====================

Up to a point a man’s life is shaped by environment, heredity, and the movements and changes in the world around him. Then there comes a time when it lies within his grasp to shape the clay of his life into the sort of thing he wishes to be. Only the weak blame parents, their race, their times, lack of good fortune, or the quirks of fate.

Everyone has it within his power to say, ‘This I am today; that I will be tomorrow.’

The wish, however, must be implemented by deeds.”

–

Louis Lamour

===============

So. This is about living Life and personal velocity (progress with momentum). I have written about self esteem and self image and living life, but until now I have never found a quote that summarizes a belief I have always had lurking in the back of my head.

“Then there comes a time when it lies within his grasp to shape the clay of his life into the sort of thing he wishes to be.”

How awesome is that? (pretty awesome)

It is absolutely true that a lot of what may hold us back from our dreams, or maybe more importantly, being whatever it is we want to be isn’t our fault <or in our control>. Life throws a shitload of shit at us and a lot of it is completely out of our control. It would be foolish to not recognize that.

But.

The days when nothing seems to go right.

The days where dreams seemed to have vanished.

The days where ‘not drowning’ is the focus instead of ‘swimming.’

All those days are gonna happen – to all of us. And it is on these days where it becomes really really easy to focus on excuses. But. We do have power to shape our tomorrows. Ignore the excuses and recognize that even if circumstances make things difficult, improving things is NOT impossible.

Sure. Sometimes a little ingenuity is required.  Sometimes you almost have to trick circumstances. Sometimes you have to zig when Life zags and sometimes you have to take some risks and get a little lucky.

Which leads me to these words:

“That I am today; that I will be tomorrow.”

Absolutely … most people underestimate what they can do today.

Absolutely … most people over estimate what they can do tomorrow.

Despite that … it still comes down to two things: action and objectives.

Actions.

What I am tomorrow depends on what I do today. My actions today make me who I am tomorrow. You get it.
This is all about first step, baby. Takin’ that first step. You constantly hear “I’ll do it tomorrow”. And when it doesn’t happen tomorrow, it becomes the next tomorrow and the next and …. well … you get it (and I will explain why under objectives).

But. While you hear that … what is actually the truth? What do people really do? (and you just may not always see it)

Here is the truth behind actions and this thought. People who decide mentally to “do something” actually, uhm, do something. No shit. They do take action. They do begin to “shape the clay of their life to become what they want to be.” They do.

Then what is the problem?

Objectives.

Doing is often dependent upon how we view our objectives and this sometimes gets mired down in meeting the sometimes farcical absurd expectations in the mind. That said. Let me take a minute on ‘objectives.’  Scott H Young wrote in May 2006, in a piece called “Balancing Today and Tomorrow“, about a nifty concept called “velocity based thinking (or goal setting)” versus positional goals:

—————————

How is it possible to balance living in each moment and the concept of personal growth and improvement? Doesn’t personal development imply a certain dissatisfaction with where you are in life? At the very least, doesn’t an obsession with personal growth indicate that you are constantly living in the future, rather than enjoying each moment? How can we remove this apparent dichotomy and get the improvement we desire along with satisfaction now? In other words, how can we live for today and still strive for tomorrow?

The old position based paradigm told us to focus on where we are in life. If we have a big house, a nice family and are in good health, then we can be happy. If we are poor, miserable and alone then we are depressed. Pretty simple. In this paradigm, our main focus is on our current position.

Some take this position based thinking to a slightly higher level when they don’t think about where they are but where they are going. Instead these people draw their level of happiness from the position they feel they will be in the future. Although this is an improvement, the cost of being unsatisfied with today is simply too high a price to pay for this paradigm.

There is an alternative paradigm, however. This is a velocity based paradigm. In this paradigm, where you are doesn’t matter. It doesn’t even matter where you are going to end up. From this perspective, our focus not where we are going, but rather, the rate we are getting there. This perspective tells us that being homeless or a millionaire makes no difference. It is only the rate at which they are improving that distinguishes them.

The major distinction between a velocity based goal and a position based one is mostly in how you view the goal. Positional goals are usually viewed as a means to achieve something. If I set a goal to lose x pounds in three months, then what I am pursuing is the goal itself. Velocity based goals take a completely different approach. The purpose of a velocity based goal is to serve to direct, focus and amplify the growth you are experiencing right now.

Imagine life is like climbing an infinitely large cliff side. Positional thinking tells you to try and get as high up the cliff as you can. Positional goals are used to reach new plateaus on the cliff. Velocity based thinking tells us that getting really high up on the cliff is irrelevant given its infinite nature. Instead velocity based thinking tells us that the true experience of life has to come from the rate at which we are climbing the cliff. Sitting at one notch of the cliff for too long is boring and unsatisfying regardless of your height. Velocity based goals in this sense are not used to reach the plateaus themselves, these goals are used to encourage, push and measure the rate at which you are climbing.

The key difference between positional goals and velocity based goals is simple. If you fail to achieve a positional goal, this is usually very demotivating. This is often why so many new goal setters fail to continue with the practice. The pain of failing to achieve when you’ve tried your best is often too great. Velocity based goals remove this problem entirely. Because the goal was simply a servant of directing and pushing your own growth, as long as you know you were trying your best (maximum velocity possible) then the goal was successful regardless of whether you underestimated the deadline necessary.

A velocity based paradigm is actually far more effective in improving our position.

The reason is actually rather simple. Positional based thinking is built on the notion of competition. As a result, we strive to make leaps ahead in our position based on where we are compared to others. If we are on the top then we slow down, for what is the point of trying really hard when you are already in the lead? If we are on the bottom, negativity and pessimism often cripple our growth. Position based thinkers tend to only achieve a maximum velocity when they feel they need to increase their position, yet that positional increase is achievable. Velocity based thinking doesn’t have this weakness. People who truly live this ideal are at a maximal velocity all of the time. Being at the top or bottom holds no distinction to these people. Rich or poor, strong or weak, healthy or ill these people are always traveling at a speed which is the most they can possibly achieve.

—————————-

I have always been a Velocity believer but what I like about personal velocity is it isn’t about frickin’ milestones and moving up the ladder and crap like that. It is about actions and objectives in a “movement” framework. And movement at your own pace. Its not a competition, but rather just with a goal of improving personal being. Judging yourself against … well … yourself I guess.

And with that I get to complete the circle on this quote and thought:

“That I am today; that I will be tomorrow.”

The only really important word L’Amour uses throughout this thought is “I.”

It’s not about competition.

It’s not about goals and objectives.

It is about I. And what “I” wants <or needs>.

That said. Life is tough enough without having to have someone else tell you how to ‘progress’ personally. Go your own speed. Fuck what anyone says.

Sure. Business weighs you down with meaningless milestones & expectations all the time.

Sure. Society, in general, crams goals down your throat all the time.

And, sure, becoming who you want to be “tomorrow” takes lots and lots of work.

