Tag Archives: immersion

Poker, Chess and Life – Part 5 (Success)


Throughout this series I’ve been using the games of poker and chess to help shed some light on some of the most key concepts we deal with in every day life. Success is the fifth, final and probably most important one to understand correctly. The basic definition of success is the accomplishment of an aim or purpose. Success in taking an exam is to pass that exam. Success in placing a bet is to win that bet. Success in life is much less clear. Whatever it is, it must be comprised by the accomplishment of the aims and purposes that lead to the life we want to live.

It’s very hard to quantify success objectively. If you ask any person whether they’d like their life to be successful they’ll undoubtedly answer ‘yes’. If you ask any person whether they want to earn as much money as possible or raise a beautiful family, they might answer ‘no’. It follows from this that getting rich and having a big loving family are just two possible routes to success for certain people and are not rigidly tied to the concept for humans per se. Nevertheless, these kind of conceptions are commonly taken as definitions of the word these days in many societies. My aim is to quantify success by something different; something that’s universally desirable to everyone and then figure out how to achieve that. I’ll start by looking at how success in games like chess and poker differs from success in the real world and go from there. Ultimately I want to drive at the idea that we have developed a pretty distorted inappropriate idea of success, at least in modern western society.

1. On Success in Games


Games are great because they’re simplified realms where the objective is very simple. In chess the objective is to win and that entails that your opponent loses. Chess is somewhat detached from real world repercussions. Success and failure at the amateur level reside in a kind of bubble. Some players are obsessive and can’t separate life from the bubble; but for the most part chess is an escape into a different world where slaughtering your opponent through mental superiority is the only concern. In poker things are a little different. The monetary repercussions of success and failure render poker a less isolated environment. Success directly impacts utility in life by defining the amount of resources available to the player. For professionals and semi-professionals the conceptions of success in poker and life may even fuse somewhat.

Nevertheless, both of those games are vastly different environments to the real world, and due to this, success in them should be regarded differently. It feels great to conquer your opponent over the board after hours of heated mental strife. It feels sweet to destroy your opponent in poker while also taking all of his money, or to put it more crudely, the resources that he could have used to obtain a better life. When you put it that way, it seems rather brutish, but winning at the expense of an adversary is highly satisfying. It appeals to some deeply rooted human instinct that we’ve evolved in order to compete effectively. Evolution has trained us to enjoy conquering others. This is the very reason there have been so many wars featuring dictators intent on world domination. Power and gross accumulation of others’ assets feel great in some way we struggle to control. This is why we love poker and chess. They provided us with a chance in the cushioned safe modern world to revert back into a mindset where success really does entail nothing other than brutalising our fellow man.

2. The State of Nature – What Success is Not


Thomas Hobbes argued that if man were to be placed back into in a natural environment void of any state intervention or protection, he would soon revert to his primal instincts to batter his neighbours to death with his club in order to attain their resources and achieve a better life. I have no doubt that we’d go this way, if that is, we had no memory of a more civilised life of cooperation under the blanket of a state.

This concept of success as triumphant domination does not fit well with the modern civilised world. In a context where our needs are comfortably met without conflict and where survival does not hinge upon winning the next spear fight, this mentality no longer leads to real success. Yet, many of us are still programmed this way: to take and take, hoarding bigger and better things and more prestigious assets than our neighbours. We have changed, and while we can still derive pleasure from the simple attainment of a prize over others in synthetic arenas like games, this instinct no longer leads to maximum utility in the real world. We need to redefine success in an era where the maximisation of material conquest no longer satisfies our yearnings.

Recently I travelled to the east coast of America to stay with a student and teach him while exploring the area. The culture in New York  and the surrounding area seemed to me a distorted version of UK culture in one aspect. Worth as a person and self satisfaction seemed to depend primarily upon two things: money and status.

