=====

Q: Who hurt you?

——

    A:     My expectations

========

“I’ve survived a lot of things, and I’ll probably survive this.”

—–

J.D. Salinger

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

So.

Seek and you will find may be one of the most misleading sayings of all time.

<I say this with apologies to Matthew who said in the bible … “ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened” … in other words .. God can always be found, but must be sought out>

Except for faith, seeking doesn’t guarantee you will find shit. That is not to say there isn’t beauty in the seeking. Seeking is actually like a free ticket on a rollercoaster ride of thoughts. Every day you step onto the rollercoaster where it is an entirely new ride with an entirely new thrill with new heights and ups, downs, overs and unders. Whether you consider this a thrill or not <or simply ‘angst’> you also encounter the thrill of losing, finding, uncovering, discovering as well as expectations met and unmet. Yet, I would like to note, 99.999% of the time you survive the rollercoaster and get up the next day and get on again.

Seeking, in and of itself, can be maddeningly exhilarating and disappointing.

I have always believed you should not only surround yourself with the dreamers and the doers, the believers and thinkers, but you should also surround yourself with dreams and doing and believing and thinking. But, as a seeker myself, suffice it to say, I have screwed myself over many more times than anyone else ever has or will <if I were to judge myself on the ‘find’ aspect>. I try and find some solace in the discovery scientific research suggests that seeking something actually more often translates into not finding.

Holy shit.That sucks.

This means the more we search for something, the more likely we are to NOT find it. No wonder ‘seek and you shall find’ is a bullshit piece of advice. This actually means seeking, in some form or fashion, may stand in the way of our discovering the truth <ponder that for a second>.

Why could that be? Well. Seeking has some goal in mind. Seeking has something it wants to find. But maybe most importantly … seeking is more often than not rooted in some expectations. And these expectations create some tensions which inevitably hurt you <although they are mostly survivable>. Life typically creates several bars of expectations we all have to navigate as we seek not only answers but being the best version of ourselves.

There are societal expectations. These are most usually absurdly high expectations of which few actually attain. And even if attainable are not attainable on any consistent basis. Therefore, even if you do attain it most likely is a brief glimpse of ‘meeting some absurd expectation which makes me feel fucking great if but only for a moment or two.’

There are personal expectations. Surprisingly these are actually more realistic expectations. Most of us know who and what we are and, in general, know what we are capable of. We set some expectations which are ‘high’ <because we all like to reach and grow and be better tomorrow than we are today> but they are not as absurdly high as the societal expectations. The good news? We attain these on occasion. And we feel pretty good about it <assuming we ignore the absurd societal expectations … and people permit us to ignore the societal expectations>.

There are, well, reality expectations. Reality is reality. Reality ignores what you wish and what you want and simply says “in this time & place this is what is attainable.” Basically reality doesn’t give a shit about what you want or how you set your expectations or even acknowledges any society bullshit … it just is what it is.

By the way we far too often ignore this last one.

Regardless. Expectations are a real sonuvabitch. But if you agree with what I just wrote they are a multi dimensional sonuvabitch. Trying to align these three things in your head is really difficult. Your brain ends up in a weird three way tug of war where truly the only thing that happens is it hurts.

Look.

I am a seeker. I seek information and knowledge and learning in an insatiable quest for more. And maybe because my greater expectation resides solely in ‘more’ I really am not hurt that often in any expectation game. What I mean by that is ‘see and you shall find’ implies … well … some destination … some specific ‘thing to be found.’ With ‘more’ as my destination … well … I have no specific destination.

Aw, shit, what a bunch of philosophical mumbo jumbo bullshit that looks like when I reread it.

Let’s just say expectations are a sonuvabitch. Period. Expectations most likely create more personal pain & angst than anything I can think of off the type of my head. That said. Expectations, most often, are survivable.

Aw shit, what do I know?

Well. Probably not much more tan what I have shared. But I would suggest that in the end your soul, the essence of your character and who and what you are, has the ability to see the subtle beautiful triumphs over expectations that the eyes often miss. So maybe close your eyes on occasion … maybe then you will see how what you simply saw as ‘survive’ was actually a triumph over expectations.

Please note … that is a good thing.

===

“Edit your life frequently and ruthlessly.

It’s your masterpiece after all.”

Nathan W. Morris

====

“But the brain does much more than just recollect it inter-compares, it synthesizes, it analyzes, it generates abstractions. The simplest thought like the concept of the number one has an elaborate logical underpinning. “

—

Carl Sagan

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

I am constantly trying to communicate something incommunicable, to explain something inexplicable, to tell about something I only feel in my bones and which can only be experienced in those bones.”

—

Franz Kafka

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

This is about ideas and thinking. I am a scribbler. And a sketcher. And a pencil guy. I carry around a stack of index cards & constantly sketch out thoughts for people. My index cards are strewn around the world. I am sure some are used for dart boards, some for a good laugh & some actually was a seed for some idea.

I purposefully used the word “seeds” because I think we would be much better off if we thought of ideas that way. Why? Well. Seeds die or remain underground or get eaten by some squirrel if it isn’t protected, nurtured, watered and pampered in some way to insure it flourishes.

And while there are gobs of articles highlighting ideation process and such , to me, all that matters is an idea doesn’t die with poor articulation. A good idea poorly presented dies. Even great ideas poorly articulated die.

Now.

A shitload of people will want to talk about PowerPoint & presenting & a whole bunch of shit that just gets in the way. Those are simply ways to do it. What matters is how you do it.

Which leads me to the Feynman technique. It is essentially explaining a concept or idea to yourself, on a piece of paper, as if you were teaching it to someone else with little background knowledge. This is all about it’s all making sure you understand it and can you explain it if not simply simple enough to be understood.

I had no clue who Feynman was when I start taking out a piece of paper to find out if what I was thinking made sense on paper. Over time I have found an index card does it for me. it forces the constraint I need to either, well, get it or not get it. If I can’t articulate my idea or thought on an index card I mentally decide it isn’t worth a shit as an idea. Ok. Maybe it is but I know I haven’t figured out a way to articulate it so that it will not die.

Look.

I am not suggesting I am a great idea person or thinker but I am suggesting creating a process to elevate all people’s thinking does not necessarily benefit the smaller group of people who are actually good at thinking & creating ideas. What I mean by that is with the intent to create a better thinking organization we tend to want to throw everyone into the same bucket <I guess we do that to encourage inclusiveness & ‘fairness’>. Unfortunately this means your best of the best get pulled out of what may make them the best & force them into the “unwashed masses” <I am kidding on that phrase but you get the point>.

We should always be thinking two parallel paths. One to elevate the majority and one to empower the minority.

Why? To protect ideas.

Minds work in a variety of ways. It seems to me that organizations should think less about organizing minds but rather freeing minds. If you have someone like me, buy me a stack of index cards & have someone riffle through tem on occasion to see if there is a seed somewhere.

