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

“I have tried in my way to be free.”

——————

Leonard Cohen

====

Ok. Occam’s Razor. You know: “the simplest explanation is usually the best one.”

Developed by 14th-century English Franciscan friar William of Ockham, Ockam’s Razor <more commonly spelled Occam’s razor>, suggests one should seek the ‘more economical solution.’ What he actually wrote <in Summa Logicae 1323> was “it is futile to do with more what can be done with fewer.”

Well.

This fabulous concept has been hijacked, twisted into a pretzel and, in general, bastardized under the insidious guise of ‘common sense’ logic.  It has been hijacked under the whole idea that ‘freedom’ is more often found in simplicity or the simplest explanations and , therefore, in a way those who use the concept in a misguided way are … well … bastardizing Life itself <and screwing up business in the business world>.

Yeah. Somehow … somewhere … someone decided that good ole Occam’s razor could be used day in and day out as ‘common sense living.’

I would point out that Ockham himself, a philosopher, wasn’t a big fan of simplistic common sense.

I would further point out that Ockham’s razor theory was based on, all things being equal, the simplest explanation is usually the best one.

I would also point out that by “simple” Occam’s razor is really referring to the theory with the fewest new assumptions.

And, in fact, I would also point out that inevitably there are times when the simplest explanation for a given set of observations is, well, wrong.

Occam’s razor never claims to determine the truth or untruth of something. It only identifies the things we should logically consider and evaluate. Common sense, under the guise of simplicity, far too often strips, well, an idea, a concept, a process & a theory — of the texture & hues of which they should be judged.

The truth is that black, or white, is overrated … as in ‘this is a black or white thing.” The most interesting things and, frankly, the most effective ordinary things & ideas are neither black nor white nor even gray.

Complexity is a colorful idea & thought.

Therefore. Should we view Occam’s Razor the way skeptics use it we would find that their ‘one explanation is more likely’ not only doesn’t mean it is a common sense black & white issue, but it also tends to mean that the ‘common sense solution is not only not common nor of sense’. More importantly, common sense also commonly suggests the incorrect solution.

Skeptics <or ‘simplify or die’ seekers>, in their attempt to simplify everything, treat Occam’s Razor as if it were an actual “Law of things” and use it to enable denying any rational claim, no matter how valid, based on … well … common sense. Occam’s Razor is not a ‘law’, simply a ‘rule’ of thought or a principle for which to think about things.

Look. It was not meant to be anything associated with ‘common sense.’ Instead it was about making choices and deductions economically. Occam’s razor was never meant for paring everything down to some beautiful simplistic core of truth.

The truth is that most things are, unfortunately, difficult and messy – even complex. And, yes, I can absolutely see why someone would gravitate to the good ole razor with the intent to simplify. But Ockham’s razor was not intended to cut away anything & everything or eliminate logic it simply suggested that when everything is done, when everything has been thought of, and if all things were equal, you should look to the most economical solution as the one which made the most sense.

No, not common sense, but rather ‘the most sense.’

Or. As Tao Ching said; “seek simplicity, grasp the essential.’

Occam’s razor does not mean eliminating the essential no matter how complex or burdensome the essential it is.

Why? Well. We certainly do not want to make things more complicated than they need to be, but you also do not want to simplify so much that losing something essential ends up ‘under complicating’ things. And this is where common sense and the whole simplicity thing really screws up good ole Occam & the razor.

Pretty much any great theory, any great concept, any great idea has to incorporate what I would call ‘intentional simplification.’ That is intentionally ignoring some things <some effects or causes of things> not because they do not exist or do not actually happen, but because they do not have any impact or much of an impact on the final outcome. Conversely, this means some idiot <or a bunch of them> are going to wander around picking up all the non essential things and say “common sense suggests your conclusion is flawed because you ignored these things.”

WTF.

“I purposefully, intentionally, ignored them … as meaningless in the grander scheme of things.”

In some absurd version of their world their ‘simple common sense facts’, well, over complicate things. They use Occam to … holy shit … complicate things. Uh oh. They actually use common sense to … holy shit part 2 … complicate things.

As I said back in September 2013 when I first used Occam’s razor: sometimes what is … is … well … just is.

Yeah. That may be the paradox that ‘common sense’ struggles with – sometimes the simplest explanation is complex and maybe even ambiguous and your job is to make it understandable, not simple.

Look.

Occam does not nor should it take sides on any given issue.

Occam does not nor should it shame a complex issue out of existence.

People who ignorantly wield Occam’s Razor often seem to be unaware of this.

To wield it incorrectly is a lazy tactic at best.

To wield it incorrectly is usually a reflection of ignoring the crucial question … whether there really is a need for the questioning.

Shit. That alone is Occam’s largest suggestion — should I slice away questioning what is?

Anyway.

Where the lazy Occam users gain confidence is that Occam, at his core <albeit I did not know him personally> was a nominalist maybe even a minimalist. But even the most simplistic minimalist recognizes that analysis of anything truly worthwhile is likely to be incredibly complex — even at its simplest.

While I love simplicity, I will admit, the utility of Occam’s Razor is highly questionable. I fear that its misuse flippantly eliminates the useful by selecting over-simplified competitors. Occam’s razor is simply a heuristic or rule of thumb which should be used to guide discussion but not to offer a solution. All it does is to encourage us to favor, among otherwise equivalent theories or hypotheses, those that make the fewest unwarranted assumptions.

It is not a law.

It is not a scientific principle.

It cannot justify a position in and of itself.

It does not represent common sense.

Maybe everyone should remember only one thing about Occam’s razor that really matters — the razor analogy refers to “shaving off” or cutting from the theory those variables or concepts that are superfluous & non-essential and only create unnecessary complications. Maybe everyone should remember before they invoke Occam’s Razor as common sense that it is more important to identify ‘the essential’ as true common sense decision making.

