Everything is F*cked: A Book About Hope by Mark Manson

Everything is F*cked: A Book About Hope Reviews

• 
  Lindsay Nixon

  Arg, it's really difficult for me to rate this.
  
  This isn't a "book" in my opinion. It's more of a collection of essays, "blog posts" and articles you'd see on HuffPo (or perhaps NPR).
  
  There are some parts of the 'book' that were well researched, provided excellent points and I thought to myself "oh wow" and "I'm going to have to read this again!!!" Then there were other parts that I was like "WHAT IS THIS?" and "WHY IS THIS HERE?"
  
  The writing also oscillated between deplorable to somewhat academic.
  
  There are times where it reads like a polished, academic book but more often it is ranty with slang like "Cray cray" and vulgar examples that Manson seems to slip in for shock value except it doesn't work.
  
  Manson is also a terrible narrator. His voice isn't just bleh, but he can't even seem to properly read his own writing--he can't deliver his own jokes and punchlines. It comes out awkward and unnatural-- making his "cray cray" and other slang even more distracting.
  
  I also kept having a revolving thought, "DAMN THIS IS SOME RICH WHITE MALE PRIVILEGE & MANSPLAINING" not that the subjects he approached where "white male privilege shit" (though there is some of that) but that he seems to overlook privilege quite a bit.
  
  Yet there were some parts of the book that I thought were excellent, though most of them were rehashing from other outstanding books I've read such as
  Thinking, Fast and Slow, Ryan Holiday/Stoicism,
  Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress or anything by Pinkner,
  Switch: How to Change Things When Change Is Hard or anything by Chip & Dan Heath, plus Nietzsche & Plato. His last bit on AI was interesting, though I suspect that was parlayed from somewhere/someone else.
  
  (UPDATE after more thought and discussion, this isn't a 3-star, it's a 2-star)
• 
  Ella

  This book will not be a well loved book.
  
  I only say this because as a person who has read a lot of his articles as well as his previous book, The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck, there are a lot of concepts in this book that can be perceived as radical, and possibly downright offensive. The keyword is perceived. When you come into this book hoping and/or believing that this book will affirm all of your biases, all of your hopes and dreams, all of what you stand for, then you wouldn't have a great time.
  
  This book talks about philosophy, human existence, psychology, democracy, religion, politics, money, etc. and it takes quite a controversial but rational standpoint on these fields. Yes, sometimes while reading this book it'll be difficult to get through some of the philosophical concepts. Yes, sometimes (or most times) you will get offended by what Mark says. And yes, you would want to put the book down.
  
  But don't. Instead, read on, or better yet, reflect first as to why you feel the way you feel. Don't succumb to the dichotomy of "good" and "bad" feelings i.e., if you feel offended, don't automatically assume that it's because what Mark wrote was wrong and you're right. This book calls upon reflection of everything ugly in all of us, and if you can't keep your biases at bay, or on hold, you will not enjoy reading this book.
  
  But, if you go into this with an open mind, prepared to feel both validated and hurt, both offended and reassured, then I think this would be a great reading experience for you.
  
  Overall, I gave this book 5 stars, because just like The Subtle Art, it called into question everything I believed, and for me, it strengthened some of my beliefs, and weakened others. A first for me in a long time.
• 
  Nikita

  Can someone please remind me never to pick a Mark Manson book again? The writing is insufferable, he grossly oversimplifies ideas that need a more nuanced view, makes preposterous generalizations about mental health and related concepts, and generally makes you wonder what his point really is. Not sure how he gets published, but seems to be riding a strange wave with the word *fuck* in his titles.
• 
  Uddipta

  Did not finish.
  He starts off by mentioning the holocaust, how people had "real" problems back then, compared to us who are now weeping at minor inconveniences behind closed doors: crying for an ex, crying because someone was rude to us, etc. I find this comparison disgusting and I mean it. The problems back then were physical and very different. There was no internet back then. Now, in the internet age, we have lots of things to compare ourselves with. Everyday, whether we want it or not, we are constantly reminded of the things we lack. And at the end of the day, when we reach home, it takes a family or a closed one to help us forget those things.
  Secondly, the writing. He speaks of things in a very patronizing manner which I found really irritating and was what made me drop this book.
  I loved his first book and on my worst days, it provides a sense of comfort unlike anything. But this book, I don't know what happened with the author. I am not trying to find comfort, but maybe just give me some substance. Time is precious and I cannot waste it anymore after getting into 20% of this one. Maybe he got too much into himself. Now that he is rich, he forgot how to relate to the common folks. This book is indeed "f*cked".
• 
  Dr. Appu Sasidharan (Dasfill)

  
  
  What made Mark Mason's first book a huge success was the freshness in the idea he was trying to discuss. But now, when the second book is published, there are many books with the same theme already published and read by the readers. Even if the author tries to treat a few chapters differently, there is a high probability that the readers will be bored after reading a few chapters of this book.
  
  The author attempts to take a different approach in some chapters by trying to discuss philosophy, epistemology, and ontology. He tries to discuss ideas shared by some great people like
  Friedrich Nietzsche,
  Bertrand Russell, and
  Yuval Noah Harari. You will feel these portions as just average if you are a follower of the above philosophers and have read their books. Still, I must admit that it was a brave attempt by the author to think out of the box, especially after the massive success of his initial book.
  
  The condescending manner in which he discusses this book will also be boring to some readers who have already finished the author's first book. I feel that he should have been a little more careful while describing mental health. Despite all these negatives, you will get some critical ideas that might be helpful to you.
  
  My favorite three lines from this book.
  

  "Because pain is the universal constant of life, the opportunities to grow from that pain are constant in life. All that is required is that we don't numb it, that we don't look away. All that is required is that we engage it and find the value and meaning in it."

