Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the shift from a belief in strict self-discipline to a more relaxed approach to personal goals, suggesting that allowing oneself to act freely can lead to greater success and fulfillment [31][32]. Group 1: Self-Discipline and Its Challenges - The author initially held a strong belief in self-discipline, equating it with freedom and success [4][5]. - Attempts at self-discipline, such as running and waking up early, often resulted in failure due to various excuses [6][8]. - The constant struggle against oneself led to low self-esteem and feelings of inadequacy [10]. Group 2: Embracing Freedom and Acceptance - A turning point occurred when the author experienced a period of unemployment and a change in environment, leading to a decision to "let go" and stop pressuring oneself [11][12]. - By allowing indulgence in activities like using a phone or sleeping in, the author found that these behaviors naturally led to a desire to engage in more productive activities [13][14]. - This acceptance of one's choices reduced the allure of "wrong" actions and made it easier to pursue genuinely desired activities [17][18]. Group 3: Positive Outcomes from a Relaxed Approach - The author experienced significant improvements in life, such as better sleep patterns, successful weight loss, and financial savings, all achieved without the stress of self-discipline [20][21][22]. - The realization that personal desires drive success rather than strict discipline led to a more fulfilling lifestyle [28][31]. - The author concludes that true freedom comes from acting on genuine desires rather than adhering to external standards of discipline [32].

Group 1 - The concept of "field" is defined as an intangible network of relationships, forces, meanings, and possibilities that shapes individual behaviors and experiences within it [4][11][14] - Each "field" operates with its own unique logic and rules, creating a distinct atmosphere and value system, which can be seen as a "small world" within the larger societal context [5][6][10] - The interaction between the "small world" and the "big world" reveals a shared structural logic, where different fields may exhibit common patterns in how they generate and distribute influence [6][7][15] Group 2 - The dual nature of "field" involves both an invisible structure that influences individuals and the active role individuals play in redefining that structure through their practices [11][15][18] - The "field" is sustained by collective experiences and historical sedimentation, which guide and shape individual perceptions and actions [14][18][24] - The dynamic interplay between structure and action within a "field" creates a continuous process of generation, allowing for both stability and potential transformation [15][18][31] Group 3 - Individuals assume roles within a "field," which are not merely chosen but are dictated by the structural demands of that field, akin to wearing a mask that allows for existence within that space [22][24][26] - The essence of individuals in a "field" is reflected in their responsibility towards a specific structural position, which they actively interpret and potentially challenge [24][28][40] - The notion of freedom within a "field" is tied to the awareness of one's role and the ability to navigate and create within the constraints of that role [28][30][40]