In the end?

“I have tried in my own way to be free.”

Far too often people do so by attempting to simplify. They assume, through common sense, that less is better & less is more. And, in some ways, that is true, but not at the expense of what is essential & needed. Complexity is a Life truth. Freedom of choice, of living or almost anything is more often found in an “economical truth” and not in a ‘simplistic truth.’

Ponder that for a while.

==========

<

p style=”text-align: center;”>Originally published August 2016

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

“The unexpected, always the unexpected.

If they expect you to move right, move left. The first law of survival in this jungle that you’ll inhabit.

The unexpected move. “

—-

The Avengers

========

“She was already learning that if you ignore the rules people will, half the time, quietly rewrite them so that they don’t apply to you.”

—

Terry Pratchett

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

Well. Far too often in business we talk about making an “unexpected move” to gain an advantage as “zig when they zag.”

So lets’ take a minute and talking about the whole “zigging when they zag” bullshit. To be clear. On a football field zigging when they zag can be effective, but in business it is bullshit.

Look. I am all for running with a temporary advantage when given the opportunity <and, yes, about 97.385% of advantages are temporary — I made up the 97.385% number>. But that is not ‘zigging’.

I am all for hunkering down on a specific distinctness when it appears the rest of the category is bumbling around in an array of meaningless claims. But that is not zigging.

I am all for leaping through a window of opportunity when the window cracks open. But that is not zigging.

Suffice it to say … zigging, in general, is a stupid strategy.

Let me explain why.

Most industries, once they have a fair number of competitors, is more like a 7 lane superhighway where everyone is driving in the same direction within the same guard rails.

Not everyone will like thinking that, but the truth is that most businesses have smart people who see the same information and do all the necessary research with people who are likely, and not likely, to buy whatever it is they are selling and therefore strategies are in the same realm and everyone is pretty much competing in the same arena.

This means a couple of things.

• • Everyone is speeding toward the same approximate destination.

  • If something is obvious to you, it is most likely obvious to them.

What all of this means is you have to move, but most moves have to be done artfully.

So maybe despite the fact I balk at the whole ‘zig when they zig’ and ‘unexpected’ anything in business gives me heartburn it is possible I could discuss the art of the unexpected move.

I call it “art” because unpredictability as normal behavior is bad. No one likes someone who is unpredictable 100% of the time and organizations <alignment, operations and ‘day to day doing’> tend to respond poorly to unpredictability (so do customers).

In my highway metaphor unpredictability most likely means either <a> a crash or <b> slowing down and you get passed or <c> you are now on a completely different road than all the other competitors speeding toward sales, & customers.

As for predictable? Yikes. Boring. Lack of creativity. Bad <in a different way>. Let’s just call predictable “lack of any art.” In my highway metaphor this most likely means you are cruising in one of the right lanes, the slower lanes, and people are passing you all the frickin’ time.

This suggests making a move in your industry take more art and artfulness to navigate the path you desire or take advantage of the opportunity that may open.

This suggests, in the business world, you sit up and pay attention just with a little more focus when someone pulls out the “maybe we should zig when they zag” tritism. You do so mostly because anyone who says that who is not on a football field most likely has their head up their ass <but want to say something catchy in a meeting to be noticed>.

I say that, again, because most time in a business industry companies are going in a direction for a reason … that is where the sales are. So ‘zigging’ when everyone else ‘zags’ more than likely means they are heading toward sales and you are not.

Ok. Now. If you want to tie ‘unexpected move’ to survival … well … that is a different story. Survival does have a nasty habit of forcing some unexpected maneuvering. Ok. Maybe out of desperation the predictable in us decides that maybe being ‘unexpected’ may actually be called for.

I would suggest that if you find yourself in desperate times rarely is anything artful in that moment. But I would suggest that in a desperate survival mode I can offer two lists you should write up on some big board in some big conference room and make sure you discuss. There are basically 4 basic responses to a threat <or opportunity I imagine>:

• • • Fight

    • Flee

    • Deceive

    • Submit

Any move you choose to make will be derived from one of these four spaces.

Choose wisely.

Once you have chosen <wisely> effectiveness in a survival fight basically comes down to 4 things <in the order of importance>:

• • • aggression and willingness to hurt your competition

    • willingness to get hurt yourself

    • skill and knowledge

    • strength and power

Some may haggle with my order, but the top two will dictate your success regardless of how you stack the last two. And of the last two I would suggest most of the time knowing what to do is more important than brute strength.

Choose wisely <but always choose the first two or you will get crushed>. I offer these two lists because when anyone suggests zigging when someone zags I bring these out.

Shit. I bring these two lists out almost any time a business wants to talk about effectively competing in an industry.

Why?

Because nothing really matters if you do not figure out these two lists.

Why?

Going back to what I said earlier … advantages are temporary   and the other guys/gals you are competing against are as smart as you are. You don’t zig just for the sake of zigging <that is wasted organizational energy> and if you do have to take an unexpected move it is most typically a response to something in the situation <opportunity or threat>.

While we like to talk about zigging and zagging the reality comes back to the highway. You have to move forward and keep moving forward <or get run over>. The only zigging anyone should ever talk about is either moving into another lane to pass someone or another lane to let someone pass you or change lanes to avoid a crash.

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

“Desperation is the raw material of drastic change.

Only those who can leave behind everything they have ever believed in can hope to escape.

William S. Burroughs

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

Unexpected moves just to do something unexpected is stupid.

It is in the same category as change for change sake.

It is in the same category as zigging when they zag.

Now.

Unexpected moves made in the search for something incredible waiting to be known <some desired destination>? Well. That isn’t stupid.

