Questioning

Should You Read a Philosophy Book or a Self-Help Book?

October 10, 2025 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

Should You Read a Philosophy Book or a Self-Help Book? Self-help and philosophy both claim to enhance life, but they approach the task from opposite ends. Self-help assumes you know what you want—success, happiness, confidence—and hands you the tools to get there. Philosophy asks whether those goals are worth wanting in the first place.

Self-help offers strategies: affirmations, routines, lists. It treats discomfort like a bug to be patched. Philosophy treats it as a signal—something to examine, not suppress. Consider Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics: it doesn’t show you how to be happy, it interrogates what happiness even means. That shift from prescription to inquiry is the fault line.

Philosophy doesn’t sell quick wins. In fact, it doesn’t sell anything. It withholds answers and insists on better questions. That ambiguity frustrates, but it’s also what makes it enduring. Where self-help simplifies, philosophy destabilizes—often constructively.

Modern self-help is philosophy run through a blender: palatable, repeatable, stripped of nuance. It offers clarity at the cost of depth. While self-help patches the surface, philosophy digs through the foundation—often asking whether the building needed to be there in the first place.

If you want action, self-help delivers fast. If you want to probe your assumptions—slowly, painfully, fruitfully—philosophy waits. It may not give you a better life. But it will offer a clearer lens for judging what “better” even means.

Idea for Impact: Self-help flatters your instincts. Philosophy cross-examines them—sometimes into silence.

Stoic in the Title, Shallow in the Text: Summary of Robert Rosenkranz’s ‘The Stoic Capitalist’

October 6, 2025 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

The Stoic revival is in full swing. Scan any airport bookstore or business influencer’s feed and you’ll find a glut of titles flaunting quotes from Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius, and Seneca—repurposed as motivational mantras for the exceptionally busy and vaguely introspective. Stoicism, once a demanding discipline of character and moral clarity, now functions as ambient wisdom: a collection of slogans to soothe, sell, and self-brand.

What passes for Stoicism today is largely superficial. Its original rigor—a confrontation with mortality, ego, and the ethical demands of reasoned action—has been flattened into life-hacking shorthand. Books that once urged readers to examine their complicity in suffering now offer platitudes about resilience and control. Many treat it less as method than accessory—something to dress up success, not interrogate it.

This is where The Stoic Capitalist: Advice for the Exceptionally Ambitious (2025) by investor and philanthropist Robert Rosenkranz slots in, bearing a title so algorithmically precise it could’ve been brainstormed by a branding team. The book claims to blend memoir, philosophy, and practical guidance, and Rosenkranz’s résumé lends him credibility. But the philosophical layer feels thin—more narrative varnish than intellectual structure.

Rosenkranz admits he discovered Stoicism late, applying it retroactively to interpret his career. The result isn’t a chronicle of Stoic-inspired choices, but a personal history retrofitted with borrowed gravitas. Where readers might expect rigorous philosophical engagement in high-stakes environments, they’ll find a polished memoir glossed with Stoic terminology. Even core tenets—agency, emotional discipline, apatheia—are presented with troubling looseness. Rather than encouraging engagement with suffering and complexity, the narrative risks casting Stoicism as permission for detachment. The mantra “controlling the controllables” recurs, but without probing what control means—or why it matters.

Recommendation: Skim. The book may appeal as a polished life story with intellectual garnish. But its philosophical promise is more decorative than durable. Real Stoicism demands interrogation of one’s motives in motion—not just the elegance of hindsight. And that’s harder to market.

What the Rise of AI Demands: Teaching the Thinking That Thinks About Thinking

July 22, 2025 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

The Rise of AI Demands Teaching the Thinking That Thinks About Thinking Spellcheck doesn’t create bad spellers; it lets spelling atrophy. Autocorrect and red squiggles do the work, and users stop internalizing rules. Just as GPS dulls a sense of direction, spellcheck erodes linguistic instinct. Remove the tool, and spelling falters—not from ignorance, but from disuse.

Now, AI poses a deeper threat. Its danger isn’t power; it’s passivity. Overreliance produces a generation unprepared for work that demands creativity and critical thought. Intellectual laziness already plagues classrooms, and AI only intensifies it.

To resist that drift, education must evolve. It isn’t enough to teach information—we must also teach metacognition. Students need to examine their own thinking: to ask why they believe something, how they reach conclusions, and where their reasoning fails. AI can assist, but only if used deliberately. It should provoke thought rather than replace it. By offering counterarguments and exposing blind spots, it sharpens cognition.

Idea for Impact: The real danger isn’t AI itself. It’s what we stop doing when it takes over. The spellcheck lesson still holds: unused skills don’t vanish; they decay.

Cultural Differences and Detecting Deception

October 25, 2023 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

Cultural Differences and Detecting Deception Spotting a liar isn’t an exact science; factors like eye contact, direct versus indirect communication, and many of the frequently highlighted “sure signs” of a liar may not always hold up across different cultures.