But. I would suggest you are actually minimizing your chances of success if you always go the speed of what everyone else is demanding of you. Maximizing your ‘self success’ is most likely found in finding, and going, your own velocity.

Anyhow.

I love this quote.

Love it mostly because I like the way it gives the truth instead of some pithy inspirational flippant quote. I like it because while it frames time in a today-tomorrow dimension it doesn’t say how fast it should be, or needs to be, done. You choose the velocity in which it happens.

This I am today, that I will be tomorrow. Words to live by.

===================

edited from original post from August 2010

============

“We come spinning out of nothingness, scattering stars like dust.”

Rumi

===========

When I started on this piece I wasn’t sure if it was about self, life, dreams or maybe even starting a business. Then I realized, in some weird way, it was kind of about all. How? Think “connection.” Or maybe connecting with something in a multi-dimensional way <emotionally, physically, experientially> which not only grounds us to us <our self>, but has a commonality to ground us to other “us’es” as well as to, well, everything <hopes, dreams, aspirations>. To me this has two aspects: stars & nothingness.

I like the thought that maybe each of us is really a star <shining brightly for something good or hopeful within ourselves as well as possibly for someone else>.

I like the thought we spin out of nothingness as people, as careers, as thinkers and as doers, scattering to find our place in the expansiveness ahead.

I like the thought that maybe, because we really are stars, we seek them to find whatever secrets they could share about us.

I like the thought that stars can be seen by anyone, anywhere if you only look up on occasion.

I like the thought that stars connect people and thoughts and dreams and wishes and … well … anything hopeful.

I like the thought that while stars are about space they are actually more about managing space by circumventing distance to activate that which can exist between stars and people.

I like the thought that stars actually embrace the strongest business building concept thru actively engaging people in a physical way … an emotional way … and an experiential way. Stars engage us, connect with us, in a way that businesses and brands should attempt to emulate any authentic way they can <because I am not sure I can find any one person who dislikes stars>.

Regardless.

Whether we truly are stars spinning out nothingness or stars simply represent our sense of ‘nothingness-to-what-could be’ mindset, it is pretty amazing to think that anything spinning out of nothingness can inevitably create one of the greatest connections a person can ever have. Stars represent life moments stitching together all that we are and all that we want to be to form thoughts & attitudes which fuel behavior.

Stars are part of everyday lives and occupy critical space in a person’s grander Life story. They never dictate behavior, but instead inspire behavior. They do so by nudging us toward both emotional and transactional personal investments into ourselves inevitably shaping life patterns, creating behavior, and ultimately encouraging us to make personal identity statements about who we are.

Stars are the beginning, middle and end of Life. They represent life and how we live it.

They are the small cornerstones to our Life stories. Somehow they transcend the transactions we make with ourselves by resonating with something inside as well as outside the moment of ‘transaction’ with the star. And maybe most importantly? This multi-dimensional transaction we make with a star perpetuates a bond which unites, influences, inspires and scatters us out of nothingness toward, well, somethingness.

I imagine that means stars ultimately represent a connection with ‘what could, or can, be.” Stars help us answer the ultimate life question: “how do people fulfill their potential and figure out who they are and what they’re capable of?”  They seem to give people a nice simple focus point which doesn’t sit there and lecture or even offer any advice, simply a feeling of possibilities.

Shit. Maybe that is all ‘Bruce-babble.’ Maybe I am giving stars too much power and too much definition.

Here is what I know for sure. We should all look at stars every once in a while:

Some of us may find hope.

Some of us may find clarity.

Some of us may find ourselves shrinking before the immensity of Life.

Some of us may see possibilities.

And some of us may find that they take the moment and make a Life transaction.

But all of us WILL find something. If we look up at all that nothingness, we will see something. Ponder.

==============

I used to tell people we use research to INFORM decisions and not MAKE decisions.

Then.

I told people we use numbers to INFORM decisions and not MAKE decisions.

Then.

I told people we use data to INFORM decisions and not MAKE decisions.

Now.

I tell people we use algorithms to INFORM decisions and not MAKE decisions.

Me

===============

“An idea of working based on three pillars: science, insight and faith. Science because I’m a social scientist by training. I believe in data, robustness of information, making sure you’re on the right track. Insight because if you’re not able to draw insights from research, you’re not a strategist, just someone observing the data. And faith because you never know what’s going to work, so you always need a bit of faith to get everyone started.”

Laura Chiavone

================

I believe great companies have one common infrastructure characteristic: culture. Good companies can be grounded in systems, processes, operations, etc, however, the step up to ‘great’ demands a culture (which is always implemented by people) to elevate the ‘infrastructure aspects. To be clear. “Culture” is not some ‘thing’, or values, or some nebulous feeling, it is an emergent consequence of how people interact with each other within a business. It is not what someone does or doesn’t do, it is what happens when people do things with each other. I thought of this because Mike Walsh has a new book, The Algorithm Leader, which suggests that the most successful companies of the future will support/augment/enhance that culture infrastructure – with algorithms. Now. Before anyone defaults into thinking this translates into “empty soul, technology order taker” company, or even holocracy (ponder how polar opposites could be relevant to the algorithm topic), let me share some thoughts on how I believe the thinking suggests structural value creation lift: for business & humans. To me this will occur through a balance of stability (knowledge infrastructure), uncertainty (quests versus missions) & understanding of Antifragility (selective redundancy maximizing untidy opportunities).

Let me pose some thoughts on the relationship between algorithms and antifragility upfront.

====================

“It is optionality that makes things work & grow.” AntiFragile

Maybe algorithms shouldn’t provide answers, but options. Maybe, more importantly, we become a little less comfortable with the need for construct and more comfortable with using algorithms as dynamic application of ‘movable construct’ at the right time & place.

“The antifragility of some comes necessarily at the fragility of others. In a system the sacrifice of some units – fragile units or people – are often necessary for the well-being of other units or the whole.” AntiFragile

Maybe algorithms should evaluate tradeoffs, fragility versus antifragility & well-being factors (of units & whole).

“The crux of complex systems , those with interacting parts, is that they convey information to these component parts through stressors.” AntiFragile

Maybe algorithms should not highlight solutions, but rather stressors or what Donella Meadows called ‘leverage points.’.

“There is a category of things that we can call half invented, and taking the half invented into the invented is often the real breakthrough.” AntiFragile

Maybe algorithms shouldn’t seek new innovations but rather ‘half invented’ ideas ripe for innovation maturity.

“Meaningful progress is non-linear.” How To Lead a Quest

Algorithms should enable an organization to identify progress paths to explore and discover rather than simply meet the needs of present identified ‘paths’ of progress or solve present identified issues & vulnerabilities.

=================

Full disclosure on my business beliefs. Throughout my career I have always felt comfortable by making the less certain decisions just certain enough that someone would go “well, it seems riskier, but, if you own it, go do it.” I say all that because I believe all Future of Work discussion should be grounded on the relationship between certainty & uncertainty – for the business, the people within the business organization and people’s minds/attitudes.

Algorithm leadership.