===========

“Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known.”

Carl Sagan

===========

Unexpected moves made to survive on the competition highway? That isn’t stupid.

Unexpected moves made to veer through a window of opportunity that arises? That isn’t stupid.

But zig when they zag? C’mon. That’s just stupid.

It is stupid because more likely than not it just means you will have not left the competition behind, but rather just left the competition.

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

“I eventually came to understand that in harboring the anger, the bitterness and resentment towards those that had hurt me, I was giving the reins of control over to them.”

Isabel Lopez

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

“Beware of those who are bitter, for they will never allow you to enjoy your fruit.”

Suzy Kassem

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

Well. Spite and resentment is one of the least discussed business ailments in the business world. What I mean is that businesses around the world <including the good ole USofA> are strewn with middle management and upper management who carry around a full backpack of resentment. This backpack has a nifty well designed logo on it — victim.

I would imagine <this is a guess> that this significant sprinkling of people in the business world carrying around the resentment of being victimized in some form or fashion do not hold the most senior spots, but rather they hold the responsibilities most dangerous to the overall health of an organization – middle management.

They are most likely not at the top because those people got the positions they deserve.

** note: while a significant amount of less-than-competent people, mostly men, get promoted into senior positions the majority of senior people do have significant skills

The ones who carry resentment are the ones who have been promoted “too slowly” or maybe haven’t been “recognized for the talents they offer” or maybe have been passed over by “someone who doesn’t know half the shit I know” and then, to their satisfaction, they have FINALLY been promoted. They take the step up, but before they do, stop at the bottom of the stairs to pick up their backpack of resentment and then accept the step up.

I often think of this as the ugly underbelly of ‘entitled’ or “finally getting what one deserves.” This is … uhm … in other words, resentment. And resentment carries a nasty quiver of grievance arrows to shoot when given the opportunity.

And grievances have a nasty habit of being one of those things that like to be addressed and not ignored.

Now. Some people confuse this with “carrying a chip on their shoulder” which is what got them to where they are today.

That’s bullshit.

People mistakenly conflate “carrying a chip on their shoulder” with ambition.

It’s not as simple as that. In fact that simplistic ‘go about business like they have a chip on their shoulder’ is actually just a lazy attitude toward motivation.

It is more often than not some self-created ‘boogieman’ someone has created in their mind in order to go out and be your best. It’s faux extrinsic motivation rather than intrinsic and it’s bullshit. If that’s all you have for motivation, well, that’s just not good <for you and the people you work with>.

Yes. In small doses a ‘chip on your shoulder’ can give you some well needed nudges to “I will show them” attitude at some key moments.

No. Large doses, or constant, “conducting myself with a chip on my shoulder” attitude simply makes you an asshole.

You become an asshole because this 100% chip on shoulder attitude actually makes hate, in some form or fashion, the energy to drive everything – it creates an outsized sense of grievance which you bring with you wherever you go. This grievance not only seems to pour from every pore in this person, but also seems to appear every time this person makes a decision <if not in the words they say>.

Yeah.

The resentment people can be crafty.

Crafty in that they justify their behavior not just based on their outsized chip, but more often that they are standing up for all who have been overlooked and begrudged of what they were entitled to by some unfair system or ‘cadre of assholes driven to let mediocrity thrive.’

It’s bullshit and it’s another version of us versus them, but with a total selfish foundation.

In addition. If they are good at masking their resentment, each decision, taken as mutually exclusive of all other decisions, can maybe be explained as a ‘personal issue being addressed’ or sometimes even simply an impulsive instinctual decision.

That’s bullshit too.

I am not suggesting all employees burdened by an unhealthy weight of resentment are actually bad managers and business people <in a pragmatic competent sense>, but they do have a nasty tendency to have built this façade of some “personal brand” which they have honed over time as they have been ignored & overlooked so much so that all decisions and choices get instinctually filtered through this personal brand filter.

Nothing is impulsive, nothing is “resentment driven” and nothing is “addressing a grievance”, it is all simply driven by the personal brand, i.e., I am what I am because of who I am.

What makes this behavior confusing to people <in terms of trying to discern motivations and the sense that there is an unhealthy amount of resentment incorporated into the management style> is that there is no long term strategy, it just assumes that all transactions meet the brand therefore, in the long run, it is good.

Exceeding expectations is defined in a transaction by transaction basis and weapons used to meet expectations <responsibilities> are justified as means to an end. In other words these managers can screw anyone they want professionally, but if within that specific project, assignment or transaction the greater organizational expectations are met or exceeded … well … this manager has “won.”

Oddly this behavior creates an odd sense of consistency … & inconsistency.

It can often appear inconsistent in that the actions, behavior & decisions are not particularly driven by any business philosophy or ideology or even based on what is right or wrong.  This drives the appearance of inconsistency.

The consistency is grounded on vindictiveness. This doesn’t mean any and all actions are vindictive just that if the opportunity arises to address some self-defined grievance and the window of opportunity to be vindictive opens this person will jump through that window.

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

“I must fight with my weapons. Not his. Not selfishness and brutality and shame and resentment.”

John Fowles

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

Here is the problem with all that I have shared today.

Resentment is part of the devilish trinity of bad shit in a business environment – fear, anger, resentment.

All the yesterdays make this person angry and humiliated and, frankly, they feel like they have been taken advantage of. It creates a negative emotional foundation from which all behavior and actions are leveraged from.

I could argue that this is a cultural thing. Something like a “culture of entitlement” in which people feel like they are promised promotions & money simply because they work hard.

I will not.

This is an individual issue.

Individuals are responsible and complicit in this attitude and behavior – culture does not force them to do anything and think anything on this issue.

I could argue that this is some version of culture encouraging a larger sense of victimhood.