  
  
  

  "You must love someone without expecting anything in return; otherwise it's not true love. You must respect someone without expecting anything in return; otherwise you don't truly respect him. You must speak honestly without expecting a pat on the back or a high-five or a gold star next to your name; otherwise you aren't truly being honest."

  
  
  

  "Ultimately, the most meaningful freedom in your life comes from your commitments, the things in life for which you have chosen to sacrifice."

  
  
  
  The negatives in this book are greater in number compared to the author's first book. Still, some great points are hidden in a few corners, like a few of the above lines I shared. If you are someone who liked the author's first book, you can give this book a try.
• 
  Adam Woods

  Something is very wrong with the world. It’s us. We have abandoned our quest for character in favour of one for happiness and we have created a world of diversions that give the illusion of freedom but in fact keep us docile and imprisoned.
  
  Manson has written a book that will stay with me for a while. This very well-researched exploration into human virtues (and hope in particular) isn’t exactly warm and fuzzy. Nor is it pessimistic. In fact it is paradoxically optimistic for a book that genuinely and convincingly lays out that everything is indeed f*cked!
  
  His trademark wit is still on display but Manson strikes a slightly more academic tone than in his first book, which was a welcome change of pace. In fact this book has inspired me to learn more about Manson’s (and the world’s) philosophical greats and read a few of his sources. I think that’s a good thing.
  
  Manson, once again, holds a mirror up to the reader, which can be confronting (in a good way), and makes demands on us to be better. Not merely hope to be better. But BE better. And that’s a message I can get behind.
  
  Give this book a go...
  
  
• 
  Javier Lorenzana

  I really wanted to like this book. As a fan of Mark Manson, I enjoyed his at-times comical writing style and humorous anecdotes in his other books. Yet, this felt stale.
  
  The book is lazy. It's essentially a bunch of repackaged Nietzsche and Harari stuffed together without any flow whatsoever. The central theme of hope acts as a loose umbrella topic to otherwise disconnected chapters.
  
  The book talks about subjects right out of Sapiens and Homo Deus by Yuval Harari. The only difference is that Manson inserts his unique voice in this commentary, including a lot of 'f*cks.' Sounds great right? Not exactly. The subjects are oversimplified, the language feels condescending at times, and the charm that Manson usually puts on in his books was nonexistent.
  
  What made Manson's earlier books good was that he spoke from experience about topics he was passionate about. But this attempt into deeper subjects doesn't cut it. It is neither comprehensive nor original. It's just not as good as other books in its field.
  
  TL/DR: Just read Harari and Nietzsche.
• 
  Kalyn Nicholson

  If I were to ask someone to “give it to me straight” in terms of life, humanity and our future potential, this book would be it.
  Amazing read, push through the first few chapters and you’ll see how it all ties together in the end!
• 
  Mehrsa

  The book was a meaningless string of random thoughts and stoic philosophy and meditation. It was funny at parts, but mostly just a few interesting stories and cliches that are set up as being new insight. Also, I don't buy stoicism and meditation as a way forward. I am still interested in progress and I do think social movements can make people's lives better. Manson seems to think it's all just vain showing off and we should all just chill, but life isn't about peace and happiness. We also search meaning.
• 
  David Lee

  Smart and funny, this book will help you make sense of your mind and the world we live in
  
  If you liked Subtle Art, you'll enjoy this too. I couldn't put it down, actually, reading it in under a day.
  
  Mark has a talent for taking potentially boring subject matter, such as the teachings of philosophers, and bringing it to life in easy-to-understand language (with plenty of expletives).
  
  I especially liked his Consciousness Car metaphor in explaining the Thinking Brain vs Feeling Brain (would love to see an animated cartoon version), and thoughts on antifragility and how we benefit by choosing to accept (and even seek out) discomfort in our lives.
  
  If you've been feeling like the world is a mess (especially in terms of politics) lately, this book can help you make sense of what's going on. And, it includes some takeaways we as individuals can use to help make a positive difference for ourselves, and by extension, society.
• 
  Shawn McComb

  was going to give this 2 stars but that ending was….. ahaha….. no
• 
  Fran Cormack

  I wish I had enjoyed this book more. I really wanted to. I so enjoyed Mark's first book, I had high hopes for this one.
  
  Alas, I found it uninspiring, and without much direction. Lots of rambling, with famous people from history thrown in, for which I never saw the connection. It felt a little forced. Contrived even. Like Mark is really, really trying to fill a book.
  
  I will be watching for what he writes next, and hope to get my love back for Mr Manson.
• 
  Heidi The Reader

  This creatively titled self-help book, Everything is F*cked, presents psychology, philosophy and the author's view of reality. In a series of essays, Mark Manson discusses a variety of topics including the differences between the "thinking brain" and "feeling brain." He uses Isaac Newton's laws to create a parallel universe's version of emotional laws and completes a fairly scathing dissection of religion. Throughout the various topics, he circles back to the idea of hope and how it can potentially create more problems than it solves.
  
  Why did Manson write a book about hope?
  
  "This book is my little source of hope. It gives me purpose; it gives me meaning. And the narrative that I've constructed around hope is that I believe this book might help some people, that it might make both my life and the world a little bit better." pg 15
  
  I did not read Manson's other incredibly popular title,
  The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life, so I went into this one not knowing what to expect. I found Manson to be particularly adept at breaking down complex topics into simple, easy-to-understand analogies.
  
  For example, here's his take on the psychological cause of a underlying feeling of unworthiness: "This feeling of unworthiness is usually the result of some bad sh*t happening to us at some point. We suffer through some terrible stuff, and our Feeling Brain decides that we deserved those bad experiences. Therefore, it sets out, despite the Thinking Brain's better knowledge, to repeat and re-experience that suffering." pg 46
  
  And here's the analogy he crafts around his explanation of unworthiness: "Put another way, the problem isn't that we don't know how not to get punched in the face. The problem is that, at some point, likely a long time ago, we got punched in the face, and instead of punching back, we decided we deserved it." pg 46
  
  His writing is simple and succinct, which could be incredibly useful for readers who are looking for more information about the self help topics presented. I didn't particularly care for Manson's overall style, but that's a personal preference rather than a commentary on the value of what he's discussing.
  