Most people want certainty therefore they let research make decisions, use numbers to make decisions, show data to make decisions and, increasingly, will suggest algorithms make decisions.

This is just a different type of efficiency couched in efficient operations. It will be called “efficient decision making.” The problem is this efficiency is just an attempt to strip a decision of uncertainty and, well, the best, most effective; decisions always carry along some burden of uncertainty.

What made me think about this? I just finished rereading AntiFragile (Nassim Taleb) and reread Mike Walsh’s first chapter of his new book The Algorithm Leader.

The former is about figuring out how to maximize from disorder or uncertainty while the latter is not becoming too dependent upon seemingly ‘certainty.’

—

“The future of companies, regardless of size, will be shaped by algorithms.”

Mike Walsh

—

Ultimately, it will be humans who use the shapes created by algorithms to assess options, evaluate antifragile components and navigate asymmetrical uncertainty.

It within this dynamic environment in which we should note business is inherently fragile. HBR once said “business is a quivering mass of vulnerabilities.” I say that because as a pendulum swings one way it will inevitably want to swing the other way. We inherently feel the fragile pendulum swing and start seeking to build ‘un-natural’ antifragile aspects to create a sense of antifragility. Aspects like systems, process, rules, KPIs, data/dashboards and, yes, algorithms. Depending on how fragile we see, or feel, the business to be the more likely we use the created mechanisms to ‘tell us what to do.’ We must fight against those instincts.

Frankly, this is where generations DO become relevant in discussing business. Older workers, 50somethings, can be an impediment by seeing past experience as ‘certainty’ . On the other hand, some 50somethings can actually be a bridge between some certainty-type learnings and younger people who are more comfortable with disorder (but they don’t necessarily have the expertise do discern the best bridges between certainty & uncertainty).

Here is what I do know. Business people inherently abhor risk, business organizations inherently gravitate toward the ‘safest’ and numbers, research, data & algorithms look like life rafts in a risky, safe seeking business world. That said. I also know progress is rarely found without some risk and is often found on ‘not-the-safest’ path. Algorithms create a false sense of ‘right thing to do.’ any leader who leans on algorithms too much isn’t leading. Period.

Uncertainty leadership.

For this I lean in on How to Lead a Quest by Dr. Jason Fox. In times of uncertainty a business does not need business ‘heroes’ but rather people aligned on a quest and leaders who embrace the uncertainty of a complex interconnected multi-dimensional business world.

—-

“You must learn to be still in the midst of activity and to be vibrantly alive in repose.”

Indira Ghandi

—-

Contrary to popular belief I would suggest a highly successful algorithmic leader is likely a 50something who has navigated research, then data, the ‘dictating’ decisions challenge gauntlet, & who were more likely to see how seemingly unrelated disparate fragments could be coalesced into decisions and futures that the numbers/data didn’t completely support, but also did not completely discount. That was a long winded way to introduce the idea of “data decipherers”. This type of leadership invaluable to an organization more & more steeped in numbers, dashboards, data & algorithms.

Jason Fox calls this “shining a light on the path before us.” Leadership will not use algorithms for ‘squinting into the future but rather to identify the stepping stones in a sea of uncertainty. They will offer people moments of some certainty without promising a certain future nor even promising steady progress organizationally. It will be more about uncovering options, making choices to alleviate stressors, so that teams can breakthrough while others provide the organization with the redundancies to protect an organization from uncertainty vulnerabilities.

Here is what I do know. Psychologically businesses will arc toward a belief algorithms will provide an increased tidiness and symmetry to business. that is a false sense of tidiness. Business will become increasingly untidy, the paths will become increasingly complex, therefore business will become increasingly uncertain with regard to the best, and proper steps, necessary for progress. Pragmatically business will need more, and better, leadership comfortable with uncertainty despite more numbers, data and algorithms.

Antifragile leadership.

Crisis, disaster resolution is rarely about resources available, but rather people* availability.

• * ‘people availability’: this is all of physical energy, skills and mental energy combined.

Here I lean in Taleb’s AntiFragile. We tend to build redundancies incorrectly, don’t assume for disorder well & only enhance fragility in plans. We too often see AntiFragile as a “leadership concept” when in reality it is best absorbed by agile/adaptable teams.

Risk management almost always solely focuses on resources necessary to sustain, and manage, foreseen crisis. As Taleb points out the largest flaw in that is most crisis do not look similar to ones on the past (they will have similarities but still be unique). In addition. Most organizations build in redundancy safety nets as, well, a net.  Because we dislike fragility so much we start building in antifragile everywhere. We tend to think of leadership as “what if” redundancy design. Antifragile leadership should be more ‘aligning resources to meet different scenarios.” Some people would call this ‘agile.’ I would not. I would simply call this pivoting (I am old school) based on the Law of the Situation. Great businesses have always been able to pivot to meet market challenges and opportunities. This is pivoting – no more, no less.

This is where I would view using algorithms a little differently than other people. Algorithms tend to look at opportunities when I believe they could be better used to identify stress points and stressors. Most good leaders are best as problems solvers or maybe better said “removers of obstacles to opportunistic behavior.’ (that doesn’t mean they don’t optimize existing operations/situations just that where good leaders get paid the big bucks is getting moments/situations unstuck). I would also argue identifying stressors permits smarter experimenting and tinkering.

Here is what I do know. Algorithms, used properly, permit people to stop just optimizing for the present and start attempting to optimizing the future. Yes. It may mean being less efficient in the short term (sometimes), but, done well, will create a more effective long term construct.

Conclusion:

I think the smart businesses of the future will be “directed to act” by algorithms, but not managed by. The latter demands acceptance of algorithm as qualified to make us to do something behaviorally, the former demands we accept algorithms as something that ‘informs’ our doing. Somewhere in between is the decision of how much we, people, are accountable for thinking. Algorithms inherently encourage us to believe business is not best when it is random. Yet. The best businesses resist the urge to suppress randomness and permit people to be more accountable for some untidy decisions with some untidy outcomes.

All businesses will exist, in some form or fashion, grounded in algorithms. I am fairly sure that’s a given. The challenge will be to not get consumed by algorithms.

To realize algorithms do not give answers, but outline options.

To realize algorithms don’t define redundancies, but rather where and when to apply redundancy resources (therefore help to define how to create proper redundancies).

To realize algorithms don’t necessarily create innovation opportunities but rather find opportunities to ‘reinvent’ ideas.

And.

To realize algorithms will not replace people, but rather augment minds and skills OF people. Ponder.

—-

==

“There are times in life when people must know when not to let go.

Balloons are designed to teach small children this.”

Terry Pratchett

————–

Well. I have written about how difficult it is for people, in business & Life, to let go of things so much I am not sure I can find any new words to share on that topic.

In fact if you google “reasons to not let go” you get nothing. Nada. You get jack shit on the topic.

All you get is page after page of ‘reasons to let go.’

And, yet, there are certainly times to know when to not let go.