If you’re seeking more reliable indicators to help you discern truth from fiction, here they are:

Inconsistent Stories: Liars often weave a web of contradictions, changing their narrative as they go. When the story keeps evolving, it’s a red flag.
Lack of Detail: Liars tend to avoid specifics, offering vague responses that leave you with more questions than answers.
Defensiveness: While a poker face can hide the truth, excessive defensiveness can signal deception. When confronted, liars may become overly protective of their secrets.

Idea for Impact: Cultural sensitivity is essential when navigating the complex realm of truth and deception.

Be Open to Being Wrong

March 22, 2023 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

The philosopher and logician Bertrand Russell, one of history’s brightest minds, was once asked whether he’d be prepared to die for his beliefs. He replied, “Of course not. After all, I may be wrong.”

Feeling that you’re making more sense than others shouldn’t be the gauge for being accurate about your convictions. Especially when you’re good at arguing, you can take your ideas and judgments in various directions that will mislead you in ways that are more convincing to you than what the other side thinks. Blind spots can spawn certainty quickly.

Idea for Impact: Hold yourself to a higher standard. Turn doubt into a deliberate attitude. Allow your mind to wander in unexpected directions. Be open to other perspectives. Be open to being wrong.

And the Theranos Board Walks Away Scot-Free

November 19, 2022 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes has finally been sentenced to over 11 years in prison. Too bad our corporate law is too narrow to attribute some criminal liability to the company’s board of directors. Such luminaries as former Secretaries of State George Shultz and Henry Kissinger, Marine Corps General James Mattis, and former Secretary of Defense William Perry, once famously portrayed as “the single most accomplished board in U.S. corporate history,” should be partly culpable for Holmes’s malfeasance.

When Holmes explained away her underlying technology as “a chemistry performed so that a chemical reaction occurs and generates a signal from the chemical interaction with the sample, which is translated into a result, which is then reviewed by certified laboratory personnel,” all the board had to do was demand, “Show me.” Determining how a device or service works—exists even—as purported, is the essential obligation of a board member. A truly engaged overseer may have preserved $945 million in investors’ capital and kept a naïve, immoral, and feckless entrepreneur from bullying the press, intimidating her employees, and gambling with the patients’ lives. (Read WSJ reporter John Carreyrou’s excellent chronicle, Bad Blood (2018; my summary.))

The board individually and collectively failed in their responsibilities as trustees of investors’ interests. Undoubtedly drafted as trophy directors to reinforce the company’s standing such as it was, not for any knowledge of blood testing, they now walk away with nothing more than a blot on their illustrated careers.

When Exaggerations Cross the Line

January 22, 2022 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

Many myths and urban legends—even politicians’ infuriating rhetoric—aren’t wholly untrue. Rather, they’re exaggerations of claims rooted in a kernel of truth.

Yes, many of us don’t achieve our full intellectual potential. However, that doesn’t suggest that most people use only 10% of our brainpower.

Sure, men and women tend to differ somewhat in their communication styles. However, pop psychologists such as John Gray have taken this gender difference stereotype to an extreme, declaring “men are from Mars” and “women are from Venus.”

Idea for Impact: Exaggeration is part of human nature. Take care to not cross the line from harmless puffery to reckless overstatements.

Invite Employees to Contribute Their Wildest Ideas

December 13, 2021 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

When Hewlett-Packard (HP) Norway appointed Anita Krohn Traaseth managing director in 2012, she implemented a “speed date the boss” program. She invited every employee from every organization level for an informal, five-minute conversation based on three themes. She encouraged people to bring their big ideas on innovating individually and collectively.

Who are you, and what do you do at HP?

Where do you think we should change, and what should we keep focusing on?

What do you want to contribute beyond fulfilling your job responsibilities? Or, do you have a talent or skill you don’t get to use now in your position?

Everyone’s an Innovator: Ramp up creativity with your frontline employees

Krohn Traaseth’s initiative defined the roadmap for her tenure. It pushed HP to become one of Norway’s top workplaces within three years. HP Norway improved every major organizational performance measure, such as staff turnover, customer satisfaction, top-line growth, and bottom-line performance.

Not only that, her discussions uncovered that there were 30 skilled musicians on her payroll. HP Norway formed a band, which played live to 1,800 company executives in Barcelona in 2013, gaining better visibility to her Norwegian outpost.

Following Krohn Traaseth’s success, other HP divisions and employers have now introduced the concept of ‘Speed Date the Boss’ initiatives in other countries.

Idea for Impact: Value the frontline people in your organization as talented assets, not cheap cogs.

Krohn Traaseth’s program was so successful because, as the top boss, she showed that she was willing to listen. She also openly modeled her willingness to listen to her management teams and foster their engagement.