  "The stories of our future define our hopes. And our ability to step into those narratives and live them, to make them reality, is what gives our lives meaning." pg 70
  
  I think this author may be similar to
  Sarah Knight and her series of self help books about
  The Life-Changing Magic of Not Giving a F**k. Readers either love or hate those, I fell somewhere in between.
  
  My favorite part of this was when Manson dived into some Buddhist philosophy in the chapter, "Pain is the Universal Constant." He discusses the teaching of suffering being similar to a person struck by arrows. The first arrow brings physical pain and the second brings the emotional pain, which can be far worse and last longer than the physical pain because of the narratives we weave around it. Through meditation, the second arrow, emotional pain, can be diminished or perhaps eliminated.
  
  "That while pain is inevitable, suffering is always a choice. That there is always a separation between what we experience and how we interpret that experience. That there's always a gap between what our Feeling Brain feels and what our Thinking Brain thinks. And in that gap, you can find the power to bear anything." pg 186
  
  Recommended for readers who aren't offended by strong language and have the ability to hold the book they're reading in that gap in their minds — between the thoughts and the emotions, in the space of pure being. I'll meet you there. :)
• 
  Ana

  I categorize self-help books into 3 categories;
  
  1.. 5 stars; from which:
  a.. you learn tons of new stuff
  b.. you agree with absolutely everything it has to say
  c.. you find it applicable
  
  2.. 3/4 stars; in which :
  a.. you find absolutely nothing new to learn
  BUT
  b.. you agree with a lot of stuff
  c.. and you think some of it may be applicable (by someone maybe)
  
  3.. 1/2 stars; in which
  a.. nothing new, old BS
  b.. you only agree with what you already know which is repetitive
  c.. application? Been there! Done that!
  
  Humorous! Sarcastic! Light yet fulfilling!
  The use of references made very well!
  5 stars from someone who doesn't treat self-help books any good!
  Must read!
  
  PS: HOPE IS A B***H!
• 
  Sam

  Everything is Fucked is a much more mature book than his last. While in the last book we looked at things we shouldn't care about, this book more focuses on what to care about. And I have to say that this book was really well done, and in my opinion, better than his last.
  
  This book will definitely leave you feeling different than when you started it. I never take notes while reading a book, but this one time I did, because a lot will stick with you, and you won't want to forget it.
  
  "Don't hope for better. Just be better"
  
  This book covers lots of different topics: Hope, maturity, religion, social media, technology etc. It covers a lot more than his previous book, and for the better. Mark really shows us what's wrong with the world in this book, and what we can do to fix it, while also having his signature "fuck you" sort of humour. Some of the things that I read were kind of obvious (don't be a dick, act like an adult and not like a child etc) but he goes into more detail than that, and really makes you question how you act as an individual.
  
  "The pursuit of happiness is a toxic value that has long defined our culture. It is self-defeating and misleading. Living well does not mean avoiding suffering; it means suffering for the right reasons. Because if we're going to be forced to suffer by simply existing, we might as well learn how to suffer well"
  
  Like his last book, Mark gives us some really interesting historical events that eventually lead to his main point that he is trying to make. I personally found that some of them were a bit dragged out and went on for a little too long, and I found that I ended up missing the point he was trying to make due to the example being very long. However this is just my opinion, and isn't necessarily a bad thing, just my personal taste. I will say that some of the events he tells are amazing and eye opening, and will definitely leave an impact on you.
  
  "When we deny ourselves the ability to feel pain for a purpose, we deny ourselves the ability to feel any purpose in our life at all"
  
  This book is a much more satisfying, mature, and deeper book than his last. I would recommend this to anyone who wants to view things with a different eye, and is open to changing the way they are as a person. And while not everything in this book is breathtakingly amazing, it will still leave an impact on you for a long time.
• 
  Miquixote

  This book’s thesis has already been written. Many times. This is stoicism. This is Nietzsche. This is Kant. This fact does not reduce the subject's interest whatsoever. I post 2 reviews below:
  
  A Pop Culture Full Metal Alchemist Review (recommended if you have some symptoms of A.D.D):
  
  “A lesson without pain is meaningless. That's because no one can gain without sacrificing something. But by enduring that pain and overcoming it, he shall obtain a powerful, unmatched heart. A fullmetal heart. That is alchemy's first law of Equivalent Exchange. In those days, we really believed that to be the world's one, and only, truth. But the world isn't perfect, and the law is incomplete. Equivalent Exchange doesn't encompass everything that goes on here, but I still choose to believe in its principle, that all things do come at a price, that there's an ebb and a flow, a cycle, that the pain we went through did have a reward, and that anyone who's determined and perseveres will get something of value in return, even if it's not what they expected.” “The truth is cruel but right.”“You see, I'm sure we can change. Because we're weak. And because we die. We have to fight in order to live, and that's what will make us strong” “Stand up and walk. Move on. After all, you have perfect legs to stand on.”
  ― Hiromu Arakawa
  
  The Nit-Picky Review, or if you have O.C.D. symptoms (with spoilers):
  
  Mark’s Uncomfortable Truth: Pleasant feelings are evidently not Mark’s goal here. He wants us to grow through pain since it’s the only universal constant. Bertrand Russell, for one, would say be wary of those who glorify pain because the historical antecedents are not impressive. The fun is in deciding how far in which direction you will go.
  
