Everybody takes risks in their lives, to a degree. There is a threshold though, that everyone has, for the magnitude of risks they can take. There is a limitation too, on the type of risks that they are naturally amenable to. And finally, there is a right timing for when they can or cannot take a said risk. Taking decisions around risk is a multi-variate problem, especially the ones that seem like a one-way door. And to top it, most major decisions seem like a one-way door even though they may not be so – that is, our perception of risk and identification of the kind of risk it is, is mostly approximation.

We approximate via the mental models we incubate, carry with us, develop, and nurture as we lead our lives. This mental model is easily influenced by our situation, our worldly successes and failures, our relationships, and the macro environment we find ourselves in.  The models we carry are sometimes hidden behind layers of emotion, or subconscious lattices of belief that we do not attempt to shake ever, unless we are jolted by an external stimulus or offer up reflection and introspection. Even then, beliefs can be wily companions in that, they can deceive us. Our relationship with truth dictates our attitude towards them – an ambivalence towards what is true brings our beliefs to the testing ground more often.

When I look at the people I know and the people around me, it seems to me as if some have mastered the art of risk intelligence – our ability to perceive with confidence what we know (and what we don’t) – more than others. While we often tag risk taking with our Sisyphean pursuits of wealth or career, it is probably broader than that. These people I speak of seem confident (or indifferent) about things that I find myself worrying constantly about – wealth, reputation, social conformity, vulnerability, and sometimes even relationships. They take actions that proffer up risks to how they will be perceived, what they would be able to earn, how divergent they will be from social mores, and how fragile they will seem to be. They have risk-taking behavior unlike mine, which I find strange and worth investigating.

What drives this don’t-give-a-f*@# attitude?

Traditional thinking says it could be their privilege – born into money, into access, into pedigree. And to a certain extent it is – their ergodicity expands if their ‘uncle point’ is stretchable. And consequentially, their risk-taking ability is higher. But this explanation goes only to a limited point as there’s probably a 50:50 chance the effect is in fact the opposite – because they have so much to lose, they become averse to risk-taking. Much like how the incumbents in business with steady cash cows as their products end up being too risk averse and complacent for the benefit of the quirky upstarts. We see those many times with the third or fourth generation of successful business folks

I wonder if its passion instead. A passion for success, for making a difference, for chasing what they love. Passion can drive focus, and what Arjun saw when Dronacharya probed – the eye of the bird. This singular focus can eliminate hurdles, including our irrational fear of taking risks.

I suspect its naivete, although it might only be in some fringe cases. I wonder if it’s the kind of naivete that is common to people on the frontier of things. There is turbulence at the frontier of any domain worth pursuing. From the earliest homo sapiens who dared to cross the savannah, to the to the spacemen that will come in the 2050s willing to go to Mars, the naivete drives the march of human progress.

A ship is safe in a harbor, but that is not what ships are built for. ~ John Shedd

‘Out there’ is the term I attach to these people. This metaphor likely traces its roots from the European explorers who set out to chart the map of the world and discover new worlds, and in the process, carved out the history of this planet as we know it. They went ‘out there’ on the frigid seas, in their fragile vessels, pining for the wild frontier. Likewise, in more contemporary vibes, some folks are ‘out there’ in their ambitions, in their desires, in their pursuits, and in their failures. They offer up a more transparent versions of man, naked in their desires and their ambitions. They attract ridicule, and care none for the better of it. They draw out critics but are undeterred by the memes that start floating. They chase wild dreams through wilders stratagems but stand firmly in their beliefs to stand out.

It’s important to support and encourage these brave souls for the risks they take. It can be argued that most risks that humans take accrue to the collective progress of humanity. Sure, some risks are degenerate ones – like crime, but they are the tail risks. So, supporting those able to take risks is supporting ourselves over the longer haul. This goes with the idea of considering everyone around you as your comrade, as your brother in arms.  H/T to book The Courage to be Disliked.

We are all naïve about some or the other aspects of our lives, sometimes without us realizing it. When you probe them, these naivetes suggest an intuitive affinity for those things. Like I am naïve about what sugar can do to my body which makes me over index on the sweet stuff even when I know the empty calories can end up harming me. There’s a risk here that I am aware of and am willing to take because I like doing so.

So, would it be fair to say that taking risks gets easier if you value the outcome so much you are willing to step out of your comfort zones and make peace with the risks that come with it? Isn’t then the skill of taking risks essentially the skill of knowing yourself and knowing what you absolutely must have?