I will not.

This is an individual issue.

It is not victimhood if you shoulder your own responsibilities and are ‘punished’ if the chips do not fall your way.

I could argue that thus is some warped version of culture encouraging unrealistic expectations.

I will not.

This is an individual issue.

Expectations are defined personally, society and culture doesn’t tell you what to expect, You craft that expectation all by your lonesome. And, I have news for everyone, while Life & business can be pretty cruel and unfair, in general, those who have ability and work hard do not typically get overlooked or left behind. Hate to tell the “resentful managers”, but I feel pretty confident suggesting that as a basic business truth.

The only thing I will argue is that someone who has a big backpack of resentment should never be a leader.

Why?

Anger today.

Resentment of yesterday.

Fear of tomorrow.

That is the trio of partners in crime in this sad story. I have to tell you. I am fairly sure no business wants those three sitting in any one office every day in their business.  And I am absolutely sure these are not qualifications one seeks in a new employee.

Beware the bearers of resentment in business.

===

“All men dream: but not equally.

Those who dream in the dark recesses of the night awake in the day to find all was vanity.

But the dreamers of day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, and make it possible.”

T.E. Lawrence

—

“The universe is full of magical things patiently waiting for our wits to grow sharper.”

Eden Phillpotts

———–

“On stormy nights they both dreamt intensively, violently – they often drowned.”

Ellen Van Neerven

————–

Ok. This is about dreaming & doing.

Let me be clear.

Discussing dreaming is fun, challenging & tricky. It can very easily fall into a ‘wasted unpragmatic use of energy & brain’ discussion. My preference is to discuss dreams as  ‘aspirational thinking.’

I associate this kind of dreaming with hope and doing.

Now. On the other end sometimes dreaming can be associated with ‘big thinker.’

Well. I dislike it when I hear ‘visionary thinker’ or ‘good at the big picture’ because most often, attached to it, is an implied ‘not a doer.’ This kind of thinking has a couple of nasty aspects. The first is that of someone thinks big they don’t like doing things. The second is that if you are a big thinker you can’t be good at doing.  Both are wrong and, well, bad for the dreaming business. The reality is we seem to encourage thinkers to think, and not do. and doers to do, and not think big. we seem to do this, well, I don’t know why we do this.

Look.

I love it when people realize that dreaming without doing is not worth a shit.

I love it when people realize that doing without fulfilling a dream makes you feel like shit.

I love it when people realize that the combination of being as ‘aspirational thinker’ <dreamer> and effective doer is the most powerful combination in the world.

I love it when people realize that having an undefined future is okay <but that doesn’t mean you are not doing something worthwhile or dreaming is bad>. 

————-

“I daydream because my future is still undefined.”

williamchapmanwritings

————-

I love the thought that the universe truly is full of magical things patiently waiting for our wits to grow sharper.

I love the thought that dreaming is a way for our wits to grow sharper.

I love the thought that dreamers of day are dangerous men … for they may act their dreams with open eyes, and make it possible.

Suffice it to say, I love dreaming … and I love doing. But I do believe doing, without dreaming, is a lost opportunity. I say that because I believe dreaming can change the world and the future. It shapes possibilities for what can be, and should be, done.

To be clear.

Not all dreaming is equal.

But all dreaming has value because, at its essence, dreaming can destroy reality.

Well. At least change a reality that may need changing.

——

“Reality can destroy the dream; why shouldn’t the dream destroy reality?”

George Moore

———

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

Stanislaw Lem

———-

Many people may not like to hear this, but, it really is the dreamers that change the world not the doers. This may be a ‘chicken or egg’ type discussion, but in my mind:

(1) doing is a commodity. it can be a quality commodity when executed well, but, doing without dreams is simply doing.

(2) dreamers envision the impossible and everyone else follows behind making it possible. dreams make the doing have non-commodity value.

But someone has to envision.

That is the dreamers.

Anyway.

Bottom line?

Dream.

Just go ahead and dream.

And maybe, just maybe, you will change the world.

====

====

“I am not afraid of my truth anymore and I will not omit pieces of me to make you comfortable.”

—

Alex Elle

===

So. Being yourself is a tricky topic. In business, Life & deciding what you want to do.

I know <I know>.

Seems like “being yourself” should be simple. Like ‘breathing’ type simple.

But it’s not. It’s not because there is a constant struggle between an internal part <’who am I’ type shit> and external <figuring out how ‘who am I’ should actually act in public>.

For example, one of my favorite young writers, Jamie, describes herself this way:

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

I’m a writer, pretty much by process of elimination. I am also a professional aspirationalist.

That’s not a word, but I’ve made it into one, since there was nothing that could quite describe me because I didn’t want to say I’m a “professional dreamer” because that sounds like some hippie shit.

I have aspirations, like, lots of them. If you’d like me to create a TV show, get in touch with me. How about publishing my memoir? Get in touch. If you are from The Ellen Show, I will, of course, accept your interview and would be delighted to dance it out with my girl, so long as she doesn’t prank me by making me eat cilantro. In fact, I want no cilantro in anything.

<Jamie Varon>

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

Professional aspirationalist. Not ‘professional dreamer’ nor ‘professional pragmatist.’

Ok.

Professional aspirationalist is just awesome.

If I could ever vote for a new term, that would be it. It’s fucking awesome. It captures the essence of restlessness & hope & striving & unlearning &, well, all the things I believe are good and healthy with a person seeking to be better tomorrow than they are today.

What I truly love about it is that she came up with a term to capture her “self.” I love it because being yourself, and even recognizing who ‘yourself’ is, is hard. And when I say hard think even harder than maybe becoming a Navy Seal type hard.

……….. self …….. an entanglement of nuances ………….

