I skimmed through most of the article, and agree to many points the author raised.
However, I find it not convincing, despite the fact I already agree to much of it. It's full of "I think this makes my life better, so it should to yours", with no definition of "better" or concrete example of achieving that "better".
This is unfortunate, I'd also like to believe that one should be able to achieve greatness without working themselves to death, and I wish there is evidence of that. Then I'll be able to enjoy my procrastination guilty-free.
I think this applies to many of the "self improvement" articles I've read.
I think these articles are definitely worthwhile, I just believe they need to be read as they are: about someone else's life. If your goals and life situation align with the author's, then I'd consider it pseudo-advice. If not, it should be read as an interesting personal success story, which are still valuable pieces.
However, I find it not convincing, despite the fact I already agree to much of it. It's full of "I think this makes my life better, so it should to yours", with no definition of "better" or concrete example of achieving that "better".
This is unfortunate, I'd also like to believe that one should be able to achieve greatness without working themselves to death, and I wish there is evidence of that. Then I'll be able to enjoy my procrastination guilty-free.