To be clear, a purposeful ‘not let go’ is a different difficulty for us. While not letting go is something that is mostly based on some version of fear or doubt, knowing when to not let go of something seems to be more about our difficulty in discerning what is important, or good, and what is unimportant, or bad.

In fact. I think part of the ‘not letting go’ difficulty resides in how we learned to hold on in childhood <the balloon thing>.

We learn very early on that when you let go of something good it floats away never to be seen again. So we have learned to hold on a tightly as possible to anything that could be construed as good <note: even if it is really a crappy balloon>.

We have become so good at it we are almost proud of not letting go. Therefore the problem isn’t our ability to actually hold on … it is choosing what to really not let go of.

Not letting go is a complex decision compounded by the fact we are complex people.

Why does the complexity matter? Because there is no formula. No ‘rules of not letting go.’

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Some things are obvious. The self stuff, the character stuff, the ‘who you are as a person’ stuff you don’t let go of. They are good balloons. But if you are not careful, after a while, you have so many balloons you can’t discern the good ones from the bad ones. Which leads me to suggest I sometimes believe the ‘what not to let go’ choice is an acquired intuition thing.

Yup. I just typed acquired and intuition side by side.

I like to remind people that you are not borne with good intuition. You may be borne with a good intuition muscle, but experience strengthens the muscle and it takes some time & experience to ‘acquire’ the intuition necessary to ‘not let go’ of the right things.

Regardless. I suggest intuition because unless one of the balloons has lost all its air and has sunk to the ground you are choosing amongst a shitload of balloons that maybe all look pretty good to you.

This may sound crazy because balloons float above you and should seem obvious at all times, but the connections to many of the balloons in your life are actually like links of a chain underwater.

==

“The moment of truth, the sudden emergence of a new insight, is an act of intuition.

Such intuitions give the appearance of miraculous flushes, or short-circuits of reasoning. In fact they may be likened to an immersed chain, of which only the beginning and the end are visible above the surface of consciousness.

The diver vanishes at one end of the chain and comes up at the other end, guided by invisible links.”

Arthur Koestler

==

You see the balloons. Okay. You see some of them.

But the strings get all tangled up and you cannot tell which string to let go of <because you are not sure which balloon will go away> and which one to hold on to. Some of the choices you make as you look at the strings are intuitive. And given some time and experience I imagine the string feels a little different in your hand as you pluck it out from all the others. That is this version of intuition.

So. One of the things I admire most in people is consistent great intuition and how they manage what to not let go of.

It is an interesting characteristic to assess when you meet people and is fairly easy because you can just look up and see the balloons they carry with them.

So, in the end, maybe the balloon metaphor is bad, or maybe I simply overused it, but suffice it to say that while there is a lot of free advice on ‘letting go’, there isn’t a whole shitload of advice on ‘what to not let go of.’

I think it is obvious that there are certainly some ‘be yourself’ characteristics that you should never let go of <although figuring out what to not let go of as you try and improve yourself is not easy either>.
What is less obvious is the other stuff in your life. Experiences, knowledge, even people.

I don’t have any answers today. Just questions. And maybe some prompting that this is something we should think about a little more.

Most letting go advice online is vapid and a waste of time <albeit with good intent>.

I don’t have any advice for ‘not let go’ other than think about it. We all learn to hold on to balloons because they represent freedom and hope and good things waiting above us. Paradoxically, despite the fact it may appear like they should be let free so we can benefit from them, it is actually those that should be the things we hold on to and not let go of. Ponder.

=================

“When we first met … you asked me a question to which I gave a stupid answer, you asked me whether I wanted to live and I said “Yes.“

Actually, Miss Page, I want more, much more. I want to create, to make something big out of something little.”

Boris Lermontov

===================

Ah.

Maybe I am cynical.

Maybe I am simply becoming a curmudgeon.

Maybe I am actually right on this topic.

I think pop psychology makes us lazy with regard to how we view life. We are encouraged to ‘be positive’ and ‘live life to its fullest’ and be happy we are alive. Pretty much nice sounding pabulum. And pretty much useless advice.

I am not suggesting we should all be pessimistic, but all the positive thinking shit establishes some fairly unrealistic expectations.

Which leads me to what you should expect.

It is also sometimes suggested that Life is big & full, therefore, living it fills up so much space and time that if you do just that, live it,  you should be satisfied because, what the hell, there isn’t a whole lot more room for anything else because it is so big & full just by living it. This seems to suggest that simply living life, and making it through life, is some achievement in and of itself. I will not argue that simply surviving can be a skill, but that’s kind of like at the bottom of the Maslow expectation in Life pyramid.

Well.

Maybe we shouldn’t look at Life, in itself, as something so big & full that there isn’t room for anything else.

Maybe Life is littler than we think. Little moments. Little experiences. Little people. Little lies. Little truths. Little color. Little things that make up what we call our current Life.

Maybe we should want more.

No. No maybe. We should want more … much more.

We should want to create. Create something. And I don’t mean make something, but rather create, fashion, something big out of something little.

This is probably the one place in our sometimes self indulgent world where I wish more of us actually weren’t comfortable with what we have … and wanted more.

Instead of settling we want more.

Instead of settling for what is we want more of what could be.

From our little space in the universe we shouldn’t settle for little but seek some big impact or contribution.

Oh. About “little.” The truth is most of Life is made up of little things. Therefore, if you don’t do anything else but live it, well, in the end i imagine you live a little life. That may sound harsh so let me soften it a bit. If you don’t do anything but live Life, the Life you live will not be as big as it could be <that’s kind of like optimizing its potential>. That said. I’m fairly sure no one wants to purposefully live a little Life so maybe we should desire to make something big out of something little.

Maybe we should embrace the thought we are all architects of our own lives.

Maybe we should purposefully seek to build something big.

Maybe the pursuit of “what could be” is Purpose in and of itself.

Maybe ‘much more’ isn’t things but rather doing things that make little big.

Maybe, just maybe, you should want more … much more.

=============

“The biggest human temptation is to settle for too little.”

Thomas Merton

==============

“At any given point you have the power to say, this is not how the story is going to end.”

Anonymous

==================

Well. I sometimes believe one of the toughest games we play in life is the tug of war between reaching and settling.

Ponder. We do it in business all the time.

“What is our reach goal? … okay … let’s make it a little more realistic.”

Uhm. Is that a reach goal … or a settling goal?

Every day and in almost every situation not only are you mentally, as an individual, assessing ‘reach’ versus ‘more certain attainment’ <which is an evil version of settling>, but everyone around you is sending conflicting signals – “we want to reach a little farther than we think we are capable of … oh … but not too far“.

WTF. This is enough to confuse anyone.

You either reach far or you don’t.

You either set a settling goal or you don’t.

But, for fuck’s sake, don’t make my head hurt more than it has to on some decisions and choices because you want to feel like ‘we have pushed the limits’ in some false way.

