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

“It’s a most distressing affliction to have a sentimental heart and a skeptical mind.”

Naguib Mahfouz

 =============

“It is lack of confidence, more than anything else, that kills a civilisation. We can destroy ourselves by cynicism and disillusion, just as effectively as by bombs.”

Kenneth Clark

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

Well. I sometimes believe we confuse lack of confidence and skepticism.

Yes. I am sure they are aspects of the same thought <on occasion> but suffice it to say whenever you are skeptical with regard to something about, or for, yourself … someone will contritely suggest you are simply lacking confidence.

Look. There is no ‘how to live Life’ handbook. Most of the time we do the best we can as we make it up as we go. And, yes, I am fairly confident all of us sit back at some time or another and say ‘what if we don’t know what we are doing.’

What that typically translates into is a life in which we constantly get tugged one way by optimism or hope and the other by skepticism. In other words skepticism slows you down — sometimes even strong enough to stop you.

Having skepticism as an acquaintance isn’t necessarily a bad person to have in your circle of acquaintances. It will give you the reasonable caution to consider a little before oblivious optimism grabs your hand and pulls you off of some overly optimistic ledge. But having skepticism as a so-called ‘friend’ is a bad person to have close to you. Its nagging presence insures you always feel like you truly have no idea what you, personally, are doing. It makes that hesitation personal. And it makes you forget that everyone doesn’t know what they are doing and making it up as they go and doing the best that they can.

Life is bigger than just us and while we are individuals and unique in our character we all pretty much share the same rules and challenges in Life.

Skepticism is personal.

It pulls you out of the bigger ‘us’ and makes you a smaller ‘us.’

I thought about this when I found this teen written letter written to herself written to her so called friend ‘skepticism’:

Dear Skepticism,

Oh, why must you infect my brain with your contagious thoughts? You are not content to let me simply accept, you find any way to twist my beliefs into doubts. When I am truly happy, you shatter the illusion and show me exactly why my life is nothing to be pleased about. Mirroring me, images of success and loneliness, you know how to get under my skin. Skepticism, you know my inner self more so than any other, thus you know which strings to pull. I am your marionette, controlled by your twisted intentions. Push and pull the words in my mind, formulate sharp sentences designed to drawn blood from my fragile humanity. The way I hurt others, is multiplied in the way I myself am torn apart.

 

In this distance, in this loneliness, skepticism welcomes itself to my chemically dyed head, taking it’s place amongst longing and deep hurt. Underneath the surface intelligence, beneath the mathematical formulas and psychology terms, is my fragility. This I admit, not much effects me, except my own carefully targeted words. Why would I allow myself to feel pain at the words of others, when my own mind is so much capable? My inner demons are muted when I am amongst others, when I am laughing with my best friend or in the arms of my boyfriend, but in silence they scream demented tones. “Why would anyone love you?” They taunt me, pulling at my weaknesses. “You really think you have anything going for you besides your intelligence?” They laugh at my naivety. “If you were worth something, to anyone, would your phone really be so silent?” They say the things I do not want to hear. They speak the truths I try to forget.

Skepticism, please take leave and allow me some peace of mind. A good night’s sleep would be beneficial, I am sick of this restlessness. The distance itself is enough, I do not need your constant reminders of what it might mean. I know you find pleasure in twisting at the corners of my mind, but please fuck off. I do not need the constant doubts you provide me with. This weekend has given you sufficient time to point out exactly how I feel, I get it. Skepticism, I know you only want to protect me, but it’s much too late for that. I am old enough to make my own mistakes and hold my own beliefs so please, fuck off.  I am done with you telling me who does not care about me. You are not a good friend, understand that I want nothing to do with you. You only bring me down.

Sincerely,

Gloria

Skepticism is sly. Even though we don’t really know what we are doing <in general> we do know something and yet actually doing it is something  very different. Therefore, skepticism sets limits for you <under the guise of protecting you>.

You know you should stop procrastinating.

You know you should be writing, or doing something to improve a skill, or practicing something, or decluttering.

You know you should … <insert whatever you know here>.

These are things you know.

You are skeptical of, well, whatever <success, effort, process, results, value … bla … bla … bla>.

In business they have something they call The Knowing-Doing Gap. Gobs of companies pay gobs of consultants gobs of money to increase their effectiveness and limit the knowing – doing gap. And after all the gobs of whatever, they know what to improve, but still don’t actually implement it.

Why can’t we put what we know to do … into actual doing? What stops us?

The answer is simple and difficult. Skepticism. Skepticism determines limits.

“Why do you, or they, or anyone get to determine my limits?”

Veronica Roth

All that said. It takes a teen to remind us how to deal with skepticism:

“dear skepticism … so please, fuck off.  I am done with you telling me who does not care about me. You are not a good friend, understand that I want nothing to do with you. You only bring me down.”

We may not know what we are doing. But most of the time we know what we should be doing.

We all have ‘heart’ and will always be afflicted with a skeptical mind.

But. My only advice.

Tell skepticism to fuck off and go do.

—-

 —————————-

“Every single one of us is good at something. Some of us just give up on what that is before we even discover it. “

=

William Chapman

—-
“I told her once i wasn’t good at anything.

She told me survival is a talent. You never need to apologize for how you chose to survive.”

=

Clementine von Radics

— 

“To paraphrase someone smarter than me, who still knows nothing, the philosophical task of our age is for each of us to decide what it means to be a successful human being.