  The Classic Assumption: Thinking vs. Feeling. We quickly learn why Mark swears so much: humans have no self control. The classic assumption, says Mark, is that our Thinking Brains are in control: Plato onwards, through the Christian ages, until very recently were proponents. Kahneman and Tversky in 2011 revolutionized thinking theory and suggest otherwise. Mark here says the feeling brain actually calls the shots. Needless to say, it’s been a popular activity to imagine our brains are divided in two, the feeling brain and the thinking brain. Mark joins the frenzy:
  1. Plato. Reason (thinking brain), spirit (feeling brain), and appetites
  2. Hume: Impressions (Feeling) or Ideas (Thinking)
  3. Freud: Ego (thinking) and Id (feeling)
  4. Probably the worst theory to date: ‘Thinking Brain has balls and is from Mars, Feeling Brain has breasts and is from Venus’.
  5. Kahneman and Tversky: Feeling (fast thinking) and Thinking (slow thinking)
  
  Clown Cars: Mark’s brain theory involves seeing our feelings as cars. Clown cars (selfish narcissists) are toxic. Healthy cars see them coming a long way away and move into the slow lane, avoiding contact with them as much as possible. Clowns flock to other clown cars. Clown cars think healthy cars are boring and uninteresting. Clowns probably drive too fast, run over pedestrians and get into way too many accidents. I imagine they are literally toxic like gas-guzzling, expensive and unreliable SUVs. Clowns probably drink and drive. If they can’t get away with that, they’ll smoke pot and drive. With a Whopper in the other hand. Woodstock represents well this type of car: Times of free love, the 1960s, if it feels good do it! The New Age counterculture was clownish all the way. In fact, indulging one’s emotions is STILL often equated with great spiritual awakening. White middle-class yuppies that were raised and told that the thinking brain calls the shots, at a later age rebelled and let their feeling brain run rampant. They never really had any real problems except feeling bad and they blamed their Thinking on that. They call that turning off of the Thinking Brain ‘spiritual growth’. Sound familiar? I am SURE you know people like this…They think that self-absorption is enlightenment. But it’s still just a Clown Car with a new `spiritual’ paint job though.
  
  The Moral Gap: Our self worth equals the sum of our emotions over time. There is something here he likes to call The Moral Gap: When someone hurts you, you think: he is shit, I am righteous. If you don’t act on it, you switch to I am shit, he is righteous. It was the best or it was trauma. They hate me because they’re envious, afraid of me, don’t want to admit that I’m better? Justification of the superiority of the narcissist. No subtleties or nuances like in real life here. You’re special no matter what. And your identity will stay your identity until a new experience acts against it. Of course, there is the 3rd alternative: A High Degree of Self-Awareness, that of forgiving others and yourself. You’ll see later that only those in the Adult Development Phase are capable of this.
  
  The 3 Types of Religions: Mark suggests that all of us generally believe the key to our eternal salvation is to stop thinking critically and join any of the hope clubs below:
  1. Spiritual
  2. Ideological (the isms: communism, capitalism, anarchism, fascism, environmentalism, feminism, leftism, etc.)
  3. Interpersonal (people worship: romantic, celebrity, children, etc.). Codependency: addicted to supporting or receiving validation from another person. Putting a person on a pedestal, the center of your world, the basis of your thoughts and feelings, the root of your self-esteem, to be your God value.
  The above Religions compete for resources and those that win out are those that most efficiently use labour and capital.
  
  The Root of all Social Conflict throughout History: Right vs. Left? His next target - radical leftists, with his guns all a blazing: To Mark, the true equality that all leftists are fighting for will never exist. Pain will always be there. And he’ll have us see the worst thing we can do is get rid of pain completely. We need something called ‘Legitimate Suffering’ (see The Road Less Travelled, Scott Peck). Now that it seems the leftists have been floored; we need a bully to kick the leftist while they’re down. Enter Nietzsche’s Master morality vs. Leftist’s Slave Morality. Strength, Dominance, Hierarchy vs Sacrifice, Submission, Equality; Right vs. Left; the Bullies vs. the Ressenters. Mark says Nietzsche was a globalist, rare and radical, believed in the value of a person’s deeds, nothing else, no system, no race, not nationality. And apparently Slave morality requires same beliefs, Equality and Totalitarianism. Well, now that leftism is seemingly bleeding all over the tarmac now, gasping for breath, let us take a quick reality check before the next round: Not sure here if Mark misunderstands Nietzsche, glorifies Nietzsche or cherry-picked a nibble from Nietzsche here? Let’s be absolutely clear, I mean no beating around the bush: Nietzsche loves, I mean loves, LOVES violence and ruthlessness. Not sure how much Mark wants that side of him as part of his philosophy. I mean Nietzsche just totally got erections for violence. I mean full daylight erections. Not morning hide it under the cover, wait- until-it-takes-a-chill-pill erection. Example hard to beat: Nietzsche loved Napoleon. He was like THE MAN for Nietzsche. Yes, mass murdering, war-mongering Napoleon. So, I think it’s fair to say that Nietzsche’s ethics were highly questionable (even if his criticism of religion and literary output were very important in philosophy). No, no grasping now my Nietzschian bullies, he was certainly not A BUDDHIST. To Nietzsche, the majority are only a means to the excellence of the few. Let it be known that this contradiction still does not eliminate the necessity of a conflict of ideas here.
  
