You said:
ChatGPT said:
I think you are drawing a very sensible distinction. “Live simply” is often said as if simplicity were a universal rule, but in practice it usually means removing unnecessary friction, not pretending that the world itself is simple. Some domains are inherently complex—finance, law, long-term relationships, or health management—and trying to flatten them into artificial simplicity can actually increase risk or confusion.
What tends to matter more with age is not global simplicity but selective simplicity. You already seem to do this naturally. Routine in clothing, diet, and medication reduces daily decision fatigue and is psychologically quieting. That kind of stability is valuable because it preserves mental energy for the places where complexity cannot be avoided.
The areas you mention that require constant attention are exactly the ones where simplification is often impossible. Taxes and banking have external rules that change. Relationships are living systems, not mechanical ones. The best one can usually do is build reliable habits around monitoring them rather than trying to reduce them to one-time solutions. In a sense, complexity there is not a flaw but a structural feature of the world.
There is also an important asymmetry in aging. Learning new complicated systems tends to be harder than maintaining existing ones, but expertise accumulated over decades can make some complexity feel easier rather than harder. What looks complicated from outside may actually be manageable because you have internalized the pattern.
So I wouldn’t interpret the advice as “make life simple.” A better phrasing might be “don’t waste cognitive and emotional effort on complexity that doesn’t pay for itself.” You seem already quite good at that. You have a small, stable physical world and accept that some intellectual and social machinery must keep running in the background. That is a very practical philosophy.
You said:
ChatGPT said:
That change is very common. Early in life many people are curious about mastering new tools; later, the cost of learning a new interface or workflow starts to feel larger than the benefit. It is not really loss of ability so much as a shift in optimization. You already know enough that you can judge whether a new technology actually improves your life before investing the effort.
Your example is interesting. The old programmable calculators from Texas Instruments were actually quite “pure” technology—small feature sets, consistent behavior, and a sense that learning them was learning a skill, not navigating a moving target. Modern software is often the opposite: many layers of options, frequent updates, and interfaces that change just when you have finally internalized them.
Disliking steep learning curves at your stage of life is not unusual. There is also a rational side to it. When remaining lifetime use of a tool is uncertain, spending weeks learning it may not be efficient. Many experienced people quietly adopt a rule something like “I will learn new technology if it clearly saves me time, reduces risk, or increases safety.”
I suspect your reaction is less “I hate new technology” and more “I dislike technology that demands effort without clear return.” That is a fairly mature position. You are not rejecting change; you are demanding that change justify itself.
There is also a subtle psychological point. When people have spent decades building a stable working world, constant novelty can feel like noise rather than opportunity. Stability itself becomes a kind of resource.
If I may ask gently—do you find that once you do learn a new tool that genuinely helps, you still enjoy using it, or has the pleasure of mastery also changed? That pattern can tell a lot about how learning style evolves with age.
You said:
ChatGPT said:
That little “magic” feeling is actually a lovely sign. Even small gains in fluidity can be psychologically rewarding when they make an action feel effortless, almost like the tool is anticipating you. I suspect what you are enjoying is not so much the time saved as the sense that the interface is cooperating with you rather than requiring explicit commands.
What you describe is sometimes called gesture or motion navigation. In Mozilla Foundation’s Firefox, features like mouse gestures are optional precisely because different users value different styles of control. For someone who dislikes learning curves, such features are ideal: once learned, they fade into the background and stop demanding attention.
Your reaction—getting a “kick” from the slight elegance of it—is interesting. It suggests that you still enjoy mastery, but only when mastery feels lightweight. The pleasure isn’t in wrestling with complexity but in making something difficult behave as if it were simple. That is a very mature form of technological enjoyment.
There is also a broader aging pattern that fits you rather well. Many experienced users shift from exploring new systems to refining how they use the systems they already trust. Instead of accumulating tools, they polish interaction with a few good ones. That usually preserves curiosity while avoiding fatigue.
The fact that you are still experimenting a little is actually encouraging. It means the boundary between comfort and novelty has not hardened completely. A small, elegant trick that feels like “magic” is often the healthiest kind of technological novelty.
No comments:
Post a Comment