It is incredibly hard because the truth is that ‘my truth’ , more often than not, is most likely an evolving tangled web of characteristics which, as it evolves, simply becomes more tangled <rather than untangled>.

Yourself is constantly adapting to new learning, new learning about things and new learning, and unlearning <changed beliefs, opinions, attitudes, perspectives>, about oneself.

That’s why I love professional aspirationalist.

True north on Jamie’s compass is defined. And its not a destination, but rather it is a direction.

Aspirationalist is a moving target. It is restless and unmoving at exactly the same time. It is an adventurer with some pragmatism. It’s not being on Ellen <although she would be delighted to do so> because once that happens there will always be something else.

Being an aspirationalist means not only having dreams, but dreaming … oh … and doing.

Yeah.

Doing. As in doing lots of different shit.

Uh oh.

That also means … well … increasingly more and different dreams <and aspirations>. And increasingly doing more and different shit. Dreaming and doing. Lots of different dreaming and doing.

In the end <to me> being a professional aspirationalist means being a restless soul. Restlessly seeking, traveling, doing, thinking. Professionally constantly in motion <mentally or physically>.

I love it because it captures my personal belief that becoming ‘better’ as a person is experiential rather than tangible <although tangible ‘doing stuff’ is certainly a component>.

I love it because it isn’t for the faint of heart.

And isn’t what truly being yourself is all about? Having some courage to even suggest ‘I will not omit things just to make you comfortable.’

Professional aspirationalist reminded me of this other quote:

 ==

“I am a world that cannot be explored in one day. I am not a place for cowards.”

Caitlyn Siehl

==

Yes.

Being a professional aspirationalist means you are not a place for cowards.

Anyway.

I wish I had come up with this word, but I am not as talented a writer as Jamie.

I like it for its sense of Life’s paradox. Paradox in that it is independent and dependent at the same time.

I like it for it’s sense of Business’s paradox. Paradox in that success in business is a combination of stillness, at the right times, and movement/restlessness at all times.

I like it because at its core it doesn’t mean shunning the world and simply being a dreamer. It has rich & royal hues of reality threading its way through its fabric.

I would like to believe I am also a professional aspirationalist.

Now.

To be clear <because Jamie is correct the word selection was thoughtful to avoid the ‘hippie shit’>. Pragmatically, we aspirationalists do seek <some> approval and acceptance <ohhhhhhhhhhhh shit>.

Accept what I just wrote <that last sentence>. Don’t fight it <even if you are one of those who say ‘I don’t give a fuck what anyone thinks”>.

Because you do care.

Whether you like it or not, whether you think it is right or wrong, whether you think it is a good thing or bad in that it makes you ‘weak’ in some way, just get it set in your head – in some form or fashion – we care.

Don’t worry … we all care <not just aspirationalists>. We all care what the people around us think about us. And by ‘people’ I mean everyone from those closest to you <who would most likely accept you in any shape and form you ended up in … but you don’t want to disappoint them> to society overall <there is some value in gaining credit for who you are and what you do>.

Some acceptance from others feeds our self-esteem & self-worth <and all that Maslow stuff>.

Ah.

Please note I used the word “feeds.” Approval and acceptance is not the only nutrition necessary for a healthy esteem and worth.

It is simply one part of the diet.

Even we aspirationalists need a balanced ‘self diet’. We do not seek sole value from proving ourselves to others. And we don’t accept sole value in and of ourselves.

Being an aspirationalist is … well … the paradox. Independent dreamer with some dependence on external cues as to the value of our aspirations.

We want to fit into the world on our own terms.

Regardless.

What a description:

                       Professional aspirationalist:      I am not afraid of my truth anymore and I will not omit pieces of me to make you comfortable. I am a world that cannot be explored in one day. I am not a place for cowards.

We need more of these people in our world — in Life & in business.

Me? I will continue living life, trying to do good shit in Life & business, as a Professional Aspirationalist.

source: Zach Mercurio

———-

“Books are not made to be believed, but to be subjected to inquiry. When we consider a book, we mustn’t ask ourselves what it says but what it means.”

Umberto Eco, The Name of the Rose

—–

“Treat all of your secondary characters like they think the book is about them.”

Jocelyn Hughes

——–

Purpose, to me, is an intrinsic energy and the moment someone, a business or a person, makes it an extrinsic objective/vision/”Why” I believe they have stepped on the slippery slope downwards to hollow, or hollowing, of behavior. What I mean by ‘hollow’ is as soon as Purpose becomes an extrinsic goal it encourages some aspect of ‘blindness’. It can be ethical blindness (which may seem weird to say assuming Purpose is good, but as Ann Tenbrunsel, Professor of Business Ethics says in this podcast, Overcoming our Ethical Blindspots , often the most altruistic organization can have the most ethically dubious behavior. It can simply be objective blindness (which all business deals with). It can just be an overall blindness toward a myriad of details under the guise of some laudable ‘purpose.’

That said.

In general, I wish all business people would put down the Purpose crack pipe and take a deep breath.

Purpose is an outcome, not an objective.

Purpose is certainly a higher order undertaking, but tying it specifically to business results is not only misguided but a dubious undertaking (Richard Shotton’s chapter in The Choice Factory is an excellent stripping of the Stengel Purpose argument).

Which leads me to books. Let’s say you are interested in business and Purpose and do not want to pay gobs of your hard earned money on some bullshit. Maybe start here. It’s Not What You Sell, It’s What You Stand For: Why Every Extraordinary Business Is Driven by Purpose by Roy M. Spence Jr. and Haley Rushing.