  Kant vs. Nietzsche: Mark does acknowledge that Nietzsche did not believe in Kant’s ideas and scoffed at the Law of Humanity (something Mark clearly believes in here too, so we need to try to understand the apparent contradiction). Mark can’t not understand that Nietzsche was all about ends. Not means. The polar opposite of Kant in that way. I am guessing what Mark likes about Nietzsche was that he was certainly pro-pain. But Mark evidently needs to be good with Kant too. Or Mark would certainly be an all-out nasty dude. Nietzsche didn't mind being seen as nasty but something tells me Mark isn't quite ready to take that step. It gets even more problematic: Kant’s value system that transcends religion is a religion too. This led Nietzsche to accuse Kant of being absurd, naïve, and outright narcissistic (talk about calling a kettle black…). Mark concurs with Nietzsche that all beliefs are inherently imprisoned by our own perspectives and are faith-based. But Mark admits some value systems produce better and more logical results than others. Science (faith in evidence) produces the best belief systems (according to Mark). Similarly, Kant has the best basis for creating value systems: value that which perceives value above all else (consciousness). We can conclude that Kant’s belief that morality can be deduced outside religion is absolutely true and is admirable. While scientifically pursued moral philosophy is Mark’s apparent goal. But Mark suggests that conflict must exist for hope and meaning to exist and he still comes across positive about war. He says: ‘war has created the most positive innovations, it brings out the best in our character’. Yikes, not sure how far he wants to take that…So, Mark is seemingly stuck. He clearly betrays religious ideological leanings with open belief in amor fati (love of fate), Stoicism and Kant’s Formula of Humanity (where you are honest, humble and brave at all moments). But he also likes the idea of going beyond Good and Evil and is just as clearly reluctant to dismiss Nietzshe despite Fred's ruthlessness.
  
  Developmental Psychology: Despite these obvious ideological contradictions we can’t write off Mark just yet- he has more interesting stuff up his sleeve. He proceeds to explain developmental psychology theory, and how most of us are stuck at an adolescent phase: When you are a kid, you are an explorer. Then you grow up and realize there is too much to explore. A child is all about pleasure vs. pain. An adolescent learns to understand life as a transaction. He gets pleasure through bargains, as a means to a pleasurable end. Becoming an adult is doing the right thing for the simple reason that are doing the right thing. Honesty is the best example. You tell the truth as an end, not a means to get something. Because honesty is good and valuable. Sound idealistic? That’s because it is. Is this actually practicable? It reminds me of the Jim Carey movie: Liar, Liar, where a lawyer is charmed (or cursed) with the inability to lie and all the chaos that ensues. Have there been any studies about people who have actually attempted to live their lives under this Formula? Apparently there are so few people actually doing this that ‘replicability’ is an issue with any study. Suffice it to say: not enough evidence, no science. So we are in the dicey religion area still. I guess there is no way around it. (Yes Nietzsche starts jumping up and down again. He certainly wouldn't like Mark playing both sides…) But let’s ignore Nietzsche one minute, and stick with the theory for now: with this undeniably interesting theory that trauma and/or neglect cause people to get stuck in either the child or adolescent mode. And prevent us from becoming the low percentage of adults that apparently exist (some 13% in the studies that have been made, but duly note the lack of evidence and replicability). Becoming an adult involves 3 things, according to Mark:
  1. Enduring pain (Nietzsche has an erection again. Fred, put that thing away!)
  2. Abandoning hope (this shouldn’t be taken too seriously, as you see Mark clearly has hope in science, evidence and Artificial Intelligence.)
  3. Letting go of the desire for more pleasant and fun things.
  
  Assuming the above as gospel, what’s holding us back from being adults?
  Fake Freedom: We’ve been given the blue pill for too long. It’s made us weaker and more fragile. Who is to blame? Marketing. Marketing has convinced us to be flooded with Diversions. Marketing understands how to manipulate our Feelings. Our Thinking brain hasn’t been trained to compete. And our Feeling brain is taking the Clown Car to a whole new level. Due to this Law of Diminishing Returns, this is the state of our current Character:
  1. We are Fragile. We have Diminishing Values, obsessed with Comfort and Pleasure.
  2. We are consumed by Low-Level Addictive Behaviours: phone, email, Netflix, Facebook, Instagram. Compulsively experiencing more stuff. Addiction produces a downward spiral, thus numbing Pain (no Pain: no Meaning and ability to find Value), generating greater Pain, and greater numbing.
  3. We have too much Choice: the more Options we have, the less Satisfaction. Consequently, we have constant Anxiety over whether we made the best Choice.
  
  This Insecurity, Doubt and Intolerance is not Freedom. It is an endless cycle of Hope. This Fake Freedom is an endless series of Transactions and Bargains which you feel you’re winning. Modern tyranny is Diversion, BS information, and Distraction. The breadth and power of the internet has created a global system of Propaganda by governments and corporations steering our desires and wishes. That is our Current Reality. Perhaps this is our Orwellian Brave New World. Big Brother is indeed watching us and steering us THROUGH Pleasure. Huxley and Orwell all in one. Mark calls Fake Freedom TOO MUCH Pleasure. We are told not to forget that maybe people actually start Revolutions because of Pleasure. Too much Pleasure and Comfort cause low tolerance for Discomfort and Inconvenience. Political Revolution then becomes a Privilege. This is called a Revolution of Rising Expectations. The leaders of the French Revolution were actually wealthy citizens. The American Revolution likewise (wealthy landowners who didn’t want to pay taxes). Prosperity, Pleasure and Convenience can thus cause a crisis in Hope. Finding Meaning is more and more difficult. But the key tipping point may be Information. Once awareness of Inequality is well-known, when it is revealed how uncontrolled Wealth has become, the Revolution of Rising Expectations may be inevitable. Maybe that’s why here Mark has footnoted Pinker and Rosling telling us things are really good? Because they know we will get pissed when we realize things aren’t actually good. We will elect demagogues and Democracy will be overturned. Prosperity, Pleasure, Convenience, lack of Hope, and Inequality awareness may just cause a Revolution. If AI doesn’t beat the people to it. Mark’s betting on AI.
  
  Education (but please, not Sparta): Obviously, Education is the only way around this. We need an educational facelift; Mark says that our Children are the masters of Pain and Antifragility (see Taleb). Maybe, but Mark let’s not start leaving our kids out during winter nights to see if they can tough it out like the Platonic ideal of Sparta actually did (see Plato’s Republic). Knowledgeable philosophy readers might be forgiven if they are alarmed by a bit too much of the less-reputable sides of Plato (and Nietzsche) here.
  