Look. I’m not suggesting this is easy. Our natural temptation is to settle for a little less than a true reach because then we are more likely to meet expectations and less likely to be disappointed. I would guess <no research to back this up> we settle in some form or fashion 90% of the time. I really cannot argue with doing shit this way.

It is simply a tactic to maintain our sanity as we attempt, in reaching our desires & dreams, to limit the roll of the dice between chance & choice. We do so because we know disappointment lurks around every corner of every choice we ever make. And, let’s be honest, the disappointment can show up in so many frickin’ ways it almost seems like meeting a reach expectation comes only in black & white … while disappointments can show up in a myriad of colors <a reverse of how it should and actually is>.

I would like to note here that it really doesn’t help that we constantly get crap advice like this: ‘I encourage people to create something that ONLY you understand. That ONLY you get, because that can make you feel like you have some sort of purpose.’ Look. I absolutely buy the fact a reach goal should be personal or at least contain some aspect of personal so that it just isn’t some bland milestone objective someone else has pointed you at.

But. Well. If you are gonna reach for something, truly reach, part of the prize at the end of the reaching isn’t holding something that only you ‘get’, but rather something you gain that others also see value in. In poetic terms, you want something that covers you in colors that others can see. 

==============

“And now I’m covered in the colors”

Halsey

==================

And maybe that is where settling really screws us.

We don’t reach far enough to access the true colors to cover our achievements in to make it worth looking at over and over again.

Regardless. We live in a black & white achievement and outcomes world, not a color world.

While we talk a good game with regard to good character and humanity and ‘purpose driven’ passions almost within the first 5 minutes of any discussion you are gonna get “what do you do” and “what have you done.” If all you can do is talk about “reaching shit” then … well … you are useless as a non-achieving dreamer.

But.

If you can point out a string of specific outcomes and achievements most people don’t ask or wonder if they were easily attainable or the fact you attained them was because you had ‘settled for something less than a reach’, all they do is think of you as a useful achieving productive person.

And therein lies the horrible fate of ‘reaching.’ While we hate the fact that meeting the expectations of others means something, well, it means something. We can try to live a Life not worrying about other people and their expectations but unless our ‘doing compass’ miraculously always points us in the right direction and unless our ‘reach’ is impeccably judged correctly every time and unless the cat’s cradle web of choice & chance happens to fall into perfect symmetry we are doomed to have to face someone’s expectations at some point.

=============

“It’s time for you to live your own life without worrying about the expectations of others.”

Unknown

============

Every day we get tugged side to side … reach or settle.

Every.

Frickin.

Day.

Here is what I know. If you settle for everything, your story will be illustrated in the blacks & whites of certainties, achievements and outcomes. You will try and color the black & whites in some odd colors to spruce them up, but (sigh), they are black & white.

If you never reach for anything, you will end you story with chapters of regrets and ‘’what ifs.’ You will have touched only grays and your access to ‘colors’ will be limited. If you reach for something and fall short, your story will have two key chapters:

the first is one filled with the failure to reach & the disappointments

the second is written by how you react to the reach disappointment – avoid future disappointment or seek to try & do better.

If you reach for something, and get it, you will never be the same again. You will have touched colors and seen that life is much more than black and white.

Please. Don’t anyone read anything too much into the ‘what I know’ portion because while the last one I wrote sounds exactly like what everyone wants, there are no guarantees in Life.

Reaching comes with a cost.

Settling comes with a cost.

And sometimes the cost is not dictated by you but rather by some choice & chance metric <which you have little control over>. And sometimes the prize, the benefit, can only be seen by you <a different version of cost>.

I imagine all I really know for sure is that, in general, we settle for far too little far too often. Ponder.

Going back into the ‘wayback machine’ because Trump never really seems to go away – he is kind of like ‘the gift that keeps giving’ (gonorrhea). Here is the quote of the day from 2016 presidential candidate Donald Trump:

“What do I know?” Trump replied. “All I know is what’s on the internet.”

Well.

This actually explains a lot.

Credible sources track Trump comments/claims he made in 2015/16 running at about 75% false (it never stopped for 5 years). But maybe we know why. He clicks on Wikipedia or urban dictionary or instagram <scanning an image with some quote or factoid> or Fox or Newsmaxx and then tweets it out or parrots it in on-air interviews.

He has no credible sources, he never has, and he just makes shit up or maybe even worse, he doesn’t truly think about what he believes.

Ok.

Now ponder this Trump wisdom oldie, but goodie.

 

“I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things. My primary consultant is myself and I have – you know, I have a good instinct for this stuff.”

Well, Donald, that sounds quite reasonable. It’s not as if the world, let alone the Middle East, Ukraine, the South China Sea, is particularly complex or that there are nuanced delicate diplomatic situations or even that it is important to get it right. I imagine just going on instinct makes sense. Or maybe go on the internet because there you will surely find all the answers you will need.

<note some heavy sarcasm there>

When I read what he said at that time I thought of a Samuel Adams quote:

—-

“If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

Samuel Adams

——

With Trump we faced a vain man, maybe the vainest of vain, maybe even one with Narcissistic Disorder, and an aspiring man – one who aspires with no rules, no boundaries, seemingly no moral imperative, or any trivial nuisance that could get in the way of a win.

Back in March 2016 I stated it this way:

He appears, alarmingly so, to be free of any actual solutions.

He appears to be free, alarmingly so, of any real policy <beyond his ‘good instincts for this stuff.”

He appears to be free,  alarmingly so, to offer frighteningly hollow rhetoric.

He is the ruin, not of the country <we will still be standing despite him>, but he is the ruin of what makes the country great <which is not simply ‘winning’ as he suggests it is>.

In my little corner of the world I did everything in my power to convince everyone of the sham Trump is and what he offered.

Why?

I will refer to Samuel Adams again <and let everyone who has not spoken out yet think about these words>:

—

“… the necessity of the times, more than ever, calls for our utmost circumspection, deliberation, fortitude, and perseverance. Let us remember that “if we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it, and involve others in our doom.” It is a very serious consideration, which should deeply impress our minds, that millions yet unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event.”

Samuel Adams in The Boston Gazette 14 October 1771

—

Speak out now. For what we say, and do, today has an impact, an impact that millions yet unborn may be the miserable sharers of the event.

We seek to circumvent the miserableness for the millions yet unborn.

Well. I wrote the original of this in March 2016. One could suggest, given Trump’s resilient fan base, that I failed in my efforts to make people understand what a sham he is, and was. I say that because while I had hoped the exhausting 5 year Trump episode of stupid West Wing was cancelled, it has not and I forge on discussing Trump, trying to make people understand one by one, and walking people through how a grifter is not only what they want but what America needs. I share this today because silence is not an option and simply ignoring him will not make him, or his believers, go away. Festering wounds do not go away on their own. I am not asking everyone to walk the same path I am, just ponder.

========

Toby Ziegler <West Wing>:

“We don’t know what the next president is going to face. If we choose someone with vision, someone with guts, someone with gravitas, who’s connected to other people’s lives and cares about making them better; if we choose someone to inspire us then we’ll be able to face what comes our way and achieve things we can’t imagine yet.”