I have noted several times I don’t particularly like reading business books. And then you run across one like this one and it renews your faith in perusing the business book section seeking something to read. This book is chockfull of interesting anecdotes and sound bites. This book was written in 2009 and even by then the premise of ‘purpose driven’ had been talked about for years (don’t buy into the bs that it is some ‘new found soul of business’), but Roy Spence offers a really nice more pragmatic articulation. Much much better, more pragmatic, than Sinek’s “Why.”

Anyway. While I believe every business owner should read this (I believe it should be mandatory reading for every business class in universities) I hope that readers take to heart the individual message. The message that if you, as a person, can get a grip on the idea of individual purpose that you can truly live an extraordinary life. This is a good book. It communicates some great messages and gives you some excellent behind the scenes stories which are just plain fun to know about.

This next book may seem odd in talking about Purpose, but let me explain. The book is Technique for Producing Ideas by James Webb Young. This book (which was written in 1937 for advertising people) is relevant to anyone’s work. This little book is one of the simplest summaries of commonsense—and articulating common sense is this book’s greatest virtue. The book lays out a five-step process for generating novel and not-so-novel ideas, articulating them so that you can put to them to immediate use. It is a powerful guide for gathering information, stimulating imagination, and recombining old elements into meaningful new ideas. It is so simple you wonder why so many consultants make it so much more difficult. But the real point in bringing this up with regard to Purpose is ‘perspective.’ Purpose is all about having, and understanding, perspective and “we” not ‘me’. “How to Produce Ideas” may sound like its about ideas, but its not. its about social dynamics and understanding where you are in perspective to others and other things. I would argue, as does Zach Mercurio, you don’t ‘find your

source: Zach Mercurio

‘purpose’ it is simply there for you to see it.

 ** note: Zach’s book, The Invisible Leader, is actually one of the books specifically written about Purpose worth reading.

Anyway. “How to Produce Ideas” is about seeing and once you see than you, well, see how you can fit in and assist in the progress of things.

Beyond those books I would much prefer business people hunker down on Vision, Mission, Strategy & Tactics rather than Purpose.

Look. Let me try this as an explanation.

We often talk about IoT (internet of things). Internet of Things is about connectivity and platforms for making things happen and lifting all. Maybe we should be speaking of PoT – Purpose of Things. Look at Purpose as structural lift. If you just go about doing things to lift things, well, you have Purpose. You will have contributed. You will have meaning. This doesn’t have to be complicated or complex, simply try in each one of your 30,000 daily decisions to attempt to provide some ‘lift’. Lift the process, lift the system, lift the task, lift the moment and maybe even lift a person.

In the end.

I often find myself in an uncomfortable position. Uncomfortable in that I do not believe Purpose will ever be found by reading a book, but reading books will help you better understand Purpose. So maybe I end with where I began. Reading, with regard to Purpose, should be viewed as an intrinsic task, not an extrinsic – objective seeking – task. The more you read this way the more likely you will intrinsically embrace purposeful living. So don’t pick up book about Purpose, pick up books and read meaningful stories. I promise you that if you can find a meaningful story, somewhere within that story will be a person who purposefully did something that mattered – and it mattered.

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

“A ship in harbor is safe, but that’s not what ships are for.”

John Shedd

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

“The arc of the moral universe is long but it bends toward justice.”

MLK

===

 The arc of history is irrelevant to most of us. Ok. Maybe better said is that we are relatively indifferent to the arc of history.

Most of us get up, drink our coffee and get going doing what we need to do that day. In doing so we cannot see any fucking arc, we just see what is in front of us. The arc can only vaguely be seen when we look at the news or talk with friends or maybe see some high falutin’ presentation on trends that supposedly impact our business in terms of sales and shit like that.

And we wonder why the world can seem so cold sometimes? Geez. That is our view for the most part. It is our daily grind (responsibilities) interspersed with some outside news filtering in for some perspective.

I would suggest any arc seems like it can almost be a straight line rather than any arc we can see. It can sometimes seem like a straight line of no change, or, a lot of bad shit with small drops of good shit mixed in.

But that’s not reality. The reality is that time and … well … our lives … do arc.

Just like when you are a ship in a harbor thinking about leaving the horizon looks flat and finite. And, yet, once you leave the harbor you realize that the horizon was simply a reflection of where you were and where you stood and that the reality was the world, the universe, arcs and bends to things you could not see from where you once stood.

Yeah. Sometimes that is hard to see.

Yeah. Sometimes we don’t have any time to think about it.

Yeah. But we should … at least on occasion. Because the arc occurs whether we see it or not. You have to be able to figure out how to get done whatever has to be done or the arc will show you what has to be done <or at least the context within which you will make your choices of what you will do>.

Look. I buy the fact that the arc of time bends toward justice. But I think it neglects to point out that people inevitably define the arc. It neglects to point out justice, or ‘good’, is not simply part of the ether, but resides in the hearts & minds of people. Well. What that means is the arc resides within us. All of us. Not just someone standing up in front of us trying to tell us what the arc is or should be.

I sometimes think we mistaken society, a country or a civilization is like a big tanker and we hire someone or elect some to jump onto the bridge of the ship and lead it out of the harbor. That is not so. You would be mistaken to think that. Each one of us is a little ship. We are a fleet of a variety of ships, boats and scows restlessly bobbing in the harbor from which we can actually leave or stay as we wish.

When we hire a leader, or elect someone, we – we little fleet of ships – are actually seeking a flagship. Someone who dares to leave the harbor and lead us over the arc of the horizon. Lead us beyond the current routes we take, lead us beyond the fishing grounds we have always used and lead us to new lands that maybe we had only heard of before.

But. We, we little fleet of ships, also control the voyages because within the hearts & minds of each of the captains resides justice and what is good & right and decide to follow, float or seek freedom.

Therefore we control the arc and bend of justice. No leader does.