Let me paint a character to serve as our example. Jim is a 30 year old business man living in New York. He has two children and a wife and works 12 hours a day 6 days a week. He drives a Ferrari and lives in a giant beautiful house. Jim is stressed, anxious and miserable. He derives comfort and satisfaction from his material acquisitions, not that he actually enjoys them, but he’s at least reassured of his self worth by their existence, as per his culture’s doctrine. He has no time or energy for his family and doesn’t manage to step back and appreciate what he’s got. Jim looks down upon those with less than him and considers them bested. He only respects the authority and the status of those richer and more successful than him. The woman behind the counter in MacDonalds is the lowest of the low and shouldn’t even be tipped like the more ‘successful’ restaurant waitress should. Jim is afraid of not being admired and respected and so he has an alpha, overly confident exterior. He’s troubled by countless emotional issues caused by deprivation of the things that would truly make him happy if he were to stop and realise what they were. So as a result, he lifts men up into the air upon meeting them in a bar (this actually happened to me) as a display of masculinity and becomes aggressive when someone inadvertently touches upon one of his inner demons.

Jim is sad, angry, arrogant and cruel. Jim is internally conflicted and doesn’t understand himself. In New York, Jim is very ‘successful’ and envied by all of those ‘lesser’ people. Should Jim be considered successful? Has he achieved the aims and purposes of life? If he is this unhappy, then instinctively it would seem not.

Here in lies my point. This rat race conception of success is misleading us and is causing us to be no happier than people who lived to be 28 and made spoons out of rocks. Jim’s tragic case is proof that no life void of happiness can truly be called ‘successful’. Sure Jim is successful within his work and how much money he’s made, but he surely cannot be called ‘successful’ in life unless, that is, happiness was entirely detached from success. This seems very wrong.

Nowadays we can survive and accumulate possessions very easily compared to our distant ancestors. Do we in general, lead any more successful lives than they did? I think not. If our sky scrapers, sushi, fast cars and executive jobs don’t make our lives anymore successful than those of cavemen, then maybe we need to stop focussing so narrowly on material gain as our sole conception of success. It’s not that resource acquisition is independent to success. Among poorer people the two are intrinsically linked as fulfilment of the survival instinct is the first port of call for a successful life. It’s just that when our standard of living reaches a certain level of safety from death, the maximisation of happiness is no longer best achieved through a blinkered resource grabbing approach.

As shown by Jim, money is only relevant to success where it translates efficiently into happiness and there will come a point where this levels off. Happiness then is the true currency of success and we have developed our materialistic conception through evolving as creatures that once needed to fit Hobbes’ model of the successful human. It’s now time to explore what other than material gain is essential for happiness and therefore success in modern civilised societies.

3. Human Yearnings – What Success Is


Unlike in games, and sadly for Jim, the defeating of competitors to achieve one single goal is not what constitutes success in life, it’s merely one ingredient and only up to a point. If success in life is simply happiness, then what are the other ingredients to happiness? What follows is a non-exhaustive list of what I take to be the most important constituents of a happy life. We’ve already covered the attainment of basic human necessity in terms of resources so I won’t deal with it again in this list.

A) Self Worth 

Self worth may be caused, like in Jim’s case, by material achievement or attainment of admiration in others. This is just one possible route to self worth however. The humble Buddhist gathers none of the wealth or luxury achieved by Jim, instead deriving his self worth from the pure unfaltering devotion to a cause he deems far more important – his religious code. A grafting housewife of a large family gets hers from ensuring her husband and six children are fed, watered and equipped to lead a good life. The scientist bent on ground breaking discovery gains hers through the acquisition of knowledge and the opportunity to personally contribute to the changing of our world for the better.

Self worth is whatever makes us feel like we have done as we should in life. it could have ethical, material or emotional roots, but it is impossible to imagine happiness without it. The murdering Buddhist monk and the ruined New York business workaholic will feel equally dejected. They have failed at whatever they’ve deemed important to succeed at. They can forget about happiness and success as long as self worth rests in a state of ruin.

In order to maximise this part of happiness it’s crucial to first be honest with oneself as to what exactly constitutes self worth. Jim might be miserable because his sense of self worth rests on his culture’s depiction of the notion and not what he really desires from life at the deepest level.

B) Companionship

Humans are pack creatures. No matter how much other humans may irritate us on occasion, when left to our own devices for any significant amount of time, we quickly realise how much we’d rather have them around. Being part of a group that treats its members well and shares a certain bond or closeness is essential for happiness. Simply interacting with others satisfies a huge part of our vat of human needs.