I will say that when I was running a small company I would pin them up on a conference room wall and during meetings anyone at any time could pull it off the wall and say “WTF you thinking?” or “I want to talk about this.”

I learned to articulate better as well as get less defensive about ideas.

The employees learned to articulate better and come up with their own ideas in their own ways. By not having an organizational process but sharing my personal process we ended up having a process.

My point is ideas are seeds. Some don’t deserve to grow & flourish but some do & we should be learning to articulate ideas better to save those seeds.

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

“Sometimes I wonder whether I have any real intelligence or if I just have enough random bits of surface knowledge to bullshit my way through most things.”

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

“Do I contradict myself? Very well, then, I contradict myself; I am large — I contain multitudes. “

—

Walt Whitman

===========
“ …In reality I did not go to the monastery to become an ascetic, but to gather those parts of my soul which had scattered…”

——

Nikos Kazantzakis

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

“I have nothing to offer anyone except my own confusion.”

——

Jack Kerouac

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

Ok. This is a quasi-reflective piece as well as some thoughts on what I think is important about how we approach people and Life.

I like messy people. People who don’t fit in a box or stay between the lines, but whose integrity is greater than any rule book and whose loyalty is stronger than blood. People who are smart but just aren’t sure if they ae really that smart & just have enough random pieces of knowledge to bullshit their way thru Life & business. That said the closest I could find to talking about these thoughts today seemed to be found in something called INTP. It is a personality designation. One of 16 <I think>.

Let me be honest upfront. I am not particularly fond of personality testing. Not because I don’t think it can create some interesting self-reflective thoughts but rather because far too many people start using it as an explanation of self <and actually falling back on it as excuses for why and how they do things> rather than simply viewing it as ‘well, shit I should think about with regard to myself.’

It can quite easily become like looking at your horoscope and seeing shit simply because it fits what you want it to fit.

In addition it can become far too easy to confuse self-descriptions with skills.  It is a false belief that some self-description correlates with having a skill.

Simplistically, personality tests should dictate nothing. They determine nothing in your life. They do not care about you. They are only indicative of personality traits and not behavioral decisions.

I imagine my real point is that if you’re lazy, or detail oriented, or easily angered or easily bored it is your own fault and not because of something that some personality test told you.

But. To be sure. It always seems to make for some fun reading. Ok. Back to INTP:

The INTP personality type is fairly rare, making up only three percent of the population, which is definitely a good thing for them, as there’s nothing they’d be more unhappy about than being “common”. INTPs pride themselves on their inventiveness and creativity, their unique perspective and vigorous intellect. Usually known as the philosopher, the architect, or the dreamy professor.

This makes it ironic that INTPs’ word should always be taken with a grain of salt – it’s not that they are dishonest, but people with the INTP personality type tend to share thoughts that are not fully developed, using others as a sounding board for ideas and theories in a debate against themselves rather than as actual conversation partners.

This may make them appear unreliable, but in reality no one is more enthusiastic and capable of spotting a problem, drilling through the endless factors and details that encompass the issue and developing a unique and viable solution than INTPs – just don’t expect punctual progress reports.

People who share the INTP personality type aren’t interested in practical, day-to-day activities and maintenance, but when they find an environment where their creative genius and potential can be expressed, there is no limit to the time and energy INTPs will expend in developing an insightful and unbiased solution

———————–

So when you take the MBTI, the personality chosen for you is based on your preference in four dichotomies which are called “preferences” because it simply means you prefer one over the other, not that you use one exclusively over the other.

Take “Introvert” and “Extrovert” for example. These two major traits are very commonly known and have recognized stereotypes. An extrovert is typically described a happy, energetic, party-goer, while introverts are described more as bookworms, loners, shy, and quiet. However, it’s not as black and white as the words and stereotypes make it seem. Everybody has a little bit of both. You simply get the “Introverted” designation because of what the test perceives your preference to be.

Anyway.

Back to quote. Random bits. I question everything, but I question myself more than anything else. I don’t understand how people can have strong opinions about things that they don’t fully understand. There are so many facets & bits to every issue that I find it extremely difficult to not constantly revise my opinion based on new information. That is basically learning to unlearn. If I thought about it I bet I have a theory for everything, even have a theory for why I have a theory for everything. I’m always modifying my outlook on life & things as I gather new information.

To be clear. That is not intelligence.

I say that because not only do I think I’m not incredibly intelligent but basing your self-worth on your intelligence is a dangerous thing (because there will always be someone smarter than you and there will always be intellectual challenges too great for your mind).

I said that because the one thing I absolutely can’t tolerate is condescension. It shows dismissal of alternative ideas and intolerance for intelligent discourse. Condescension also creates a barrier to novel experiences which force you to think about things from a new perspective <leading to new insights>.

How does this benefit me? I live in a world of possibilities.

How does his NOT benefit me? Choosing only one and dedicating myself to it fully makes me feel trapped. I always need a way out.

====

i have survived
so many fires,
i can no longer tell
if i am alive
or if i’m still burning.

—  Pavana पवन

=====

But having a way out means smartly finding your way in as well as smartly seeking a way out. Oddly, this sometimes means you can look both spontaneous and cautious depending on who is looking at you and what circumstances you may be dealing with. I appear spontaneous to those who don’t know any better, but I’m actually extremely calculated & thoughtful. So let’s call it “calculatedly spontaneous”. It means being deliberate — with haste in my actions. It’s weird. A lot of people perceive my actions as unstructured or random, but they really are not. I meander, but I do so with purpose.

When confronted with a new obstacle, I may initially appear too still & maybe slightly indifferent but all the while I was paying attention and sniffing out subtleties in the obstacle the whole time in seeking a way out.

This also means I require a job me to actually use my brain and have the opportunity to work on a wide range of activities. Monotony kills me.

I’m not one of those wicked smart people we all seem to know neither am I the dullest knife in the drawer. My grades were never stellar, but I was able to find effective paths between two points and do exactly what’s necessary to take it. I’m not into overachieving I am into achieving smart shit like, well, anything that requires me using my brain.

I do know Curiosity is possibly the most important characteristic of anyone who is good at what they do <in Life & in business>. But “good” comes in a variety of shapes & sizes and sometimes those shapes & sizes are crafted by one thing: do we care more about the question or the answers. What I mean by that is finding truth, or the best answers, is very rarely a linear process. Therefore the question & answer sequencing to that truth is not linear. Oops. I tend to believe most people use question & answer in a “that begets that” way. All in all, that means believing the answer is more important than the question. All that mean is if you get the first question right <and a shitload of us do not> the truth is arrived at like in a sequence of dominos. I’m always going to be searching for the next piece of the puzzle, and that’s both an exhilarating and depressing proposition in that “what’s next attitude” almost demands little reflection on achievements.