I will suggest, consciously or subconsciousnessly, people tend to follow, or guide, based on justice therefore the arc will bend — sometimes too slowly — toward the goodness which resides in humankind. Just like a ship in harbor looking out from a harbor that goodness can sometimes be difficult to see when looking at the horizon but, I can guarantee this, if you leave the harbor it is easier to see.

=====

“Even if I knew that tomorrow the world would go to pieces, I would still plant my apple tree.”

Martin Luther King, Jr.

=====

We like to think of good as solid, 100% defensible and, maybe most importantly in today’s thought, 100% recognizable. We would be wrong to think that way. Good is often nuanced with some subtle distinctions in practice. Good intentions can be perfect, but doing good is more often than embraced by not 100% good people (imperfect people) and actions are not always 100% right (imperfect implementation).

Which leads me to Martin Luther King. He was an imperfect man with a perfect vision for civil rights and humanity. He fought for what is good, and right, nonperfectly but with perfect intentions.

First. While MLK is tied very tightly to the rights of African Americans, I believe he would like to also be noted for his leadership on civil rights – for all. In today’s terms, he held Black Lives Matter in one upraised hand and All Lives Matter in the other. It is a fact he stood tall against persecution of any person regardless of color of skin or ethnicity. Personally, I believe had he lived he was destined for UN ambassador or even UN Secretary General fighting for freedom of choice everywhere.

Second. MLK day is a day celebrated in the US and is a special day to African Americans. I too celebrate the day and the memory of everything MLK fought for and the fight still going on today. I believe no white person can ever truly understand the depth of the persecution African Americans faced and what MLK stands for. Maybe I am naïve, but I just don’t think it possible.

To that last point. There is a fantastic episode of Boston Public which took this issue head on (whether white people have the right to discuss the “N” word and slavery). And while every bone in my body strains to have the depth of understanding and I am (or at least believe and hope I am) openminded as any white person could be, I don’t think it’s possible to truly understand unless you are an African American.

Oh.

And I believe white people who claim to understand are naïve.

That does not mean I won’t try and better myself nor try every time I can to get closer to understanding every chance I get. That doesn’t mean that on MLK Day maybe everyone should at least attempt to.

Let us turn our thoughts today
To martin luther king

So. With all that said. I would like to leave this post with some of the words of “Shed a Little Light” a wonderful song written by James Taylor and a clip of Aimee Mann performing it pulled from a West Wing Episode.

Let us turn our thoughts today
To martin luther king
And recognize that there are ties between us
All men and women
Living on the earth
Ties of hope and love
Sister and brotherhood
That we are bound together
In our desire to see the world become
A place in which our children
Can grow free and strong
We are bound together
By the task that stands before us
And the road that lies ahead
We are bound and we are bound

“We are bound together, by the task that stands before us, and the road that lies ahead.” Imperfect people bound together trying to do what is good and right. In our imperfection, even our versions of ‘good’ imperfect, we will attempt to forge the perfect path forward. And in doing so, maybe we will achieve the vision of an imperfect man trying to do good.

“Why am I grown Old in seeking so barren a Reward as Fame?

The same Parts and Application, which have made me a Poet, might have rais’d me to any Honours of the Gown, which are often given to Men of as little Learning and less Honesty than myself.”

=

John Dryden

——-

“I feel like I’ve swallowed a cloudy sky.”

Haruki Murakami

Fame.

Fame is an appealing concept to almost everyone. Hear me out. Even if you are one of those people who say “I don’t want to be famous”, you actually do.  Yup. Maybe not ‘red carpet’ famous, but instead maybe if but for one minute ‘noticed by many’ famous.

At the crux of this mental battle we all have is: at what price would we pay for it … this ‘fame’? What price would we pay even for a sliver of fame?

Would you pay anything for “so barren a reward as fame” as John Dryden characterized it? What is the exchange you are willing to make?

Which leads me to selfies, instagram, pinterest, tumblr, Tiktok … pick one.

In technology’s world of the web we are not seeking our 15 minutes of fame, but our 15 seconds of fame with two paths lying ahead:

<a> hoping it will either turn into 15 days of fame as it gets reposted & discussed & editorialized, or

<b> hoping it turns into nothing … as it is embarrassing in reflection.

Therein lies the challenge of gaining fame … even a sliver.

Anyway. I have a theory about fame. Ok. I actually have two theories.

To be clear, these theories, theorems, postulates, whatever you would like to deem whatever glimpse of brilliance or absurdity within what I share, its my own with no research; just looking around at people and having listened & watched probably a million through my professional career.

First thought.

Genes. Chrissie Hynde <Pretenders lead singer> said this once:

“As far as success goes, I’ve never really got too excited about losing or winning. I don’t have whatever the gene is you need for that. Whatever the gene John McEnroe has, I don’t have that.

I don’t care.”

Some people don’t simply crave fame. It is part of their DNA. It is in their genes. I say this because far too many of us <myself included> mock the fame seekers as narcissistic or shallow or, well, pick your poison, but, the reality is that they simply have a gene we do not.

This doesn’t mean I have to find it likable. It simply means I need to recognize that not everyone is the same. And it also means we need to step back and recognize that fame can be used for good or for bad and that fame, while sought, is rarely controlled by the ‘soughter.’

Second thought.

My sense is that to most of us every day schmucks that the whole concept of fame is simply a means to an end, i.e., a vague concept that really has to do with esteem and self worth.

What?

Yeah.

I tend to believe most of us don’t really want the spotlight for life. We simply want to know that we are worth a shit.

That we are good at something.

Conversely, we fear be mediocre. Ok. Let me clarify. We fear being 100% mediocre and that fear affects how we view ourselves.