———-

—

“You have to break rules to break free.”

Tinker Bell

===

“The best way to predict the future is to create it.”

Alan Kay

—

A new year is always a reflective moment and a pandemic certainly does amplify the urge to reflect. Coincidentally, whenever asked about the effect of Covid on, well, everything, I say one word: amplify. It has simply amplified everything – uncertainty, change, technology (some people call it ‘digital transformation), existing business vulnerabilities, Life vulnerabilities as well as business strengths, opportunities & risks, etc., as well as certainty.

Yeah. It has also amplified both uncertainty and certainty.

The pandemic shone a spotlight on the fact uncertainty is not the sole owner of fear & risk that even certainty contains aspects of fear. And a lot of fear.

I can know exactly what I want to do, I can know exactly what certain steps I need to take, I can even know with certainty what my quest looks like, and fear will still dog you every step of the way.

Let’s be honest. Certainty was not supposed to feel this way.

While we like to say ‘change is my constant companion and friend’ it is quite possible fear will shed its superficially bad perception cloak and take its place in public vernacular as “fear is my constant companion and friend.”

Look. I am not suggesting everyone curl up in a fetal position overcome with fear, but what I am suggesting is 2021 will be the acceptance of the fear of the known; the fear of certainty.

We are certain we will survive (because what is the alternative?) or, as my friend Murray Calder is teaching me, we will not survive and, yet, the quest goes on. Why? Because what is the alternative? And maybe that is the biggest lesson of 2020. The quest goes on, despite the fear, whether you are staring at certainty or uncertainty.

** note: Please note I am not suggesting one can become fearless, in fact, I think a fearless person is a lie. I am also not suggesting becoming ‘unfeared.’ I believe we have learned un-anything, let alone unfearing, takes a lot of energy and some sometimes-absurd contortionist reasoning.

I do not suggest embracing fear just as I am not suggesting ‘not fearing’ nor am I suggesting uncertainty is better, or worse, than certainty, but rather maybe just accept it all. Why? Because as a corollary to ‘the quest goes on despite the fear’; 99% of us have a 100% daily survival rate.

If a pandemic year has taught us anything, that last sentence & thought may be it.

Which leads me to Tinkerbell and moving forward and how people should accept fear is a valuable companion.

Peter Pan and Tinkerbell are volatile companions. They fight, they scoff at each other – maybe even show a little contempt for each other -, they make each other angry and jealous, but when it comes right down to it, they would each die for the other.

** note: The book version of TinkerBell, one of the most recognized characters in children’s literature, was certainly one of the feisty imperfect spectacular ‘doer’ type of people.

Considerably different than the Disney version.

Considerably more interesting than the Disney version and, more importantly, a reflection of the fact the world is not a Disney version.

They recognize they aren’t always perfect; the world isn’t always perfect and while sometimes they drive each other crazy they also realize those very characteristics that make each other crazy are also often the ones that make the other love them so much. They also recognize that the combination of their characteristics increases their likelihood of survival.

And while Peter Pan may have embraced not growing up, TinkerBell embraced “you have to break rules if you want to break free.”

The pandemic put a spotlight on rules, boundaries and norms. Some were needed and, well, some that existed before the pandemic simply became useless within the pandemic. We reflected on so many rules, so many things society tells you to do, so many things business tells you to do, and began to realize if you want to break free, if you wanted to find some success, shit, if you wanted to survive, you have to decide what you want to do – and be. In some way 2020 encouraged us to find our inner Tinkerbell.

The rules of the status quo, the rules of what we viewed as ‘certainties’, became silly cages to stand in. In fact, many of us began to realize fear was a silly cage. We saw uncertainty was actually the norm and certainty was also to be feared. What do I mean?

We stood in March and we knew, with certainty, it would be shit.

We stood in March and knew, with certainty, we would survive (we just didn’t know how).

We stood in March and we knew, with certainty, we would have to do different things.

There were a lot of knowns and, yet, many of us were shaken; even some fear. On other words. Fear was a certainty. And. Certainty was fear.

Uncertainty wasn’t the cage, certainty was. This, upon reflection, freaked us out. It freaked us out because the certainty cage has always been a comfortable cage for us. It has always barred us against the nastiness of the outside world. All of a sudden, the cage we accepted as a comfortable cage (or maybe not recognized we were in), the way it was supposed to be, some of the ‘certainties’ in Life, shit, even the uncertainties we normally accepted (including “life cannot be planned”) became simply wisps of smoke from the dumpster fire of 2020.

Suddenly we were free.

It may not have looked like freedom in March , but freedom it was.

And maybe, just maybe, we learned to think like a bit TinkerBell with this freedom.

She wasn’t always nice. She was feisty. She was willing to break rules. She had an imagination. I am not suggesting you shouldn’t be nice, but freedom does mean some shaking up of things, some discomfort and some conflict. Look. I am suggesting we need to ‘break some norms’, break some of the Life rules of emergent living (and, no, I do not mean not social distancing or wearing masks, etc.; but rather break some of our expectations of how Life is supposed to be lived), and break out with fear in hand.

Maybe break out our inner Tinkerbell.

It’s about flying.

It’s about finding and embracing the magic in Life.

It’s about recognizing the world has dark places, but still be willing to venture out

It’s about being nimble where evil <or ‘the bad’> tends to win thru stolid unmoving sturdiness.

It’s about not always being nice, but being true of heart.

It’s about being smart, not strong.

It’s about breaking some norms in order to be free.

It’s about using your pixie dust.

Far too many of us see a dark world and instead of imagining what could be simply hold on to something in the past because it <a> seems better and <b> seems safer (as known). It is our way of ‘unfearing certainty.’  I would argue we do not seek certainty, but rather seek unfearing aspects of our lives and, as a consequence, miss out on the magic in life.

Now. In the absence of a pandemic, in and of itself that seems like a good idea, but as everyone is doing it and as everyone decides to hold on to their ‘own thing’ we simply stay in our own little NeverLand.

** note: Peter Pan’s author made Neverland these places that are found in the minds of children and each is “always more or less an island” not the same from one child to the next.

Its not a good idea for two reasons.

• The pandemic pretty much blew up anything we had been holding onto that could possibly be ‘unfearing’ life
• That kind of thinking actually encourages is to become islands, avoiding adventure <except in our own mind> and not sharing adventure, and a pandemic clearly showed us to survive this ‘adventure’ you need others. Your Tinkerbell needed Peter Pan and Pater Pan needed Tinkerbell.

Anyway.

I think more of us need to seek our inner Tinker Bell in 2021. And in doing so we have a chance to refind the magic in Life and embrace fear and guide ourselves to new and better adventures not alone but together. Maybe in 2021 we stop valuing certainty over uncertainty, stop embracing uncertainty, and simply grab our fears, place them in pocket, and get up and go.

Aw.