What a self-reflective post today. Oddly it’s been sitting in my draft folder for years staring at me daring to be written. Today was the day.

“Sometimes I wonder whether I have any real intelligence or if I just have enough random bits of surface knowledge to bullshit my way through most things.”

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

“When you do things right, people won’t be sure that you have done anything at all.”

–

God (in Futurama)

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

So.

This is a business, and Life, lesson from Futurama of all places.

Doing what you are supposed to do, and doing it well, is actually one of the most underappreciated abilities in the world. Mostly because it isn’t noticed. Why the hell wouldn’t someone notice “things going right? <you may ask>.

Well. Most of us just expect things to go well and only notice when it doesn’t. We expect, well,  competence.

Anyway. In case you have forgotten … Futurama was one of those random Fox sci-fi based animated shows in the early 2000’s. Typical of that genre <Simpsons & Family Guy> when the writers wrote a good show it was a frickin’ great show, conversely, and when they missed, they really missed <by galaxies in this case>.

Regardless.

I loved the premise behind this series … it follows the adventures of a late 20th-century New York City pizza delivery boy, Philip J. Fry, who, after being unwittingly cryogenically frozen for one thousand years, finds employment at Planet Express, an interplanetary delivery company in the retro-futuristic 31st century.

Anyway.

The quote. Here’s the entire conversation:

the Galaxy God: Bender, being God isn’t easy. If you do too much, people get dependent on you, and if you do nothing, they lose hope. You have to use a light touch. Like a safecracker, or a pickpocket.

Bender: Or a guy who burns down a bar for the insurance money!

the Galaxy God: Yes, if you make it look like an electrical thing.

When you do things right, people won’t be sure you’ve done anything at all.

Well. Regardless of whether this thought is delivered from some animated galaxy God or not … this thought is a big thought <which, I imagine, is the reason why they had the god character deliver it>. It is a Life truth. It is truth that many of the really great things in life are easy to miss, really easy to mistake as nothing, and yet they are … well … “right.” Everything is just in its place as if it belonged there all the time <and no one put it there or that way>.

My point? Goodness … heck … greatness … whether we like it or not … is stealthy. Even the big stuff can be quite stealthy. And ponder this. The people most likley to make things right <without anyone noticing> are also the same people who are most likely to offer small acts of kindness <which can be more effective than doing great, drastic actions> that ground the ‘no one really notice good stuff’ with with a true  ‘doing things right’ selflessness.

Easy to miss … easy to mistake … when everything is great.

Oh.

The corollary thought to what I just typed is ‘things that are noticed.’

Sometimes if you try and accomplish huge, world changing things … they become engulfed in the spotlight. Yup. In the business of what you do, or are attempting, you gather well intended good supporters, sometimes even large groups of supporters. Unfortunately, even thought this is good stuff with good intentions  more often than not you inevitably also gain people along the way who disagree <in some way> and even though a minority — they are loud.

And from that grows conflict.

And doing things right actually becomes debated.

And the debate is often in the nuance.

<note: that is kinda nuts when you think about it>

And the spotlight & the conflict not only bring notice but bring along the inevitable destruction  of what is good & right. That, right there, is the argument for & the reason why great shit happens an no one notices. People who want to do great shit knows that being noticed tends to destroy ‘good shit’ and spotlights, in general, draw people who like spotlights and not necessarily doing what is right.

Cynically I could suggest now that what is better to do is perform the small acts … the ones that are unnoticeable by the mainstream public therefore you avoid the conflict.

But. I am not that cynical.

Doing things right isn’t about small … nor large … its just about doing the right things the right way. The kinds of things if you do it right … really right … people will not really be sure that you’ve done anything at all.

Now.

In today’s bombastic world it can actually become a bad thing if no one notices. Why? <insert ‘huh?!?’ also> Because someone else at the exact same time is telling everyone what they did … and yes … unfortunately … often the squeaky wheel does get the grease.

Aw heck. Here is the truth good people know. The value of doing the right  thing is never in the credit. And we need to remind ourselves of that more often.

“I alone cannot change the world, but I can cast a stone across the waters to create many ripples.”

Little things can matter. A subtle touch can create the needed ripples. And you can be the initiator, instigator or implementer … or even all of them … and it doesn’t really matter.

In fact.

How do you know when you not only did the right thing … but did it right?

No one notices.

Well.

How is that for Life & business advice?

Don’t be noticed <but always do the right thing well>.

<Note: I will not be making millions writing that book>

Being good <or God> isn’t easy.

You always have to be ‘doing’ and yet you always have to not be noticed.

Your reward?

Things are done right.

And people believe they did it themselves.

By the way. I will note that is also called “character.”

That said … I could have easily used the infamous character quote … “character is what you do when no one is looking.” But I didn’t. On purpose. Because the Futurama quote is a stronger point about character. It takes it one step further. Character is doing the right thing and not being noticed. You are facilitator for good and what is right. And have the strength, an inner strength, to just do what you do with no recognition … no outside stimulus.

You just do.

Yup.

Don’t be noticed <but always do the right thing well>. People won’t be sure that you have done anything at all.

But who cares? Being good <or doing the right thing> isn’t really about anyone noticing.

I know. I know. But if no one notices then, well, in today’s world I may get screwed. You know what I say? Being good isn’t easy but you sleep well at night.

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

 “I take up my old pen again – the pen of all my old unforgettable efforts and sacred struggles. To myself – today – I need say no more. Large and full and high the future still opens. It is now indeed that I may do the work of my life.”

—-

Henry James, in his early 50s, wrote in his Notebook:

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

“Throughout history, people with new ideas — who think differently and try to change things — have always been called troublemakers.”

―

Richelle Mead

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

Well.

I was a West Wing fan and I always remember Sam Seaborne say “if I am gonna lose let me lose doing something.”

That’s an attitude. It is an attitude where you kind of look around at all the bullshit & all the corporate politics & all the company manual rules and say … “well, a lot of this shit is going to make me lose more often than I win, and worse, make me do some things I may not be proud of.” So you set out to do good things, the right way, and play your best game and figure if you lose , well, you plated your best game.

Some people call us troublemakers.

Some troublemakers make themselves out to be “disrupters.”

Here is the truth. There is no label for these types of people.

They aren’t out to make trouble nor are they purposefully being contrarians, they simply think a different way and see different things. It is quite possible they simply see a dimension the rest of us just cannot see. In other words, they see invisible shit.

Therefore, the most successful of these people actually make the invisible visible.

“… marveled at the way in which three clear liquids … nitric acid, hydrochloric acid and water … when combined produce color … and not just any color … but the color of a flaming sunset.”

Well.