  Real Freedom? According to Mark, Real Freedom is actually Self-Limitation. Consciousness of your Time, Attention and Choices. This causes an Increase in Return. Greater Commitment. Greater Depth. Less Superficiality. We must stop hacking life. Real Freedom is victory over Desires, seeing the world unconditionally. Freedom requires nothing of the world. Just your Will. This is very Stoic.
  
  Things we can do that don’t just involve Self-Help: From an activist point of view Mark admits that online Advertising and Fake News must cease to exist. We need independent 3rd party algorithms to rate veracity of headlines. Evidence is the only life preserver in an infinite sea of Lies. This is Mark´s Hope and Religion coming out of the masturbatory sock of self-help. His hope seems to be that AI will fix this Manufacturing of Consent.
  
  The new Religion: He reminds us again and again that each subsequent Religion’s attempt at Global Harmony has only been partial and incomplete. But he has his own final Religion: AI, and us as domesticated dogs. We already submit to artificial algorithms and we love it. The best of us are shitty information processors, even if you or I can access, harness, and manipulate information better than others, we can’t compete with AI.
  
  Elon Musk was asked what could cause the end of the world. He replied with 3 possible outcomes:
  1. Nuclear war.
  2. Climate change.
  3. Computers
  Mark thinks otherwise. He thinks computers will behave better than us and correct the other 2 of the above.
  
  The Richer you Are, the Sadder you Are: Technology has brought us empty, meaningless variety, and endless options. But supposedly it has reduced poverty. Forget that Reduced Poverty is patently false since the 70s, unless we are speaking about the 1%, but that doesn’t change the argument: we DO live near the top of history in quality of life. It is emphasized that the wealthier the country the more its people struggle with feelings of meaning and purpose. This book is for them. Only 10 percent in a yougov survey of people from the 17 richest countries felt the world was getting better. Wealthier countries and neighbourhoods also have higher suicide rates on average. Mark raves about Steven Pinker and Hans Rosling here. Their works are deemed in the notes as ‘excellent, indispensable and important’. Apparently, they are dead on about how lucky we all are. But Steve and Hans care nothing about how depression works. They are addicted to big stats like the GDP (Gross Domestic Product). Even from a purely statistical perspective, they lack subtlety. They don’t want or care about the mathematics of noticing that median real wages have actually reduced since the 70s (see my review of Factfulness explaining the math). So Inequality is going up big time. Mark acknowledges this although he certainly emphasizes that we have way more than enough prosperity. The difference being that Mark definitely realizes that life actually sucks for most people in rich countries. Mark suggests the problem is Lack of Meaning. To Mark, it is clear that Material prosperity is not more valuable to us than Purpose. To Hans and Steve our disconnect, our addictions, our lack of connections are not the core of life. Prosperity is. Mark Manson points out what they miss: Meaning matters. (See ‘Man’s Search For Meaning, Frankl).
  
  Some tough truths about pain vs. pleasure: Despite all the above argumentation noted, we are still missing evidence here. Remember Evidence and Science are the only Religion worth following now right? The thing is there really aren’t conclusive studies to suggest that Pain improves us. Similarly, there aren’t conclusive studies to suggest that Pleasure does either. To make it all even more confusing, there aren’t conclusive studies to suggest what the right balance is. Since we don’t have community like we used to, Inequality is worsening, we are unhappier whether Steve, Hans or Mark think we have reason to be. Mark definitely suggests we are wimps. That we need to toughen up. Maybe, but did I say that there is no conclusive evidence about all this?
  
  With all this in mind, there is no doubt your motivation, whether it’s intrinsic or extrinsic, matters. You gotta love that Mark talks about Intrinsic motivation: the simple pleasure of doing an activity well, rather than for an external reward, motivates you to continue doing that activity. Mark says that’s why he wrote the book. Not for the millions of dollars. Nice! Let’s assume it’s true. 😉
  In agreement with his polemics or not, give Mark Manson credit for putting passion and prudence on the scales again.
• 
  Leyla Shb

  وقتی کتاب رو به پایان رسوندم حس خوبی داشتم چیزهای جدیدی یادگرفتم و بهم اضافه شد به قول نویسنده رو اون طناب که بین هیولا و ابرانسان هست کمی جلوتر رفتم.
  تقسیم بندی ذهنمان به ذهن عاطفی و عقلانی و ماشین دلقکی، تفاوت آزادی جعلی و حقیقی، تعریف سیستم‌های شکننده و ضد شکننده، آزمایش اثر نقطه آبی و تاریخچه ی بازاریابی، تف��و�� بچه ها و بزرگسالان، مصیبت‌های سرگرمی های پوچ رو خیلی دوست داشتم و فکر میکنم در ذهنم ماندگار بشن.
  تاریخچه مختصری که نویسنده از زندگی ویتولد پیلکی،نیچه، نیوتن، ادوارد برنایز، ایمانوئل کانت و تچ کوانگ دوک به تناسب در جای جای کتاب آورده بود خیلی جالب بود.
  شرح نویسنده از شطرنج و هوش مصنوعی جالب بود ولی نتونستم بپذیرم اون چیز متعالی تر هوش مصنوعی باشه حالا یا اطلاعات من از هوش مصنوعی کمه و یا نویسنده اغراق کرده بود.
  امتیاز رو 4 دادم چون برخی جاها مطالب پرش و گسستگی داشت نویسنده اون پیوستگی و انسجام کافی رو برای اثبات ادعاش نداشت. من فکر میکتم اگه به جای امید آرزو ترجمه میکردن بهتر بود. ولی با همه اینها موقع خواندن بعضی جاها واقعا غرق در لذت میشدم.
  اگر بتوانید تردیدهای درونی هر کس را به کار بگیرید تقریبا هر چیزی به او بگویید خریداری خواهد کرد.
  اینترنت برای این طراحی نشده بود که چیزی که نیاز داریم به ما بدهد برای این طراحی شده بود که چیزی را که می‌خواهیم بدهد.
  جست و جوی خوشبختی همه ما را به بچگی می‌کشاند.
  اگر فقط زمانی احساس خوبی دارید که زندگی شاد و آسان و زیباست یعنی آزاد نیستید.
  فاصله بین حقیقت و خواسته ها را ازبین ببرید نه از راه تلاش برای رسیدن به خواسته ها بلکه با پذیرش حقیقت.
  آزادی جعلی تنوع است و آزادی حقیقی تعهد است.
  چنان عمل کنید که انسانیت را چه در خودتان و چه دیگران همیشه به منزله هدف در نظر بگیرید نه وسیله.
• 
  Sam

