Unknown author
• "I distinctly remember forgetting that." - Clara Barton

I hope my silly point is becoming a little more clear. We all believe we can detect and avoid contradictions, oxymorons as we know them to be called, yet most of us struggle to function without adopting one or two into our very own moral fabric. The idea that we are all special, that we all deserve special recognition, etc is both beautiful and completely illogical.

My buddy Pareto

Proposes the idea that most things in life are not distributed equally. It's also important to point out that the Pareto Principle is not a law, but a rule and like many other things in the observable nature, it has exceptions to it. It seems however to be mostly true, or at least this has also been my observable experience.

• 20% of the input creates 80% of the result
• 20% of the workers produce 80% of the result
• 20% of the customers create 80% of the revenue
• 20% of the software bugs cause 80% of the crashes
• 20% of the features cause 80% of the usage

And the list can continue like this until we are all blue in the face. In very beginning however, the Pareto Principle referred to the observation that 80% of Italy’s wealth belonged to only 20% of the population. Upon reading further into the matter, it seems obvious to me that the numbers are not absolutes, but more like guidelines that manage to bring needed attention to observable phenomena.

In conclusion

Most of us won't be that remarkable, and that observation does not mean we should give up or be depressed about it. I know it seems a bit out of place for me to talk about the "reasons why not to try" but If that is what you got out of this post, I must apologize and try to do a better job at explaining myself next time.

The main point I'm trying to make is that only things that are difficult to accomplish can be valuable to us sapiens, that nothing easy is truly appreciated or at least not in more permanent way. So when we read/hear other people say, this is hard, this is too difficult, nobody can do it, its rigged, we are given a choice, a powerful choice. We have to ask ourselves one question:

Am I willing pay the cost to be in the 20%?

Other posts by yours truly

_{• At this time?
• First pit stop
• On our way to St Pete, look at them beaches..
• Do you need a niche? - Thoughts on "making it" on Steem
• In the name of the Benjamis - Audio version}