One of my favourite films is ‘Into The Wild’, which features a young 20-something man desperate to escape modern civilisation and culture which he cares for not at all. He thus embarks on an expedition into the wilderness ending up in the most remote icy plains of Alaska. In his travels he thrives during human interaction and through the mix of weird and wonderful characters he meets, but ultimately comes to the sad realisation during his final lonely starving minutes that: while he got exactly what he wanted by living alone in the wilderness and self sustaining in the most remote undeveloped lands, none of the would-be happiness was truly obtained as there was no one there for him to experience it with. The final words he scrawls down before his death have stayed with me ever since i saw that film: “happiness only real when shared.”

Loneliness causes insanity. We evolved to depend on each other as those who enjoyed loneliness perished. As a result, we need companions to realise the happiness we gleam from the other sources on this list.

C) Connection 

Connection is linked with, but a little different to companionship. While the former involves sharing your interactions and experience with others, connection is about actually being understood and understanding other humans. The crudest and strongest example of connection, I suppose, is falling in love. There is love in every hollywood movie ever, even ones that could have been good, had they not been poisoned by the cringy, default, inappropriate, sexist love story in which the helpless woman falls for the strapping man who just obliterated a 90 foot tall 50 tonne alien with his fists.

The reason for this is that many people are deprived of real connection and so lap it up like nectar from the wide screen, in the dark, in a room surrounded by lots of other love deprived people all sitting a socially acceptable distance from one another who will never speak to each other in their lives; possibly holding the hand of someone they used to be truly connected to.

Love in this crude form that hollywood likes to butcher and devalue originates from a special kind of understanding. It’s a result of the person you’re in love with actually understanding you for exactly the person you are and wanting to be with that person. It’s like a special bubble that rises out of the ground and encapsulates two people rendering the rest of the world less important. If we don’t fall in love, we don’t feel the churning buzz in the pit of our stomachs that makes us feel a truly connected piece of the world. If no one understands the real you, then you can never completely connect with anything, only parts of yourself can achieve this at different times and you’ll be less happy and therefore successful than you could have been had you found real connection.

True connection isn’t always possible, or if it is then it often fades away after some period of time. Nevertheless, getting as much as you can of this is achievable and essential. I believe that one reason we’re so unhappy as a society is that we hide parts of ourselves from our partners, marry people that we don’t fully connect with out of comfort and social pressure, and maintain a fearful distance from others as some kind of defensive mechanism. This lifeless forced monogamy kills the quest for real connection and we feed instead from pitiful drips of distorted simulations of connection through our entertainment.

Connection is not limited to romantic connection. You can connect with strangers, friends, dogs, books, songs and audiences. Keeping an open mind and being fully yourself around everybody you meet is the surest way to forming true connections so that you don’t need the methadone handed to you by TV shows in which people make connections you only wish you could.

D) Pleasure and Immersion

This one is my personal favourite. If you don’t enjoy life, it’s hard to see how life could ever be successful for you. Entailed by the realisation of pleasure is the avoidance of pain; at least of the fruitless kind. It’s essential to seek out the things in life which make you happy. Sex, good food, drugs, philosophy, terrible hollywood love stories, music etc. whatever thrills and excites you, this is what you have to pursue.

There are three categories of moments in time: past, present and future. Nothing in the past can generate very much pleasure, maybe just a fraction of it’s former pleasure in the condensed dulled form of memory. Things in the future can cause you pleasure, but only because and when the future becomes the present. While it’s possible to look forward to your wedding and derive pleasure in the present from knowing that this great future event is going to happen, that pleasure is microscopic compared with what you’ll experience on the day, when it becomes the present.

Therefore, the present is thee part of time where pleasure should be maximised. Toiling in the present to set up future pleasures is wise only if you’re going to be able to relish them when they become the present. Dwelling on the past instead of living in the moment is probably never ever wise. I suppose what I’m getting at is that forgetting all about the past and the future and fully immersing yourself in the moment is of huge value, to happiness and to success. There are of course limits concerning consideration to other persons and all out egoistic hedonism is a truly condemnable moral practice, but knowing when to just fully savour the present moment and get yourself into the kind of situations you can savour is key.

We all live relatively tiny blips of lives in which it really didn’t matter how much money we made. If you grab the pleasure that comes your way and engineer as much of it as possible for the future then you’ve nailed a key ingredient to success in life.


Like I said previously, games are really fun because they provide alternative realties in which the principles of success become streamlined and instinctively fun to achieve. However, we must avoid being Jim, the guy from ‘Into The Wild’ or anyone else who fails to realise what gives humans real happiness. I’m sure you can add to my rather limited list of human success principles. Feel free to comment and suggest additional ideas. I’d be interested to hear what other things you the reader thinks are essential to success in life. After all, it’s what we’re all striving for.