  Deeper but Incohesive
  After reading "the subtle art of not giving a fuck", I thought that Manson would have no new subject to talk about, and I was almost right. It can be concluded that this book has a more didactic tone, that is, it goes deeper and scrutinizes our intrinsic values, showing us the myopic effect they impose on our life. The thing is Manson's previous book had a very straightforward scheme (not that I am a stalwart supporter of linear plots, actually it is the exact opposite), however, this book was deprived of the "logical sequence of subjects". I could barely connect, Kant's daily schedule to the sci-fi-Isaac Asimov-ending. From my standpoint, the second half of the book was the fulcrum of the entire book. As for the first half, the exorbitant information regarding "religions" was extraneous and could have been truncated and the same thing can be said about the last chapter. It was all way too "predictivy like an ominous presentiment.
  To put it in a nutshell, Manson is trying to say what Krishna Murti was trying to say many years ago.
  Someone asks Murti: what is the right "way"?
  and he answers: there is no "way".
  Manson tries to convey the same thing with "hope"
  One must go "beyond" hope. To hope as Nietzche described it is fraught with danger, man should go beyond Good and Evil to transmute into something Nietzche called "Superman" or "Übermensch" . One should simply put in the action.
  "Don't hope for better. just be better".
  This book is much deeper than his last book, it tries to convey a deeper more philosophical meaning. I can understand why some readers cannot relate to it the way they had related to his previous book.
  
• 
  Bianca

  I liked this book much more than the first.
  
  The entire book basically points out the fact that pain is universal, suffering doesn't have to be, as it's based on how we perceive our circumstances.
  Manson brings into the mix Nietzsche, Kant and Plato. I don't see myself reading them any time soon, but it was good to learn about some of their views.
  
  Manson also mentions everyone's "favourite scientist" - Einstein - who is attributed all sort of sayings and quotes that he never uttered - ie "Everyone is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid."; "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." "The average human only uses 10 per cent of his brain." and so on.
  
  I appreciated learning about: The Blue Dot Effect: humans warp their perceptions to fit their expectations, ie if you look for something bad, you'll find it/see it, even when it's not there. (look it up).
  
  The last chapter on AI gave me anxiety, although he sort of puts a positive spin on it. I guess we'll wait and see, there's no escaping it.
  
• 
  Shreya

  "Greater commitment allows for greater depth. A lack of commitment requires superficiality."
  
  First of all, if you are looking for a book that will give you hope about something, then just don't continue reading this. This book is not about hope. It is anti-hope.
  
  And I understand the concept and can relate to what the author is saying but the author contradicts himself more often in this one. It'll leave you confused.
  
  This one is much better than the subtle art of not giving a f*CK, just because it has some relevant information and facts.
  
  First two chapters are okay, but when the book dives into religion, you miss the whole point about why you ever started reading this book.
  
  Other than that it is a mediocre read. The writing gets repetitive and boring after a point.
• 
  Elsa Rajan Pradhananga

  The book starts off with the remarkable truth that ...We are inconsequential cosmic dust, bumping and milling about on a tiny blue speck. We imagine our own importance. We invent our purpose—we are nothing. Drawing from psychological facts and the wisdom of philosophy, Mark Manson establishes with ease that hope is a mechanism to steer forward despite the uncomfortable truth of life that human existence is meaningless. The author won me over with his logic, sharp observations and interesting anecdotes. There's no denying that the emotional part brain has an upper hand when it comes to decision making and that unless the thinking and feeling parts of the brain are at an equilibrium, everything feels hopeless. It didn't feel convincing enough that us faulty algorithms may worship AI in future. Everything is fucked presents to readers what we have to know and not what we want to (another need for bridging the gap between our feelings and reasons) and gives us an opportunity to reflect on our beliefs rather than follow it blindly. Apparently we should shift our focus away from hope and better ourselves. Isn't that easier said than done?
• 
  غيث الحوسني

  كاد الكتاب ان يكون جيدا لو لا الكلام الذي كان يمكن أن يلخص بقدرأقل مما قيل بكثير.
• 
  Reza Abedini

  "ميدانم ، شايد به دنبال يافتن نوعي اميد و اطمينان از اينكه اوضاع بهتر مي شود، سراغ اين كتاب آمده ايد، مثلا اگر اين كار و آن كار و كارهاي ديگري انجام دهيد ، اوضاع بهتر خواهد شد. متاسفم! من چنين جوابي برايتان ندارم ، هيچكس ندارد؛ چون حتي اگر تمام مشكلات امروز به شكلي جادويي حل شود ، ذهن ما ناگزير مشكلات فردا را تجسم مي كند."
  