This may sound silly.  This may sound Disneyesque <mostly if you haven’t actually read Peter Pan and only know the Disney Tinker Bell>.

But do not disregard the thought.

Tinker Bell sought something better even when faced with reality. She desired to create the future. She guided from adventure to adventure. She may not have liked all her companions, but she never desired less for them at the expense of something more for the ones who mattered most to her.

Oh. And she had pixie dust.

Metaphorically, I could argue we all have pixie dust it just seems irrational to think so in our rational brains.

Seek your pixie dust. Tap into your inner Tinker Bell. Have faith and maybe find a Peter Pan or two to trust on your quest. And maybe reflect on the fact the fear of the known, the certainty, is equal to the fear of the unknown/uncertainty, and that 2021 will be where norms are redefined, adventures will abound and Life’s value is found in valuing the fact 99% of us have a 100% daily survival rate.

====

“There’s a place they can go if they’re tired of chains,

And our roads may be golden, or broken, or lost,

But we’ll walk on them willingly, knowing the cost –

We won’t take our place on the shelves.

It’s better to fly and it’s better to die

Say the wicked girls saving ourselves.”

“Wicked Girls Saving Ourselves”>

—–

============

“The impression left after watching the motions of birds is that of extreme mobility – a life of perpetual impulse checked only by fear.”

Richard Jefferies

============

This is a thought on making an impression and having a purpose and doing ‘what I’m going to do’ with a sense of character. I share my thoughts aware that we are in a world where grandstanding & bluster seems to be the norm.

Let me begin with a thought about Pete Seeger:

“I’m driving north, and on the other side of the road I see from the back a tall, slim figure in a hood and coat. I’m looking, and I can tell it’s Pete, He’s standing there all by himself, and he’s holding up a big piece of cardboard that clearly has something written on it. Cars and trucks are going by him. He’s getting wet. He’s holding the homemade sign above his head—he’s very tall, and his chin is raised the way he does when he sings—and he’s turning the sign in a semicircle, so that the drivers can see it as they pass, and some people are honking and waving at him, and some people are giving him the finger. He’s eighty-four years old. I know he’s got some purpose, of course, but I don’t know what it is. What struck me is that, whatever his intentions are, and obviously he wants people to notice what he’s doing, he wants to make an impression—anyway, whatever they are, he doesn’t call the newspapers and say, ‘I’m Pete Seeger, here’s what I’m going to do.’ He doesn’t cultivate publicity. That isn’t what he does. He’s far more modest than that. He would never make a fuss. He’s just standing out there in the cold and the sleet like a scarecrow. I go a little bit down the road, so that I can turn and come back, and when I get him in view again, this solitary and elderly figure, I see that what he’s written on the sign is ‘Peace.'”

 a friend of Seeger’s

So. I knew of Pete Seeger but didn’t really know him – he was of a different generation than I. That means he, as an activist, I wasn’t there to see him in action.  And as a musician he never really did anything that made it on my ‘that is what I like’ radar.

Regardless. The thought … ‘what struck me is that, whatever his intentions are, and obviously he wants people to notice what he’s doing, he wants to make an impression …’

Not everyone has a sense of purpose like Seeger. And we shouldn’t. Everyone is wired differently.

By the way, you shouldn’t feel guilty if you don’t. Today’s world seems to be asking everyone to ‘have a purpose’ or suggest everyone should be defined by something extraordinary. That’s bullshit. Utter bullshit.

As Mike Walsh suggested for business, it is also true for people – it is absolutely fine to do something ‘mundane and profitable’ for you, your soul, your esteem and your family.

Look. I imagine most of us just want good things to happen and for people to do the right thing and kind of bank on the fact most people feel that way. That is fine.

But. Then there are the ones who grab some purpose with a sense of passion and decide to take that purpose on the dance floor and say ‘let’s tango.’

They want to be seen.

They want to make an impression.

I imagine my point is that you don’t have to grandstand or be flamboyant or ‘over the top’ in any way to make an impression.

I imagine my point isn’t that you don’t have to develop a detailed plan or make your attempt a Stanley Kubrick-like event or any ‘grand plan’ to make an impression.

In fact it may be as simple as standing on the side of the road with a hand written sign.

In fact in today’s all-bluster loud grandstanding world a quiet calm simple moment of purpose may actually speak loudest of all.

I liked this story.

And I wanted to share it just to make people think.

Look. If you have something you want to say, just say it.

I sometimes believe we overthink some of the really important simple things. It seems to me that far too many important things that should be said, things that people have a real purpose for and things that people really believe in, get lost because someone else says ‘that’s not the way you should say it’ or ‘this is how you should say it.’

Well folks.

There is no formula for how to say things you want to say.

Simple actions can make a simply loud statement in some very quiet ways.

And, I will point out, the only right thing is saying what is right.

In the end. A hand written cardboard sign on the side of the road. Ponder that.

————

“Consent yourself to be an organ of your highest thought, and lo! suddenly you put all men in your debt, and are the fountain of an energy that goes pulsing on with waves of benefit to the borders of society, to the circumference of things.”

—

Emerson

============

Let me tell you what’s on my mind as we head into 2020.

I worry the world is getting stupider on a daily basis. Ok. Not really. I imagine we are actually getting smarter every day, yet, the overarching public narrative just seems stupider every day. It’s just that it sometimes feels like smartness is whispering and dumbness is shouting. All of this dumbing down seems to center around complexity & simplicity. The world is complex and we have become convinced simplicity is the key to, well, everything. The truth is almost all hope, and possibilities, resides in managing complexity (if not the complicated) and fear (including lack of risk) thrives on simplicity. Within the wretched hollow in between resides much of the current narrative, and thinking, conflict. I would also suggest success, pursuit of happiness and societal health resides in how the conflict is conducted, and won, within that wretched hollow.

Which leads me to my hope for 2020. We should have more hope and possibilities than we could ever imagine. And, yet, instead, we seem to have more fear infringing upon the possibilities.

The answer to this challenge, at least to me, resides in some intellectual aspects, i.e., what is going on in with our attitudes that affect our heads, how we think and how we approach these things. So let me share what I believe would help us moving forward in 2020 to improve upon our hope and possibilities.

Issue one. over-simplification

Suffice it to say we have devolved into a society of sound bites and over simplification.

In business it seems to be all about simplicity.

In everyday Life it is ‘summarize it for me’ or ‘it’s simple <insert some explanation here>.’

In the end I can’t figure out if should be pointing the finger at us or them.

• Them because they think we are not capable of understanding some form of complexity and therefore they only offer up simplified versions of what needs to be communicated.
• Us because we either <a> demand a sound bite under the guise of ‘we only have time for the headline’ or <b> we only latch on to the fragment of the whole which we believe summarizes the whole.

Therefore I will point the finger at all of us and them.

Here is a Truth everyone really knows <albeit hesitant to admit>. Most things are just not that simple. An effect can have multiple causes and a cause can have multiple effects. I say this despite the fact naturally we would like all the dominoes to line up one after another and when one falls the next naturally is impacted and falls.

