The Best Self-Help is Free: Reason and the Decisional Component of Productivity

The productivity of a person is simply a matter of how much productive work he can accomplish. We can, however, separate this attribute into two components: the decisional and the quantitative. The decisional component of productivity entails properly resolving what is to be produced, whereas the quantitative component describes how much of it is produced. In order for productivity on a large scale to be possible, both the decisional and quantitative components need to be satisfactorily addressed. Otherwise, one might have a brilliant, insightful idea about what ought to be done but lack the means to carry it out - or, on the flip side, one might be equipped with all the skills and tools needed to achieve immense productivity but lack an understanding of the ends to which these assets can be effectively put.

In order to properly decide what ought to be produced, man can ultimately consult only one guide: his rational faculty. No matter how much external data or advice he seeks, it is ultimately his reason which must analyze this information and produce a conclusion regarding the most prudent course of action to be followed. Even if an individual relies greatly on the pronouncements of some other human authority, this reliance cannot result in sustained productivity unless he has reached an individual, rational conclusion regarding why this authority ought to be believed. Trusting a man's technical judgment because he is superbly knowledgeable in the given field can be a rational decision; trusting him because he claims divine inspiration, a gut feeling, or the sanction of the general will can only lead to a series of endeavors that are doomed to failure from the onset - perhaps punctuated by a scarce few accidental successes.

Perhaps the most useful principle for adequately addressing the decisional component of productivity is the simple but profound Law of Identity: "A=A." To accurately understand what must be produced and how it can be produced, it is necessary to recognize that each thing is what it is, not necessarily what one wants it to be, wishes it could have been, or hopes it will become. So many decisional errors which impede productivity result from individuals attempting to fit a given object into a role to which it is ill-suited. This is not to say that the object is a deficient one; in some other role, it might have done a marvelous job. Clear examples of such violations of the Law of Identity include cases of non-professional gambling. The layman gambler sees attendance at the casino as what it is not: a systematic strategy for earning him money. On the other hand, the house recognizes the Law of Identity quite well and uses the casino with great success as a systematic strategy for earning it money.

Tautological or not, the Law of Identity serves its most significant role as a reminder to individuals that, in order to achieve any lasting success in the real world, it is necessary to fathom a thing's actual properties and to recognize that there is nothing more about that thing besides its actual properties. Following it consistently implies purging one's mind of wishful thinking and replacing it with realistic thinking. To a thoroughgoing realist, the decisional component of productivity becomes far easier to satisfy.

The decisional component of productivity requires a recognition of the objective constraints facing a given individual. Before embarking on any endeavor, it is necessary to ask oneself: "What is the best I can realistically hope to achieve by doing this? On the flip side, what is the worst-case scenario that could occur with this endeavor?" Furthermore, one should not hold the best-case scenario as one's expectation. More realistically, the outcome will be somewhere in-between the best and worst possible results. But because the worst-case scenario is always possible, one should set that as one's expectation and provide safeguards accordingly. If something better occurs, one will only be pleasantly surprised at the result. Of course, whenever it is possible to substitute a more preferable result for a less preferable one through one's own efforts, this should always be done.

But the worst possible manner in which to make a decision to produce is to do so based on hyper-inflated expectations of what is possible. For in this case, even if one has achieved the best-possible realistic outcome, one is still doomed to disappointment. Having done something genuinely productive, one will still bemoan the futility of it all and will likely be deterred from undertaking further productive activities. The talented young artist who throws away his magnificent paintings because he feels they do not match the great masters in quality is an example of this stultifying tendency.

Read all chapters of The Best Self-Help is Free.