Let me say, first, seeing things no one else can see makes a shitload of people uncomfortable. So if you are one of those people you learn really quickly your success resides not only in making some invisible things visible but making them the color of a flaming sunset when you do (or … a delightful colorful way)

To be clear. There are not a lot of people able to take the invisible things and put them together in ways that make them visible.

Ok.

Let’s say these are the people who take things most of us just cannot, or do not, see … and make them visible in a meaningful way that is relevant and recognized. Anyway … the mixture I described above is sometimes called Aqua regia (Latin and Ancient Italian, lit. “royal water”) or aqua regis (Latin, lit. “king’s water”).

Regardless.

Having the ability to combine invisible factors and creating something wonderful and visible … is a skill.

And kind of a complex skill. Not just ability to see things unseen but also to see the bigger vision. But my larger concern is it is quite possible we are forgetting HOW to do it.

Why?

Well.

In today’s business world if we don’t believe something exists … well … then it doesn’t. That means what is invisible cannot become visible because, well, if it’s not visible it doesn’t exist. Unfortunately, the truth is that if we don’t know that something exists, it really doesn’t mean that it doesn’t. It only means we don’t know one way or the other or maybe we just haven’t been made aware of it yet. Someone wrote that evidence is not about proof or certainty or necessity but rather it is simply something that can contribute to belief. This means we can have evidence but it is in no way conclusive.

This is the fundamental mistake when discussing evidence. The mistake is the belief or assumption that there can only be evidence for claims that are true but, in fact, there is a vast amount of evidence for claims that are in fact false.

I say all this to point out why people who can see the invisible are called troublemakers (and want to call themselves disruptors>.

For when people dismiss ‘possibility’ simply because they weren’t aware of it, or haven’t made the attempt to explore it, or haven’t looked beyond their own personal usage/viewpoint — then they are all too frequently jumping to conclusions based on … well … lack of information rather than the presence of it.

The people who do not fall into this trap? The ones who can see the invisible things. The ones who can actually take clear components and put them together and create something tangible and colorful.

And that makes people feel uncomfortable.

Anyway.

I am not sure they are trainable … I could be wrong … but I tend to believe they are more a knack, an innate ability, more than one that can be taught.

And it is quite possible it is because of that <there is no training that the skill is simply inherent> which makes them look like troublemakers to the rest of the world.

It is troubling to not have some “go to book” or manual to explain things and it is troubling when someone can see something you cannot see <even if you squint>. .

That said.

Think of it this way.

If you know someone at your company or in business who makes you ‘marvel at the way in which they are able to take three clear liquids and combine them to produce color … and not just any color … but the color of a flaming sunset’ you should pay them gobs of money or just make sure that you pay attention to them.

Because invisible is … well … invisible to pretty much everyone.

And anyone who can see the invisible is worth every penny you can pay them. Because the most colorful beautiful visible in business … is inevitably created from some random combination of ‘less than visible’ aspects. They make visible a new road. You may not want to walk it but you should appreciate a road builder regardless.

“Our wretched species is so made that those who walk on the well-trodden path always throw stones at those who are showing a new road.”

―

Voltaire

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

==

“When written in Chinese, the word crisis is composed of two characters. One represents danger, and the other represents opportunity.”

–

John F. Kennedy

==

Ok.

I love this quote.  And a boatload of business management people do <dozens of books written using it>.

Uh oh. But it isn’t true.

Good ole JFK got it wrong <but he is in good company>.

The usual explanation is that the Chinese ideogram for “crisis” is made up of two characters signifying “opportunity” and “danger.” To us folk on this side of the planet this is a great example of the ancient East wisdom. And teachers, pontificators, self help specialists, motivational speakers and anyone who likes to tell people to find lemonade when given a basket of lemons have used this explanation.

The key lesson shared?

“A crisis provides an opportunity for change and growth as well as a danger of regression or stagnation.”

<but that is too long and complete to be a soundbite>

Yup. This is pretty frickin’ deep.

The truth?

1. In Chinese, the term for crisis is wei ji.

2. Native Chinese speakers tend to think the crisis = danger/opportunity connection is complete bullshit.

The Chinese word <not really an ideogram by the way> for crisis, when translated, literally means “dangerous, or precarious, moment.” That’s it.  No ‘opportunity.’  No benefiting.  Just danger. Or … maybe I should focus on the part I like … “a precarious moment.”

Not a bad lesson in itself. Crisis CAN be bad … but in reality is just all about having a precarious moment … that needs to be managed.

Just to be sure I cover all my bases as I tear down all that self-help mumbo jumbo people have absorbed and are putting in use day-to-day.

(through some research)

A mandarin expert breaks down the word and definition and wisdom mumbo-jumbo:

A whole industry of pundits and therapists has grown up around this one grossly inaccurate statement. A casual search of the Web turns up more than a million references to this spurious proverb. It appears, often complete with Chinese characters, on the covers of books, on advertisements for seminars, on expensive courses for “thinking outside of the box,” and practically everywhere one turns in the world of quick-buck business, pop psychology, and orientalist hocus-pocus. This catchy expression (Crisis = Danger + Opportunity) has rapidly become nearly as ubiquitous as The Tao of Pooh and Sun Zi’s Art of War for the Board / Bed / Bath / Whichever Room.

The explication of the Chinese word for crisis as made up of two components signifying danger and opportunity is due partly to wishful thinking, but mainly to a fundamental misunderstanding about how terms are formed in Mandarin and other Sinitic languages.

<that was awesome …>

Next.

While it is true that wēijī does indeed mean “crisis” and that the wēi syllable of wēijī does convey the notion of “danger,” the jī syllable of wēijī most definitely does not signify “opportunity.”

The jī of wēijī, in fact, means something like “incipient moment; crucial point (when something begins or changes).” Thus, a wēijī is indeed a genuine crisis, a dangerous moment, a time when things start to go awry. A wēijī indicates a perilous situation when one should be especially wary. It is not a juncture when one goes looking for advantages and benefits.

As the Mandarin language expert says quite succinctly … “In a crisis, one wants above all to save one’s skin and neck!”

As well as …

“Any would-be guru who advocates opportunism in the face of crisis should be run out of town on a rail, for his / her advice will only compound the danger of the crisis.”

I loved this guy.

A little wordy in his explanation but he was passionate about telling everyone how far off base they were on the whole crisis/opportunity thing. Sorry.  No Eastern wisdom here. In this case the east and the west agreed that a crisis is bad, dangerous and to be wary of and that’s it.

Ok.

All that said <mostly said to enlighten everyone and piss off a boatload of publishers and book writers> let’s talk about crisis and the opportunities a crisis does actually create. Most of us quickly see the danger in a crisis… and we should … because it is exactly as translated … a precarious moment.  Like its true Chinese definition a crisis is a crucial moment where things begin to go awry.

It is easy to overlook any opportunity within the crisis because, frankly, we are often just trying to survive <in other words … save our skin, neck & ass>.