  اين كتاب رو كمي با سختي خوندم ،
  چونكه بي نهايت پرش موضوعي داشت و نياز بود گاها بارها خوانده بشه تا مفهموم درك بشه
  
  موضوع كتاب درباره اميد بود اما نه "اميد داشتن" در باره فهم غلط ما از اميد بود و اينكه زندگي بدون اميد اونقدرها هم ترسناك نيست
  به عبارتي ديگه ميتونه خيلي خوب باشه و نويسنده براي اين موضوع زندگي كانت رو مثال ميزنه و موفقيت هاي اين آدم بزرگ رو
  
  ابتداي كتاب درباره تقابل ذهن عاطفي و ذهن عقلاني بود و اينكه چقدر هر دو ميتونه انسان رو تخريب كنه
  زندگي انسان در اين كتاب به يك ماشين دلقكي تشبيه شده بود كه عقل و احساس راننده هاي اون هستند
  
  در ادامه مقوله اميد از ديدگاه فلسفي مورد بررسي قرار گرفت و ذهن كودك و نوجوان و بالغ در تجربيات روزمره مورد سنجش قرار گرفت
  
  در آخر هم درباره هوش مصنوعي نوشته شد كه يكي از مباحث جالب كتاب از نظر من بود.
  
  
  "واكنش احساسي ما به مشكلاتمان از طريق اندازه مشكل مشخص نميشود، بلكه ذهن ما فقط مشكل را بزرگتر يا كوچكتر جلوه مي دهد تا با ميزان اضطرابي كه انتظار داريم حس كنيم، تناسب داشته باشد"
• 
  Christine D

  I skimmed through a lot of this. It seems to me like he did a lot of philosophical research, then gathered a bunch contemporary themes, threw them in a mixing bowl and voilà! sequel!
  This just wasn't for me.
  If you are looking for something remotely hopeful, I would recommend not picking this up. 'a book about hope' is a misnomer in my opinion.
• 
  Curtis

  A few good parts, but mostly f*cking boring.
• 
  Beatrice

  A condescending mansplaining stream of consciousness
• 
  Chest

  Needlessly convoluted. Includes terms like "God value" and "emotional altverse Issac Newton". (???)
  
  Been following Mark Manson's content in the early days and this was a huge disappointment -- this time, Mark gets lost with his thoughts with his head far too down his ass.
• 
  Hestia Istiviani

  I read in English but this review is written in Bahasa Indonesia
  
  

  "The fact is that we require more than willpower to achieve self-control. It turns out that our emotions are instrumental in our decision making and our actions. We just don't always realize it."

  
  
  Sukses dengan buku
  The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck, 3 tahun kemudian Mark Manson barulah melanjutkan tulisannya melalui Everything is F*cked. Buku yang sepertinya sudah ditunggu-tunggu oleh sebagian besar pembaca setianya ini lebih fokus membahas tentang hope atau harapan.
  
  Masih khas ala Manson, semuanya dibuka dengan kisah dan bahkan tragedi. Kekuatan story telling yang apik membuat pembaca bisa memahami konteks sebelum akhirnya Manson masuk ke dalam materi. Uniknya, Manson membagi buku ini menjadi dua bagian yang cukup kontras. Tentu saja, masih tentang bagaimana kita merespon kejadian-kejadian dalam semesta kita sendiri.
  
  Bagian pertama adalah tentang harapan. Bahwa manusia hidup memang dalam yang namanya Uncomfortable Truth. Ada masa-masa dalam perjalanan kita yang membuat kita tidak nyaman, tapi itu tetap harus dijalani karena memang begitulah keadaannya. Semua manusia pasti mengalami Uncomfortable Truth tetapi jangan malah menjadi hilang harapan. Sebab, karena harapan, manusia jadi memiliki semangat untuk berjuang dan berusaha keras.
  
  Uniknya, pada bab yang membahas How to Make All Your Dreams Come True, Manson menggunakan analogi agama/kepercayaan. Baginya, manusia meyakini sesuatu yang ada di luar kuasanya (meski Manson sendiri adalah seorang Atheis, ia mengakui hal tersebut) dan apabila diolah sedemikian rupa, agama/kepercayaan bisa menjadi senjata sekaligus semangat menuju harapan. Manson pun menuliskan beberapa tahapan jika ingin membuat mimpi kita terwujud melalui analogi uniknya itu.
  
  Misalnya:
  
  

  "Because, as we'll see, religion is all about emotional attachment. And the best way to build those attachments is to get people to stop thinking critically."

  
  
  Sebuah satir halus namun cukup mengena.
  
  Masuk ke bagian kedua: Everything is F*cked, Manson mengajak pembaca untuk tidak memiliki harapan dan ekspektasi. Bagi Manson, memiliki harapan dan ekspektasi malah membuat rasa kecewa kita semakin besar jika hal itu tidak sesuai/tidak tercapai.
  
  Jika bagian satu Manson menggunakan banyak kisah bahkan menggunakan analogi agama/kepercayaan, di bagian kedua Manson cukup banyak mengutip cara pandang filsafat seperti Nietzsche dengan narasi "God is dead." Bahkan Manson juga mengutip cara pandang Stoa tentang bagaimana manusia menjalani hidup tanpa berekspektasi.
  
  Ada pula satu bab yang khusus membahas soal Pain, soal luka dan sakit. Bagi Manson, pain bukan untuk dihindari karena ia akan selalu ada. Pain hendaknya dirangkul sebagai suatu konstanta. Ia pasti ada dalam setiap fase.
  
  Secara keseluruhan, aku hanya sanggup memberikan 3 bintang. Meski cara penyampaiannya unik dan khas Manson, tapi dalam beberapa bab aku terkadang merasa jenuh dengan inti cerita yang sebenarnya masih sama dengan bab yang ada di depannya. Manson melalui buku ini memainkan peran sebagai pengingat, karena semua orang sebenarnya juga tahu tentang harapan dan ekspektasi.
  
  

  "The only true form of freedom, the only ethical form of freedom is through self-limitation. It is not the privilege of choosing everything you want in your life, but rather choosing what you will give up in your life."

  
  
  Ohiya, Manson juga memperkaya tulisannya dengan studi kasus dan data-data pendukung, termasuk bukunya
  Jonathan Haidt. Tulisannya bukan sembarangan hanya opini Manson semata membuat buku ini memiliki standing point sendiri.