Poker, Chess and Life – Part 3 (Skill)


Skill in anything is an attractive thing to strive for. It’s something we can develop and hone to achieve the things we want. To put it simply: skill grants access to success. But what exactly composes skill in poker and chess, and can the same thing be applied to life? Can we simply develop our skills in the same structured way and guarantee ourselves the same level of prosperity as we can in the realms of strategy games?

1. Skill As Decision Making (poker and chess)


As always we set off by looking at our concept in question through the lens of the chess player. You win a game of chess by being more skilled than your opponent. Being more skilled than your opponent is represented by the fact that you make superior moves to the ones he makes. Therefore, being skilled at chess is simply to possess some faculty that consistently enables you to make good decisions. Good decisions lead to better outcomes than bad ones do with a firm degree of reliability in the purity of the chess world and so skill translates directly and instantly to success.

In poker there’s no real fundamental difference here. Skill is still the underlying currency of success and it can be reduced here also to brute force decision making; it’s just that now there exists a delay in the translation of this skill to success as we saw last time when we examined luck and learned that this game contains a great deal of it. A common misconception about poker held by the uninformed outsider is that since poker is a game of luck, it can’t also be a game of skill. This is completely false and to quickly explain why I’ll use the following analogy that I so often find myself falling back on at social events.

Imagine we each have a coin and decide to play a coin tossing game where the idea is to toss your own coin and flip heads more than your opponent does with theirs. When someone flips heads, he/she scores a point but scores nothing for tails. Our coins are perfectly normal apart from one small but crucial detail: mine is weighted in such a way that it lands on heads 51% of the time. Your coin, on the other hand, is just a regular two pence piece from your pocket and lands on each side 50% of the time.

What would happen if we played a match of ten tosses each? Well, I’d flip heads 5.1 times out of 10 on average to your 5 times out of 10, but on one occasion in isolation, anything could happen. There will be many times where you toss more heads than me and over this small sample it would be impossible for an onlooker to determine that any one coin was favourable to the other. However, if we toss 100,000 times instead of 10, we’ll find the 0.1 extra heads I toss per 10 to be decisive. I will flip more heads than you than you due to the law of large numbers which says that statistical likely hoods hold true over large numbers of trials. I am crowned champion over a 100,000 toss match thanks to my ever so slightly better coin.

Now let’s imagine this small edge of being able to toss more heads was not in fact due to me holding a bogus weighted coin, but was a result of my superior skill in coin tossing. Now we can see how skill can generate a positive long term expectation in a hybrid game of skill and chance, but that the more skilled party can easily still lose over the short term. Here in lies the unreliable nature of success in poker over the short term but near certainty of long term profit for the more skilled party in the long run. In poker, this skill equates to choosing what action to take with a certain hand in some distinct situation. The player who makes the better decisions wins the money in the long term so again skill is just this ability to choose good options.

2. Skill As Decision Making (life)


Jerry (50) dropped out of university at the age of 19 as it wasn’t for him so he’s chosen instead to travel and pursue his passion for music for the last 25 years. He’s now making his way through Australia with his wife teaching the guitar while she teaches piano. He says couldn’t be happier.

Sally (50) has worked as a solicitor for the last 25 years and grown to loathe it. She feels like her life has passed her by without her even realising, each day a meaningless blur in a procession of routine drudgery. She’s thought about changing her life at various points, but never found the moment to join the police force like she’d always fancied.

So what do Sally and Jerry have in common? They’ve both made choices for the last 25 years that have resulted in different levels of satisfaction with how life has gone. It seems pretty obvious that Jerry has chosen better than Sally and thus lived a far more positive life over the years. Just as in poker and chess, there’s a sense in which skill is simply a person’s ability to make good decisions. Of course Sally’s knowledge of the legal system and Jerry’s knack with the guitar are sub-skills, but if we want to generalise away form sections of life to the bigger picture of life itself then skill is at least partly decision making.

There are two issues rearing their heads here so I’m calling for a short time-out to deal with them.