And what makes this even more difficult is that the opportunity may be well hidden. The danger is always obvious and the most critical in our eye because the crisis creates potential personal harm. So what makes a crisis truly a “precarious moment” is that assuming you are seeking to find that elusive opportunity within the crisis … well … that with danger lurking its not that we forget to look for the opportunity but rather we seek to avoid the danger and the personal harm.

Lets call this for what it is … self preservation.

And that isn’t bad by the way.  Because if you don’t survive the “opportunity” becomes irrelevant. It is natural to avoid danger during a crisis and make that THE priority.  So, no, I am not going to suggest someone become an “opportunity person” when dealing with a crisis.

I believe people who can discover opportunities in a crisis are people who have already successfully managed the ‘precarious moment’ several times in the past. Maybe call it trial by fire.  Maybe call it trial & error.  But suffice it to say you ain’t gonna be seeking opportunities when dealing with your first true crisis.

Yes. Many people say that it was actually a crisis that caused them to make a much-needed change.

Yes. Living through a hard time challenges people to grow in ways that makes them more mature and opens them to new possibilities.

Where I would argue with people on this is that through surviving the crisis they … well … just found a better way to survive. And that’s not being opportunistic.  That is simply survival instinct <compounded by understanding of what makes oneself happiest>.

Look.

Life constantly gives you opportunities … and gives you crisis also <unfortunately> … regardless … you get opportunities not just to take a chance but also just to improve your current state.

Here is the formula (although in this case I am not sure A + B = C).

(A) A crisis is a forced decision making moment (typically survival based).

(B) Decision making moments represent opportunities.

(C) Opportunities typically translate into some type of change.

And everyone, obviously, wants to capitalize on any change (who would choose to have a negative result from a decision?). If someone wants to claim a crisis represents an opportunity go ahead and do so … but please recognize that it is an indirect extended relationship.  And in doing so you could be doing a disservice to people because it ignores what a crisis is truly about – survival.

Ok.

I do believe dealing with a crisis has a lot to do with attitude <which is possibly where many people get confused with this whole opportunity thing>.

A Pollyanna attitude? Nope.

Someone wrote: “Welcoming personal setbacks as rich opportunities for growth can help you survive them. Does that seem like a twisted point of view? After all, problems make us miserable, right? Scott Peck, author of The Road Less Traveled (Touchstone, 2003), considers them a gift — if you look at them in a deeper, less reactive manner. Indeed, they can give us clear perspective.”

Wow.

That is a bunch of bullhockey <bullshit>.

A crisis is just that.  A crisis.  A dangerous moment. A precarious moment.

Should we be seeking opportunities in the middle of a frickin’ crisis? Nope.

We should be seeking survival.

And that is where attitude comes in. Not “lets find the opportunity” or some baloney like that <or find the lemonade out of the lemons> but an attitude capturing a strength of character <I will be strong and overcome> and resiliency <survive>. Afterwards maybe you can look back and discover the opportunities that were an outcome from the crisis (although this has a slightly masochistic point of view in that from pain comes pleasure that kind of creeps me out) but when in a crisis … just deal with it.

Have a good attitude and explore all the possibilities/opportunities … once you have managed the experience itself.

Dealing with a true crisis takes character.  HOW you deal with a crisis says almost as much as what you do to deal with a crisis.  A crisis is a gauntlet. You have to have strength of character.  And strength in resiliency.  Please don’t measure yourself when dealing with a crisis by what opportunity you discovered from the crisis … measure yourself by how you survived.

A crisis.

It is a ‘precarious moment’ … a ‘crucial moment’ … a ‘dangerous moment.’

<East & West agree on this>

Seek to survive the moment. Don’t seek the opportunity for god’s sake. Just try and be aware should an opportunity arise <as you survive>. Leave the ‘opportunistic crisis management approach’ to people who write books and pontificate<but, please do not buy the books and live your life by all their bullshit>.

Oh.

And don’t misuse the Chinese definition of crisis. Because that is where this whole rant started. I am all for seeking opportunities and I have a shitload, too much, experience dealing with crises. But I will be honest … my first response in any crisis is “survival”. Once I can see, or sense, we will survive hen, yeah, I will most likely scan the horizon for some opportunities. But survival first.

—–

“A dream will always triumph over reality, once it is given the chance.”

=

Stanislaw Lem

—-

Well.

Suffice it to say Hope is a pretty resilient motherfucker. And I am glad it is.

Sometimes life beats the crap out of you. And I mean REALLY beats the shit out of you.

It beats you up enough that sometimes it makes reality take on some insurmountable size and shape … all but blocking out any sight of dreams.

And in doing so … by blocking sight to dreams the only thing a person can fall back on is Hope.

And that’s what bravery is all about.

In spite of everything.

In spite of all that happens, which by almost any measure would make you decide that hope & dreams are a waste of time, you maintain some hope.

In spite of all the shit that makes you begin thinking that time is better spent dealing with reality, you maintain hope.

I say this because, in the end, I tend to believe it is some version of bravery that keeps your head focused on maintaining hope. Because you have to be brave in some form or fashion to maintain some faith in something that can be difficult to see <especially if reality is standing in the way>.

You have to be brave to maintain some dreams you have.

You have to be brave to maintain some thought that there is something beyond the reality of the moment.

Unfortunately.

Reality is the inevitable. The inevitable of Life <which actually represents, unfortunately, ‘things beyond your control’>. What I mean is that some things are inevitable in your Life once someone else decides to pursue something in their Life … especially if their decision invokes some relentlessness. And … in that ‘inevitable space’ … sometimes there are often truly no good solutions to the situations <not just problems … just regular everyday situations> that arise.

There are only bad and less bad solutions. And within that quandary it becomes even easier to lose hope.

Because that quandary most often is involving what is seemingly mundane everyday stuff … not the really big stuff. And when that happens you begin thinking … “shit … if I cannot even navigate the little stuff how the hell will I steer myself toward the big stuff <my dreams & things I hope for>.”

And you feel … well … fucked.

Fucked because Hope only provides an unclear future. There are no specifics and no clear destinations. And sometimes hope get additionally blurred by your desire to be able to see into the future.

But here is the deal.

Being able to see the future doesn’t make you any smarter or wiser than anyone else. And it certainly doesn’t stop you from making mistakes. All it does is to let you know what a problem is and how big the problem is … but it doesn’t give you any way to do anything about it.

Seeing the future just enables you to … well … see it … but you cannot do anything but deal with it <not change it per se>. And in dealing with it … therein lies the bravery.

Dealing with the daily battle to keep your Hope.

—

“I carry the battle in me.”

=

A Six Word Story

—

Each day, whether you pay attention to it or not, you carry the battle between hope and reality. The battle is defined by bravery. That is the only way you win the battle.