Well. Life and things don’t really work that way. Maybe in a controlled test environment but in real Life events are typically bombarded from a variety of directions and while not all ’causes’ are created equal <some can impact more than others> most things are too complex to be simplified into ‘one thing.’

Over simplifying simply means ignoring complexities.

Over simplifying simply means being consciously, or choicefully, ignorant.

Over simplifying … well … just doesn’t work in the long run.

Heuristically this simplistic bullshit (often fortune cookie wisdom) eases you through the moment only to have to doubly <or exponentially> invest energy later on.

Simply? Over simplification just doesn’t work.

Instead of dumbing things down to some simplistic sound bite we need to raise the level of general understanding & knowledge to the level of complexity of the ideas & systems and <frankly> the world in which we live within. Life isn’t simple so what makes us think over simplifying will offer solutions?

Anyway.

Factually, seconds of involvement <sound bites> versus minutes of involvement <deeper complex discussion> has a direct relationship to degrees of real knowledge.  i.e., seconds leads to shallow knowledge or let’s call it ‘less knowledgeable’ and minutes lead to something deeper.

Yes. This suggests our love of over simplification is a direct result of our ongoing belief there is not enough time to do everything we want to do (not understanding). This is crazy. Nuts in fact. Oversimplification only gives us the appearance of effective time management and certainly doesn’t translate into effective progress. Why? Oversimplification under assesses complexity, rarely demystifies uncertainty and is not particularly helpful in reconcepting & rethinking that which is (which is kind of a version of ‘future-proofing’ your Life).

Look. What I am suggesting is difficult and uncertain work, but certainly more satisfying and inspiring when we solve and recreate. This means less The Secret and more real thinking. Less positive attitude inspiration and more hard work behavior aspiration.

Neither hope nor possibilities can be resolved in a sound bite. They are simple sounding concepts with deeper complex workings. The fate of hope and possibilities lies in balance if we don’t invest in the hard work of ‘non over simplification.’

Maybe worse <pragmatically>? We won’t solve any of the problems <because most problems cannot be solved in simplicity and certainly not in over simplification>.

This leads me to #2.

Issue two. being intellectually insightful is about hard work.

Let me begin by suggesting that good ideas cannot be decided by number of tweet votes in favor of.

Life and ideas is not American idol. We are not all judges <and probably shouldn’t be on American idol either>.

Good ideas are rarely popular. This really means that being intellectually insightful requires more than a surface ‘this is what I think’ tweet popular vote. If we really want to do what needs to be done to maximize hope and possibilities, we have to hunker down and work hard. Work hard in that we need to reassemble the present (knowledge) & rethink things by using all aspects including economic thought and philosophy and the past … all of which means dealing with ambiguity and contradiction.

And, yes, that is hard work. But it is the kind of work that hones the intellectual insightfulness we need.

Instead of dumbing things down we need to be raising the level of general understanding to the level of complexity of the systems in which we are embedded and which are embedded in us.

And while you may balk at something like ‘intellectual insightfulness’ as too far reaching, suffice it to say, we just need to be smarter, less ignorant, more enlightened <open to additional thoughts> and more involved in the difficult and uncertain work of demystification and reconcepting ideas and systems in which we live in and, well, just plain rethinking shit.

• Simply talking about world-changing ideas will not simply make the world change. Changing the world takes work, really really hard work.
• Simply having a positive attitude ain’t gonna work. Hard work will work. And in this case I mean hard thinking
• Simply ‘doing’ aint gonna cut it. We need to be smarter. And whether you think about thinking this way or not, it ain’t about staring off into space doing nothing, thinking is a blue collar job. It’s about work.

Issue three. innovation is not <just> technology.

Innovation is the lifeblood of not only business but society & Life. It is the path to bettering lives. Period. Therefore, it demands we ‘consent to the highest thought. That said. For some reason we seem to be associating innovation with technology and just technology.

This type of thinking is lazy, not consenting to the highest thought.

This type of thinking leads us to possibly believe technology innovations will eventually solve all problems and maximize everyone’s Life as some point.

It’s a very dangerous idea because in reality of we focus just on technology as the solution we are actually preventing the real change we need.

It’s a very dangerous idea because it completely removes the human aspect.

Minds need to innovate too. Thinking and attitudes need to evolve and innovate.

New thought systems, economic systems and systems in which people live eat and breath all need to evolve and, yes, that happens through innovation <whether technology is involved or not>.

Technology is simply a path that runs parallel to culture <or society> and each needs to be run at the same pace <or at least be run side by side on occasion>.

A truth is that technology outpacing society simply exacerbates the flaws and limits of the slower runner. If a problem is endemic to a system, then we run the risk that technology simply amplifies the problems. Technology and culture are entangled. Technology and people are entangled.

Technologies may enable new ways of doing things (not just doing but thinking) and this effects culture. I would suggest we flip that equation and say if we want to maximize technological innovation we should innovate cultural/society structure and seek to augment it, to maximize its potential, through technological innovation.

At the moment it seems like we respond to technology rather than proactively drive technology.

Technology has certainly dramatically improved the overall quality of life. The paradox is that the system we have now may make amazing new technology possible, but at same time is creating such cultural conflict that maximizing technology ‘what could be’ seems impossible.

We need to innovate the systems in which technology exists: economically, culturally and philosophically.

So. 2020.

Look. Hope and possibilities abound in today’s world, but they are rarely just given … they need to be earned and they demand consenting to our highest level of thought.

I don’t believe simplicity is bad.

I don’t believe being optimistic or having a positive attitude is bad.

I don’t believe that if you don’t spend years to understand the complexities of a specific issue and have the ability to offer solutions you don’t deserve to engage in the subjet ct.

But we seem trapped at the extremes.

On one side too often we seem verbose and excessively caught up in complexity and nuance …for complexity and nuance’s sake. At minimum this costs us the opportunity of possibilities within a complex world and at its worst it makes the complex seem impossible to navigate, i.e., we lose hope for something better.

On the other side too often we oversimplify/simplify into Gladwellian bullshit or infotainment like sound bites simply for simplicity sake. At minimum a lack of knowledge suggests lack of participation or involvement; at maximum it suggests intellectual laziness and inbetween resides a comfortable simplicity of fear.

We cannot be lazy moving forward. We cannot afford to be lazy thinkers. For in this type of laziness lurks ignorance and it is ignorance we should fear — not any ideological argument or technological innovation which inserts itself into our daily lives, but ignorance.

And maybe that would be my hope of a cultural resolution for the new year. Avoid lazy thinking.

——-

“Consent yourself to be an organ of your highest thought, and lo! suddenly you put all men in your debt, and are the fountain of an energy that goes pulsing on with waves of benefit to the borders of society, to the circumference of things.”

———

No predictions for 2020 just a desire we all “consent yourself to be of your highest thought.”

---

postscript: some of this was written in my 2013 end of year post. I believed some thoughts were even more relevant for 2020 than they were in 2013.