The first is the subjectivity of success. ‘Success’ as intended from now on is subjective to the agent in question and not comparable to how others perform on an objective scale. Mike might not be as intelligent or brilliant as Fiona, but he could be more successful in life if he achieves more good stuff (whatever that turns out to be) than she does relative to their respective natural abilities and opportunities. Fiona might be a natural born world class pianist who received world class lessons from infancy. Mike didn’t have this chance so this needs to be taken into account. Of course there will be external factors governing overall achievement in life, but success should be measured in an equal manner so we’ll be overlooking any of these natural strokes of luck from now on.

The second issue and the one I’m going to need to leave on the sidelines until part 5 is what exactly constitutes success in life. Could Sally not be considered more successful than Jerry if she’s saved a lot of money, bought a house and raised a family in the last 25 years where as Jerry has not? Maybe her sacrifice in doing something she hates was worth it should we zoom out and see the bigger picture. Sure, maybe! it depends on what we think the currency of the good actually is in this baffling realm. Maybe that currency is different from person to person. This question is worthy of more space than can be allowed for in this section so stay tuned for fuller exploration soon.

That aside, I want to investigate why some of us are more skilled in life than others. Why do some of us repeatedly make bad decisions and end up in bad spots while others seem to chose prudently and reap the rewards? I have three explanations for this that might lead us down a path to improving our skills in life. They are: desire invasion, decision discipline and decision automation.

By desire invasion I refer to something more than just a lack of willpower or lapse in judgement. Many types of people, for example, addicts, criminals and mentally ill people suffer from an inner programming so profound that it overrides any hope of decision making carrying out it’s normal duty of pursuing the best outcome. The poker equivalent is the enraged recreational player who has a gambling problem and chases his losses without rationality or sense of limiting the damage. The chess equivalent is extremely rare and even more bizarre than the rest of the chess community, but i suppose he’d be the board trashing, abusive type of player who gets so mad at the game he starts to make moves in a shortsighted emotional manner and hence gives up decision making in any rational sense. These people are not necessarily unskilled at life, they simply suffer from something debilitating that prevents that skill from being exercised. Even the most gifted poker player in the world will be a loser if he can’t keep it together for long enough to think clearly and implement his ability.

For the rest of us, success in life I believe is very much a case of skill in decision making. We understand this on some level yet many of us constantly make decisions we know deep down to be mistakes.

The first culprit here is decision discipline or lack thereof. Just about every poker player suffers from this deficiency at some time or another. We know that we should fold the river because analysis shows calling to be unprofitable, yet we chose to call anyway and convince ourselves somehow that it’s okay. We know playing h5 and opening up the kingside is probably theoretically bad, but we can’t resist the chance of winning via a brilliant (or lucky) mating attack. We resolved to run 3 times a week this year and give up Papa Johns pizza as this was much better for our well being, but hey, it’s two for tuesdays today and it’s really cold outside.

Those who succeed find ways to keep discipline levels high more frequently and enforce strict codes of decision making upon themselves. Those who fail succumb to bad decisions they could have avoided with a stronger faculty of discipline. Success in life requires discipline, otherwise the brain will just make the bad decisions it seeks for whatever irrational or emotional purpose. Discipline here usually involves the overriding of emotional interference of any type. It takes Sally discipline to quit her job as a lawyer and pursue actual happiness just as it takes me discipline to stop ordering pizza. Her job is controlling her fear enough to make the change where as the rouge desire I’m trying to reign in is temptation or perhaps gluttony.

If we separate emotional urges from our rational analysis, we’re better placed to make the right decision. Sometimes, however emotions can lead us to the correct choice. The saying “follow you heart” has a hell of a lot of truth to it in my opinion. However, other times we’re best placed ignoring emotional impulse and reasoning out the problem. The real skill in life then is using our cold calculating abilities to decipher which emotions are worthy of listening to and which are striving for unwanted ends. This isn’t going to be easy, but as a friend of mine likes to maintain, large problems need to be broken up into steps and now at least we have a starting point.

Finally we come to decision automation. I came up with this concept thanks to a poker illness many poker players are afraid of developing – the dreaded autopilot! This is a frame of mind that can exist in almost any mental activity where the brain, due to distraction or fatigue, stops thinking authentically and begins to rely on habitual patterns to make decisions. We suddenly find ourselves on the turn without any idea of how we got there. We have to trace the hand backwards to reason that we must have open raised KJs from an early position and been called by the big blind. Then we must have continuation-bet the flop and been called again. Our minds switch off when they lack the focus or energy to create new thoughts to deal with a situation and shift into this autopilot mode so damaging to our win rate.