I imagine the opposite is cowardice. And the thought that it is the cowards <or the ‘unbrave’> who give in to reality and let hope die <or lose>. Frankly … I don’t like that. Nor do I really believe it. I don’t think its cowardly.

I just think it’s … well … very easy to let the reality of Life grind you down. You can be the bravest sonuvabitch and still find your hopes & dreams being crushed.

But.

I will say this.

You must be brave in the face of reality if you want your dreams and hope to even have a chance. And if you believe such a thing as bravery is too daunting?

Well.

Remember this.

If you give hope a chance, even a glimmer of a chance, it will win the battle against reality.

How can I say that?

Reality is, in the end, always negotiable.

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

“If all you can do is crawl, start crawling.”

—–

Rumi

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

That night the wind stirred in the forsythia bushes,

but it was a wrong one, blowing in the wrong direction.

That’s silly. How can there be a wrong direction?

‘It bloweth where it listeth,’ as you know, just as we do

————

John Ashbery

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

Ok.

One would think getting started would be one of the easiest things in the world to do.

One would be wrong.

Oddly, in business, and Life I imagine, getting started is one of the more challenging things we encounter.

We hem.

We haw.

We wax poetically.

We gnash our teeth.

We plan.

We plan some more.

We play out a zillion ‘what of scenarios.’

We make assignments; discuss the assignments and who will do the assignments.

We discuss the assignments again.

We debate whether the right people are assigned to assignments.

We reassign assignments and assign milestones, checklists and a variety of “we do not have confidence in you so we will set up a labyrinth of reporting checks & balances for you so that you know we do not have confidence in you.”

We wait until the wind blows in the right direction <even though no one is sure what the wrong direction is – to blows in whatever direction it blows, doesn’t it?>.

And then maybe, just maybe, we get started. We do all of this under the guise of insuring we get right whatever we start. Uhm. And we do this knowing full well, at least in business, the odds of something going wrong is near almost 100% on any given project.

I imagine a part of our hesitation to start is our ‘self’ trying to address the feeling of not being ‘expert enough’ right out of the starting blocks gate. That certainly holds a lot of people back from even trying because while you may not care about being the absolute best, or even being perfect, you don’t want to suck or look stupid <or, at minimum, we desire to limit our suckedness>.

To be clear.

Making a mistake is one thing.

Making a stupid mistake is another.

I wish business would more often view workflow as learning to ride a bike. Chances are you weren’t an expert your first try … crashing into shit, banging the crap out of yourself … but most times you persisted and not only figured it out but got pretty good at riding the frickin’ bike. The problem is that business looks at those crashes and bumps & bruises as “mistakes” <despite the fact they happen all the time and to everyone>.

Yeah.

That is something a shitload of people don’t talk about a lot. The fact that Businesses face failures and mistakes <of the system or process or of people> all the time.

Sometimes small, sometimes large … but all the time. Most mistakes stay under the radar and are relatively harmless. They are simply the cost of doing business … as humans.

However.

Far too often these failures come to the attention of some manager within the system and then THEY bring it to everyone’s attention. And therein lies the bigger business truth … discerning the type of error – exception or systematic.

That said. With regard to mistakes … business people tend to fall into one of two categories:

—

• Those who see the exception as systemic <a reflection of an ongoing issue>

• Those who see the exception as … well … an exception

—

I could argue that the difference between a good leader and a bad leader can be found by which category they fall into.

I cannot tell you how many times I have sat in a business meeting watching people wring their hands and speculate on ‘why did this happen?” <that speculation is the business version of ‘misinformation’, in other words, ‘made up’ version of why things happened the way they did>.

But.

Once the misinformation is stripped away, the remaining question is, and always will be, how big is the mistake <not whether it was stupid or not or should it have been known or not>? And therein lies the flaw in how business tends to view these exceptions <mistakes> in today’s business world.

We seek some absurd level of perfection and in doing so we shut down in dealing with an exception with the incredibly stupid intent to break <or revisit> a well-designed, well working system <or even a well-trained, highly capable employee> to eliminate a … well … a stupid mistake <although almost no one can truly discern the difference between a stupid mistake, a mistake or simply a failure of the system itself>.

How does this apply to getting started?

This translates into having our head on a swivel before we even start. We look for trouble where there truly is none.

We find issues everywhere … even when it is simply a perception … or worse … a speculative ‘what if’ issue. And, maybe the worst, in all of our speculative modeling and ‘what if scenarios’ we absurdly end up applying the wrong remedy <or sometimes an unnecessary remedy> against something that is … uhm … speculative for god’s sake.

Look.

If you do some research on what slows people from getting started you will find one word over and over again – fear. It is often used simplistically and … well … inappropriately. I imagine if I stretch my thinking I could suggest fear is at the root of hesitation but I kind of think it is just most of us just do not want to suck. We truly do want to get shit right. Therefore it would seem gale wind almost everyone faces at the starting gate is one thing – the unknown. And this unknown is multi-dimensional in that there is a forward unknown <you may not have done this exact assignment or task before>, there is the general unknown <each task lives contextually in a different environment therefore even if you have done something once before the new context will invariably mean you will face something new> and the’ unknown’ unknowns <the random shit that inevitably occurs in the business world>.

Shit.

After reading that I don’t know why anyone actually starts anything.

Shit.

After reading that I don’t know why anyone would ‘go full speed’ but rather aim for some mediocrity as it would appear to be a safer more conservative path.

Oh.

But here is where the unknown really hits you hard in business – accountability. In business, regardless of whether you encounter knowns or unknowns, you are accountable.

Shit.

Double shit.

In business most time <I think> getting started is so hard because … well … you are accountable once you start <albeit … you will also be accountable if you don’t start … it just seems a little less risky>.

Accountability is a sonuvabitch. It is a sonuvabitch because even just one bad thing seems to create a crisis scenario.

And therein lies the biggest challenge.

Inevitable criticism occurs based on some perception of perfectionism <because the world around you almost absurdly always believe you should have foreseen the knowns AND unknowns>. It is an unfortunate truth that people expect certain things … and often these ‘certain things’ are unrealistic.

Look.

I am all for striving for perfection with an eye toward the implementation of an idea. But as with so many aspects of life, the key is striking a balance between opposing forces, each with its own set of pros and cons.

Too little perfectionism leads to a rapid but undesirable endpoint.

Too much perfectionism leads to analysis paralysis and no endpoint at all.

To be clear.

I believe Perfection is shit. It is shit because things just happen in business.

How often does this ‘happen’?

All.

The.

Frickin’.

Time.

I say that because it sure would encourage more people to get started if we embraced the truth that not everything, and not every mistake, is a crisis. And you know what? Even if you do face a crisis it has a familiar pattern.

You’re knocked off balance.

You learn.

You adapt.

Anyway.

