On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 7:37 AM, Sriram Karra <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Thaths <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Aug 20, 2013 8:48 PM, "Sriram Karra" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I was asking if GTD can be considered self help. > > > > > > > > > The above strongly indicates your question is really something else. > > If not > > > why do you care one way or the other? So, Thaths, what is your *real* > > > question? > > > > I don't understand. Can you elaborate? > > > > Hehehe. What I am personally curious about is to know why you asked that > question in the first place. As I prefaced my first post in this thread up-stream, I did not even remember seeing this thread (from 2009) when it first appeared in this list. I stumbled into this thread searching for something else. Re-reading this thread I wondered if there were socio-economic factors behind the uniformly negative reactions (in this thread) to the Covey/Carnegie-genre of self-help books. > Do you have a particular view on the self-help > genre? My view is that judging by the fact that platforms in India are littered with pirated copies of these books, there must be a large leadership. And they must sell well because, presumably, a largish segment of the population find these books useful. I began to wonder if hipster life hacking was different from self-help. Maybe the difference between the two is socio-economic? > Do you feel it changes anything about the self-help genre or about > the GTD cult one way or the other? It was the juxtaposition of your > question with Kiran's strong views that triggered this curiosity. > It doesn't change anything about the self-help genre (or GTD). Thaths -- Homer: Hey, what does this job pay? Carl: Nuthin'. Homer: D'oh! Carl: Unless you're crooked. Homer: Woo-hoo!