Looking at ourselves internally and looking at our selves externally seem to rarely match. We are either inflated with regard to ourselves or we have some deflated view of ourselves.

Neither is good.

“All I ever asked of life was that it should pass me by without my even noticing it.”

Fernando Pessoa

This is where that 15 seconds, or 15 minutes, of fame steps in. A spotlight shows us, even for a glimpse in time, some reality.

Something, well, good.

That we are actually good at something.

That people recognize it.

And that moment is it.

It’s enough.

Most of us don’t desire more than that. Just the validation is enough. We can step back into our lives content and continue the grind. Even if we continue the grind with a slightly livelier step knowing that somewhere someone valued us and our contribution.

And, yes, I am unequivocally discussing fame.

Not the smile of a child, the nuzzling from your dog, or even some very personal soulful evaluation and endorsement of your behavior which can provide valuable value affirmation, but differently than fame.

I am discussing fame as is in the harshest glimpse of society and life.

The unhesitating judgment of a cold and often brutal world. Unbiased personally you know when you walk away you weren’t cheated in judgment.

And in that judgment you were noticed and passed judgment.

“Everyone deserves a standing ovation at least once in their life because we all overcometh the world.”

R. J. Palacio

To be clear. The corrolary to what i just shared is your flaws, mistakes, misjudgements, also can get scritinized in the spotlight. Hence my opening where I offered an A path and a B path. Wander into the spotlight at your own risk.

That said. Fame, using Dryden’s language, it is most often not found in “the torrent of the people” or “the riot of a multitude.” Fame is most often found in a moment where the price is nothing more than facing our insecurities on whether we are good enough.

And, in that moment, the fame pendulum can swing far one way or the other.

We are not good enough.

And the world stands and stares.

We are good enough.

And the world stands and stares.

Simplistically, therein lies the price of fame.

The fact you will find out whether you are good enough. And maybe that’s why we all seek some version of fame at some point. Maybe we all really do want to know the truth; harsh or not. Maybe, just maybe, that is what fame, to the non-egotistical, is really about.

Because attaining a rich reward, or, so barren a reward, is a reward nonetheless.

==========

“We all have one foot in a fairytale, and the other in the abyss.”

—–

Paulo Coelho

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

My anger at the world coils inside of me. It’s a directionless seething, there’s no name or face to aim at.”

————–

Claire Zorn

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

Well. Life demands us to draw a lot of lines.

And more often than we would like to admit it demands we place one foot on one side of a line and the other foot on the other side of the line.

That may not sound … well … right.

Or maybe the best thing to do.

It may even sound like I am suggesting you ‘straddle the fence.’

Nope. This isn’t straddling, this is about being grounded or balancing oneself.

Balancing? If you don’t place one foot solidly on either side, you can be quite easily consumed by the extremes of Life which are, more often than not, found on only one side of a line.

If you don’t place one foot solidly on either side, you can be quite easily consumed by others who seek to consume what you may think you don’t really care that much about <but you should … and actually do when you care to think about it enough>.

If you don’t, you can be quite easily consumed.

I guess what I am saying is that Life demands you pragmatically be active in drawing some lines so that you have some sense of when you are getting too, well, “too”. It helps if you can have some sense of where to actually place your feet that is meaningful.

Maybe what I am saying is that many of us have no problem ‘making a stand’, but if you really aren’t sure where your line is then it is quite possible you aren’t really sure you are taking your stand in the right place.

Okay.

Maybe think of it this way.

It’s kind of like making sure you have things in perspective when you take a stand.

It’s kind of like demanding realistic hope.

It’s kind of like demanding some hopeful despair.

It’s kind of like demanding you believe in some fairytales and some abyss-like darkness.

It’s kind of like demanding lines for yourself so you can deal with the lines Life is going to demand of you.

Look.

I don’t really believe there are angry-only people. They just have so much anger within themselves that their line is drawn differently than others.

I don’t really believe there are dreamer-only people. They just have so much imagination within themselves that their line is drawn differently than others.

But here’s the deal.

You have to draw some lines.

There has to be some reality to ground some imagination.

There has to be some truth to ground some questioning.

There has to be some principles to ground some rebelliousness.

There has to be some fairytaleishness <I made up that word> to balance out some of the inevitable abyss.

You do have to have one foot somewhere other than where your other foot resides.

I know.

I know.

That sounds a little of whack from conventional wisdom because far more often you hear “both feet on the ground” and shit like that. But if you have two feet on the line … well … you have chosen to stand on a thin balance beam and will teeter your entire life. That is tiring & dangerous. But if you have two feet, one on each side, you have chosen a life of fairytales AND a life in the abyss.

All that said.

Yes.

There are times you draw a line and make a choice to shift both feet solidly onto one side. I would suggest this is a situational decision and not a “living Life” type decision. Situational like:

That is right and that is wrong.

That is good and that is bad.

That is normal and that is not normal.

Those are most likely the moments in which Life says “now, in this time and place, here is the line … on which side to you choose to stand?”

I would suggest sometimes we fuck this up by confusing a ‘Life one foot here & one foot there’ decision and a contextual situational decision. What I mean is that in that time and place you may try and keep your fairy tale foot in place and your abyss foot in place … and mistakenly take on a different type of decision demanding a different type of line.

That would be a bad decision.

The good decision?

In that time. in that place. In that moment. You shift your feet.

Sigh.

I never suggested lines were easy. Just that Life demands we draw a lot of lines. I would suggest that if you do not draw some lines you will find yourself lost in anger coiled within, or maybe constantly living a less than fairy tale life dreaming it all away, or stuck in some dark abyss seeing no way out.

Yeah … lines come in pretty handy at times. Pretty handy in managing Life. I can tell you <for sure> that lines can be pretty handy at helping you decide when something should end … and something should start.