Perhaps unsurprisingly by now, I’m now going to say that the same thing happens in life all the time. How many decisions do we make, completely unaware of the fact we’re making a decision at all. And how good of a decision can we possibly make where this is the case? I didn’t go for a run today because I didn’t even think about it until I was in bed, yet at every point of the day where this was a possibility, my subconscious was choosing not to bring it to my attention. If we can develop a system of flagging up important decisions as and when they occur, we can minimise decision automation. We may also need a system of bookmarking certain things so we remember to consider them and consciously make a decision about if and when to do them. The more you automate your life, the firmer the grasp routine will have on your mind and the quicker the mould will grow over that beautifully dynamic creative and inspired part that’s always seeking to make great choices and better your life.

So to recap, in order to not end up like Sally, we need to build decision discipline to quell the destructive randomising effect of emotion while still using it as a guiding beacon the times we find we agree with its impulse. We also need to banish autopilot decision making and keep fresh our inspired originality and creative pallet so that we may paint things into our lives that aren’t staring us right in the face. Be aware and be disciplined; in chess, in poker, and in life!

3. Skill Beyond Decision Making – Immersion


If skill in life leads to success, and decision making isn’t always sufficient for success, then skill must be more than just decision making. Why would I say decision making isn’t always enough? Well, when we make a good decision we gain useful things that can be enjoyed or transferred into happiness. In order to experience happiness or pleasure from the things we’ve gained though, there’s one ingredient missing, and this ingredient I’m going to call ‘immersion.’

Let’s imagine Julia read this article, but stopped before this section. She became obsessed with making decisions every moment of her conscious waking day and making the right ones. She built an amazing career, made a beautiful family with her successful husband and became very rich (all thanks to me). Unfortunately, her days are now nothing but a massive fest of stress and worry as she battles with decision after decision, adamant that she’ll make lots of right choices about important things.

So Julia isn’t very happy and that’s because she never allows herself to blend in with the world and enjoy the fruits of her labour. If we’re doing nothing but choosing what to do next, we can’t savour the present. We enter some bizarre self contradictory loop where we spend the present always setting up the future so that it will be better but then we chose not to cash in that betterness and instead set up the next future so it will be better so on and so on. I think we’ve all encountered neurotic stress-heads like Julia. She has a great decision making faculty but lacks the other half of skill in life – immersion.

Immersion is the ability to switch off the decision making brain and allow yourself to profit through endorphins and positive inner well being. I find that some of the most enjoyable times in life are those where you get completely lost in the moment. The times you remember forever are those which felt the most special at the time. The very things we try to manage and even suppress in order to make good decisions are the things we need to let loose in order to gain from those decisions….emotions! We are supposed to thrive by becoming one with our environment and simply being sometimes.

As someone with very hedonistic views, I may be biased here, but I’m going to go ahead and state the weak claim that no achievement is really anything if life is void of pleasure and happiness. The happiest people seem to me to be those who can successfully flick the switch of decision making on and off at the appropriate times. Switching it on to create the circumstances conducive to happiness and turning it off again in time to enjoy them.

In poker and in chess we have no need for such a balance. Skill is not measured by how much we enjoy the trip but by the destination that is the winners’ circle. In life though, I;d say you’re pretty bad at life though if you create an empire of resources that noone ever enjoys. The poker equivalent would be building a massive stack in a tournament to then leave the computer and let your stack disappear along with any hopes of winning money. To be like Julia is to create a winning endgame in chess then blunder it all away in horrific fashion.


Skill is vital to success in chess, in poker, and in life. Decision making is vital to skill in all three realms. We need to control our emotions in order to proposer at this and make sure we stay vigilant enough to have the right factors up for decision in the first place. The more we avoid the natural inclination to autopilot our way through the world, the more beneficial the topics of our decision making become. The more we conquer our irrationality and channel emotion in the right way, the better the choices we make on these matters. At the end of it all though, it’s totally irrelevant how much we achieve if we neglect immersing ourselves in the world and enjoying what we’ve created. Life is a finite blip in the grand scheme of things. Don’t blunder it all away in the end game.

Skill in life is just the ability to achieve what is good for us to achieve. More about that in part 5.