The truth is that the wind, more often than not, blows in the wrong direction … even though … well … how can a wind blow in the wrong direction? My point on that so many times we wait on getting started until the wind is blowing in the right direction and … well … it never will.

The wind just blows.

And we just need to get started.

I will admit. I have always been a “let’s just go do shit and figure shit out as we go” type business person assuming I was surrounded with enough good smart talented people that we ran little risk of not figuring shit out.

That said.

I didn’t always sprint out of the blocks … I was also willing to crawl.  All I cared about was getting started.

I wish we taught that attitude more often.

Crawling can be as good as, and even more effective, sprinting and crawling is better than not moving at all.

============ 

“…can I tell you something…? I don’t think you’re in love with the past.

 I think you’re scared of the future.”

―

Brad Meltzer

=====

Well.

Generational business visions. What I mean by that is while businesses chug along making money, or not making money, how they make their money changes by generation.

Back in august 2013 I described what I called “the evolution of business vision” suggesting that there is a generational shift occurring in how people in business are viewing business. I attached to that thought a belief that the 50somethings were an impediment to progress and, in particular, the progress that the younger business generation offers businesses.

I believe all of that even more so today.

Organizations are adapting how they attack business purpose, vision and outcomes <measurement & attitude> driven by the rising younger people who view it significantly different that the existing older management.

This is creating a natural friction with the impatience of the rising and the lack of impatience to change by those in power … in addition … there is a natural friction found in how an organization assimilates the new and the old <and the necessary experience needed to make it happen> to make the well needed changes for progress.

This is attitudinal stuff we have always dealt with in business as we churned thru generations.

What do I mean?

• All generations are shaped by the generations that came before
• All rising generations want to shape the future based on how they have been shaped <and it will not be the same as those who shaped their thinking>
• All generations currently in place will want to shape the rising generations based on past learnings <and it will most likely contain unattractive features to the rising generation>

Where I truly believe the new well-needed vision shift is running into an obstacle is with ‘respect.’

And oddly … I will suggest it isn’t that the young should respect the old … but rather the opposite. I believe the 50somethings need to get their proverbial heads out of their asses and develop some respect for the young and what they can do <that we cannot>.

Show them respect and I imagine they will show us respect <if we have the ability to actually, authentically, deliver respect with the right attitude>.

Sorry to tell the older folk but … well … if two generations are to have respect for one another … the younger generation will have to believe the older generation has some value <in what they offer> and listen to it.

Now.

I admit.

I write all of this fearing we 50somethings are losing their respect. We have always been old and less adaptable … but now we are truly becoming an impediment to progress <or getting better>.

The obstacle mentality may have something to do with attitude, and pride, but to get to the core of what this is all about you really need to discuss money … not only how we personally get paid <earnings & wealth> but also how the company gets paid <profits, ROI, revenue, growth, etc.>. And I say that wishing more business people would talk about this issue rather than “selfish, lazy, entitled’ younger people and “old, out of touch, tech amateur” older folk.

Money, and how it is viewed,  is the issue

Basically I believe that the demands of managing business has evolved generation to generation … bloated dollar management to squeezed dollar management to … well … I sense it will be something like the ‘added value’ dollar management in the near future <if the 50somethings help with some progress>.

The following chart diagrams my entire thought process:

Here is the explanation behind the diagram. The current 50something management generation is literally and figuratively the generation that got squeezed. What I mean by that is this was the generation who had to learn how to do more with less and get more with less. This was the generation who was also demanded to generate more profits and sales increases … with that same ‘less’.

To do that we … well … we maintained the same business models and the same business processes <to a large extent> and then simply squeezed dollars and organizations for everything they had. This meant, as we squeezed things into each dollar. we squeezed out EVERYTHING of intangible substance <purpose, integrity, ‘doing the right thing’, soul, etc.>.

Yup.

If there is anything this current older management generation understands better … I don’t know what it is … they understand the concept of the squeezed dollar and squeezed organizations. They had to figure it out because they had to adapt to what the economic environment demanded <or be killed if you don’t>.

That said. This means the burden, what they know and believe is the way to do things, of this business generation is the squeezed dollar. They arrived in their situation because the boomer business leader generation was more about ‘the bloated dollar.’ They overcharged and built brands & businesses based on excess <and encouraged a belief there was value in excess> and, yes, offered some good products & services along the way.

I will note everyone, in both of these generations, typically made a lot of money. Yeah. This generation of 50something business leaders has already made a lot of money. The one before, let’s call it the boomer business leader, made even more.

And each made it differently.

Boomers thrived on the bloated dollar.

The bloated dollar was when companies could charge whatever they wanted and got it. Project estimates contained ‘fat’ <or ‘fluff’ or ‘padding’> to absorb unforeseen changes or challenges and buyers assumed the price was what the price was.

The current generation of business leaders has had to thrive in a ‘squeezed dollar’ environment.

The squeezed dollar is the unfortunate byproduct from the boomer generation leaders’ wonderful success … the financial community demanded the same results … but the consumer demanded transparency.

Therefore in order to maintain continuous sales growth <which is actually a relatively ludicrous concept> and continuous profitability the current business leader had to find ways to squeeze the same profit/growth out of less dollars <cutting staff while cutting prices while cutting … and cutting … and … well … cutting>.

Ok.

I say all this to get to where we will go and why there is so much conflict in the business world.

Suffice it to say that economic pressure creates a certain type of management style in order to be successful. 50somethings learned on the job and actually were quite successful maintaining the boomer ‘earn as much as I can’ attitude <a version of extravagant desire for more> as well as working leaner <on the edge of what an organization is actually capable of>. Unfortunately for the business world … the next generation of business leaders want something different <and they should … because where do you go after a bloated dollar and then a squeezed dollar?>.

The next generation? <the current ‘youth’>

They really don’t like either the financial ‘squeezed/lean’ aspect or the organizational aspect tied to the financial earnings attitude.

Therefore, in my opinion, the young <who are obviously chafing under the existing management style> will most likely swing to what I call the ‘added value’ dollar. It suggests accommodating attitudes beyond simple profit  <and purpose driven value> as well as simple positioning companies by ‘de-commoditizing’ within industries <rebuilding value beyond lowest price>.

What I mean by this is that they want businesses to swing operationally back toward a ‘bloated dollar’ construct but stuff the ‘bloat’ not with any padded financial aspects but rather with some purposeful aspects which encourage employees to think, and know, that they are part of a ‘good capitalism’ rather than a simple ‘morally hollow’ capitalism.

Anyway.

Regardless whether my prediction is correct or not … what is correct is that the 50something business management objectives are not aligned with the younger generation objective desires. And that lack of alignment pertains to both management style as well as corporate objectives.

This is an issue.

It is an issue not just because older managers want to manage misaligned with what the people doing the shit find any passion or interest in but it is incredibly likely the older manager is speaking a different language than the younger generation.