When employees see the boss willing to receive honest feedback and no one’s head rolls, they’re more likely to speak up.
Soliciting ideas directly from employees individually, rather than holding brainstorms, takes the edge off group dynamics. Group settings aren’t where all employees feel free to share their best–and bold—ideas.
Rank-and-file employees can be a great source of innovation if only their leaders listen to them. Organizational innovation doesn’t have to trickle top-down or emanate from the R&D team. The best way to produce great ideas is to start by generating many ideas. Encourage everyone on your team to think, contribute, and participate.

————

PS: Anita Krohn Traaseth is now the CEO of Innovation Norway, a state-sponsored project focused on promoting innovation and economic development. She’s the author of Good Enough for the Bastards (2014,) a Norwegian version of Sheryl Sandberg‘s Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead (2013.)

Cf: See my guide on preparing an action plan at a new job by collecting the expectations of all the people with whom your new role interacts.

Let’s Hope She Gets Thrown in the Pokey

November 16, 2021 By Nagesh Belludi 1 Comment

The Elizabeth Holmes-Theranos criminal trial hasn’t been without its share of theatrics.

Yes, Holmes’s massive fraud is obvious. She entranced (read WSJ reporter John Carreyrou’s excellent chronicle, Bad Blood (2018; my summary)) journalists, investors, politicians, and business partners into believing her fantasy science. She may even be responsible for negligent homicide if people died because of her company’s fake test results.

Then again, these sorts of cases generally hang on subtle distinctions between hyperbole and outright dishonesty and whether such deceit was deliberate.

Holmes’s lawyers will argue that she was merely an ambitious entrepreneur who failed to realize her vision but wasn’t a fraudster. Her lawyers will make a case that she is not to be blamed because people took her puffery and exaggeration as factually accurate. At what point do her wishfulness and enthusiasm go from optimism to intentional fraud? That’ll be the critical question.

At any rate, the Theranos verdict is unlikely to deter others from the swagger, self-assurance, hustle, and the “fake it till you make it” ethos that is so endemic to start-up culture. Investors will never cease looking at people and ideas rather than the viability of their work.

Idea for Impact: Don’t be so swayed by story-telling that has a way of making people less objectively observant. Assemble the facts, and ask yourself what truth the facts bear out. Never let yourself be sidetracked by what you wish to believe.

You Can’t Believe Those Scientific Studies You Read About in the Papers

November 11, 2021 By Nagesh Belludi Leave a Comment

Look at the filler articles in the well-being section of your preferred newspaper, and you’ll often luck into health advice with nuance-free mentions of all sorts of scientific studies.

One week, drinking coffee is good for you. Next week it’s harmful. Ditto video games. Swearing makes you look intelligent, but hold your flipping horses … the next day, swearing makes you seem verbally challenged to explain your annoyances respectfully.

Gutter press revelations isn’t only less-than-scientific, but it actually defeats the objectives of science.

In June 2014, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences published an allegedly peer-reviewed paper titled “Female hurricanes are deadlier than male hurricanes.” The study deduced that hurricanes with feminine names generate more casualties supposedly because tacit sexism makes communities take the storms with a feminine name less seriously. The work was discredited as soon as its methods were dissected. Nevertheless, the dubious paper had made its way into media channels across the country because of the believability implied by the influential National Academy of Sciences.

Positive results that make a sensational headline tend to get published readily—especially if they speak to the audiences’ worldviews. In truth, many of these studies are low-quality studies where the variables are latent, and the effects aren’t directly observable and quantifiable, especially in the social sciences. Sadly, with the push to produce ever more papers in academia, peer review doesn’t necessarily corroborate the quality of research nearly so much as it enforces a discipline’s norms.

Idea for Impact: Let’s be skeptical readers. Let’s be better readers.

Let’s subject every claim to the common-sense test: is the claim possible, plausible, probable, and likely? Everything possible isn’t plausible, everything plausible isn’t probable, and everything probable isn’t likely.

Being skeptical does not mean doubting the validity of everything, nor does it mean being cynical. Instead, to be skeptical is to judge the validity of a claim based on objective evidence and understand the assertions’ nuances. Yes, even extraordinary claims can be valid, but the more extraordinary a claim, the more remarkable the evidence to be mobilized.

While we’re on the subject, have you heard about research that found that you could make unsuspecting people believe in anything by merely asserting that it’s been “shown by research?” Now then, the former’s the only research worth believing. Very much so, yes, even without evidence!

Questioning

Wondering what to read next?

Wondering what to read next?

Wondering what to read next?

Wondering what to read next?

Wondering what to read next?

Wondering what to read next?

Wondering what to read next?

Everyone’s an Innovator: Ramp up creativity with your frontline employees

Idea for Impact: Value the frontline people in your organization as talented assets, not cheap cogs.

Wondering what to read next?

Wondering what to read next?

Gutter press revelations isn’t only less-than-scientific, but it actually defeats the objectives of science.

Idea for Impact: Let’s be skeptical readers. Let’s be better readers.

Wondering what to read next?