This is NOT a generational issue, this is a business philosophy issue.

Fortunately, I do believe it is easily solvable.

Me?

Oddly <and maybe surprisingly> I would follow the money.

Stop talking about feelings and ‘features’ and flexible hours and laptop/tablets for all and free lunches and start talking about doing what a business should do well – make money and make money you are proud of.

Maybe I could call this substantive productivity or possibly substantive profit or maybe i could just call it “meaningful business” but what i would call it is a productive business strategy because it engages intrinsic motivation.

===========

In 1949, Harry F Harlow, Professor of Psychology at the University of Wisconsin, outlined something called “intrinsic motivation” … or the joy of the task itself. Research reflects that for most complex tasks intrinsic motivation is a much more powerful drive than any external motivator. More than money or tangible reward.

And a key part of this intrinsic motivator is ‘purpose’.

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

“Biology gives you a brain. Life turns it into a mind.”

—

Jeffrey Eugenides

===========

Ok.

So I thought I had left the whole right brain left brain discussion behind.

And it reared its ugly head again one more time just the other day. And <distressingly> it was in a business environment, with senior people, discussing people’s strengths & weaknesses.

Look.

This whole right brain, left brain thing about creativity versus ‘logical’ thinking has to stop.

Stop … now <please>.

The truth?

We use our whole brain for thinking. Not halves. And right brain left brain mumbo jumbo is just that … a bunch of mumbo jumbo crap.

Yup.

The whole thing is bullshit.

Trust me <you don’t really have to because I will share reasons why you should>. And if you don’t believe me … well … if you ever want to drive a psychologist/psychiatrist/neurologist/any ‘ist’ crazy … bring it up.

With that … a reminder on what his whole thing is. In the right-left mythology … the left brain is logical, ordered, and analytic, and it supports reading, speech, math, and reasoning. In the same myth … the right brain is more oriented towards feelings and emotions, spatial perception, and the arts, and is said to be more creative.

Well.

Interesting myth. And it is just a myth. It is wrong (wrong & wrong … and maybe even wrong again).

And we have actually known for at least 30 years that this characterization is incorrect.

In fact the guy who probably put us all in this mess originally <Mike Gazzaniga who created the study in the 60’s that some pop psychologist used to write some fantasy-like left/right brain business books that became best sellers> who was a pioneer of modern study of brain hemispheric differences immediately tried to put a stop to the craziness as soon as it began with a book chapter titled “Left brain, right brain: A debunking.”

And he did that 25 years ago.

<note: he wrote it because the original crap was begun after he did a brain hemisphere study in the 60’s>

And, yet, there is still plenty of bunk to go around.

Its crazy.

I myself have gnashed my teeth <and sometimes growled> against the “left brain / right brain” myth for years <probably not 25 but a bunch>. It usually is personal <and I believe this is so for most people>. People are always trying to tell me how “right-brained” I am <or left … I get confused>.

Which I always find amusing since whatever I am doing invariably needs whatever the other side of the brain was supposed to be doing.

Plus. I would like to think I am using my whole frickin’ brain.

But.

It mostly aggravates me ,and kind of disturbs me> because it is deliberately misleading.

It has been used to support endless management dialogue telling us that we should liberate ourselves from too much left-brain ‘logical’ thinking and enjoy the fruits of our liberated, right-brained creativity <or vice versa depending on your management belief system>.

Look.

People may be inherently more visual, aural, spatial, sequential, intuitive, rational <or irrational> talented or non-talented … but it ain’t because of anything to do with left versus right brain.

Ok.

If you don’t trust me I pulled this from a medical journal.

A more technical explanation of how the whole thing went haywire:

==

You’ve probably heard this left/ right brain dichotomy before. It goes something like this: the left hemisphere of the brain is logical, deductive, mathematical, etc., while the right hemisphere is artistic, visual and imaginative. The idea stems at least partly from the classic studies of split brain patients performed by Sperry and Gazzaniga in the 1960s.

There are some functional asymmetries in the brain, and it is true that certain regions of both hemispheres are specialized for particular functions. Speech illustrates this, but also shows that nothing is ever so simple when it comes to the brain: in most right-handed people, speech is processed in both hemispheres, but predominantly in the left. In some left-handers, speech is processed either predominantly in the right hemisphere or on both sides.

So the notion that someone is “left-brained” or “right-brained” is absolute nonsense. All complex behaviours and cognitive functions require the integrated actions of multiple brain regions in both hemispheres of the brain. All types of information are probably processed in both the left and right hemispheres (perhaps in different ways, so that the processing carried out on one side of the brain complements, rather than substitutes, that being carried out on the other).

An article was published this week in the venerable (and reliable) psychology journal Psychological Bulletin, which synthesized 67 brain imaging studies of creativity. Among other things, it showed that creativity is not especially a right-brain function. In fact, two of three broad classes of creative thought that have been studied seem not to depend on a single set of brain structures.

What we call “creativity” is so diverse that it can’t be localized in the brain very well.

One might think that this study would put to rest at least part of the left brain/right brain mythology, namely, that the right hemisphere of the brain is more responsible for creative thought than the left.

One would think so, but I wouldn’t count on it.

==

My conclusion?

I put the whole right/left brain thing in the same category as reading a horoscope or reading my own tarot cards. If you give someone a vague positive description in which they can see themselves they will tend to agree with you. And that is dangerous on a number of levels <if people actually believe it>.

Ok.

Here is the main reason I bring this up <beyond the fact it drives me crazy and it is still being seriously discussed in the business world>. It has a detrimental effect on education and how we manage our youth. It is as bad as social profiling when it comes to kids.

Left brain kid.

Right brain kid.

You carry that label and not only does the child begin to see themselves in that label <it is kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy> the adults tag the child with the label. And start treating them that way. And expecting things based on the labeling.

All of a sudden the child is placed on the left, or right, brain treadmill <oops … I meant to say moving sidewalk>.

And then they are left there.

Uh oh.

One day the child wants to jump off the treadmill to hop on the other one for a while … <adults> “whoa … get back on your treadmill … you know that other one is only for the right brainers … and you will be much more successful on the left brain treadmill <sidewalk>.”

That, my friends, reads scary even if it seems just a theory.

And we all know that at some place, at some time, with some children … this is actually happening.

We need to squash this left/right brain myth forever. Now <please … again>.

We use all of our brain.

Brains are ambidextrous.

And even if you, personally, do not want to believe this, well, please … at least teach kids that is is so.

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

“Rabbit’s clever,” said Pooh thoughtfully.
“Yes,” said Piglet, “Rabbit’s clever.”
“And he has Brain.”
“Yes,” said Piglet, “Rabbit has Brain.”
There was a long silence.
“I suppose,” said Pooh, “that that’s why he never understands anything.”

—

Winnie the Pooh

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