I don’t know the answer to that, but I would like to find out.”

=

Ottmer <the futurist>

— 

Well. Let me begin by saying, well, being better is better.

Or better said: better is good.

In addition. Being good at something is good.

Those are two basic Life thoughts. Simple thoughts, but kind of important thoughts. Important because they are pervasive throughout civilization, culture, attitudes and certainly drives behavior.

Now. The most basic aspect of this whole thing of people wanting to be really good at something and, I imagine why people want to be passionate about something, is that they have experience with lack of passion. I say that last thought because <here is a Life truth> the reason why we’re not passionate about stuff we’re not really good at is because we aren’t <cannot be> passionate about stuff we suck at.

Yup. Think about that. Passion is inextricably tied to ‘not sucking’ <or ‘being good at’>.

Here is where it gets a little screwy. Being good at something is a minefield mentally.

Huh? What do you mean <you ask me>??

How many times have you heard some version of the following phrases?

• “Everyone has a special skill!“

• “You just need to practice!“

• “You haven’t tried everything yet!“

• “You better work out what special skill you have and then use it for the rest of your life because if you don’t you’ll live in a dumpster fighting with cats for food!“

That trite advice is fine for people who are good at things, but what if you just suck at everything?

<or at least have sucked at everything you have tried to date>

Well. Here is the good news. It is next to impossible to suck at everything. It is much more likely that “… some of us just give up on what that is before we even discover it.”

As a corollary, in reality, it’s impossible to be good at every single thing you try.

Oh. But that doesn’t necessarily mean you suck. It’s all about perspective and how you define whether you’re good at something. For instance, are you basing how bad you are at something on your own standards or are you comparing yourself to others? If it’s the latter then you need to stop and remind yourself that we are all individuals. You’re not inferior or inept, you’re just different <kind of like snowflakes … okay … maybe not>.

Suffice it to say that insecurities and doubts limit your potential <regardless of whether you suck or are actually good> so if you intend to succeed at something you must first get rid of them.

Ah. But here is the curve ball Life throws at you <or is it a screwball??> — while you are figuring out what you are good at a whole shit load of incompetent assholes around you are trying to convince everyone what they are good at <of which they are actually not good at what they think they are>.

Yup <part 1>.

Incompetent assholes rarely know they are <a> incompetent & <b> assholes.

Yup <part2>.

Incompetent people don’t know they are incompetent <in other words … they don’t think they suck>.

——

When asked, most individuals will describe themselves as better-than-average in areas such as leadership, social skills, written expression, or just about anything where the individual has an interest.

This tendency of the average person to believe he or she is better-than-average is known as the “above-average effect,” and it flies in the face of logic … by definition, descriptive statistics says that it is impossible absurdly improbable for a majority of people to be above average.

It follows, therefore, that a large number of the self-described “above average” individuals are in fact below average in those areas, and they are simply unaware of their incompetence.

——-

It seems that the reason for this phenomenon is obvious:

–      The more incompetent someone is in a particular area, the less qualified that person is to assess anyone’s skill in that space, including their own.

–      When one fails to recognize that he or she has performed poorly, the individual is left assuming that they have performed well.

Anyway. What this means is that the incompetent tend to grossly overestimate their skills and abilities.

—

“He felt he was himself and did not want to be otherwise. He only wanted to be better than he had been before. “

Leo Tolstoy

—

The Department of Psychology at Cornell University made an effort to determine just how profoundly one mistakenly overestimates one’s own skills in relation to one’s actual abilities.

They made the following predictions before the studies:

–       Incompetent individuals, compared with their more competent peers, will dramatically overestimate their ability and performance relative to objective criteria.

–       Incompetent individuals will suffer from deficient metacognitive skills, in that they will be less able than their more competent peers to recognize competence when they see it–be it their own or anyone else’s.

–      Incompetent individuals will be less able than their more competent peers to gain insight into their true level of performance by means of social comparison information. In particular, because of their difficulty recognizing competence in others, incompetent individuals will be unable to use information about the choices and performances of others to form more accurate impressions of their own ability.

Rather than showcase the study and the results let me just say … they were correct in their assumptions.

Look. While I have spent a lot of time talking about incompetence and the incompetent, there is nothing more beautiful than watching competence in action. Especially if they are just good, not great, and have the awareness to build on their good in pursuit of … well … not great … but something better.

—-

“No one is good at everything, but everyone is good at something.”

any after school 1990’s special

—-

“Sucking is the first step to being sorta good at something” 

Thorin Klosowski

—

And maybe that is why competence <or being good> is so beautiful to watch … it is the pursuit.

The pursuit? Being good at something mostly means you weren’t as good, or even sucked, at some point. This means the true competent people keep pushing.

Being good at something means no dumb questions, no dumb answers and no low <or stagnant> standards. And that is where I believe the whole concept of ‘being good at something’ should be grounded.

It’s not passion.

And, frankly, it may not even be something that comes easily to you.

It is more about holding yourself to some higher standard.

It is about the desire to keep pushing.

It is about being responsible for not quitting.

—-

“Hold yourself responsible for a higher standard than anybody else expects of you, never excuse yourself.”

Henry Ward Beecher

—–

In the end. Set aside ‘higher standards’ or ‘accepting you are good at something’ … in the end I respect … well … caring.

Giving a shit.

Or maybe call it … ‘nerdy as fuck about something.’

—-

“I respect people who get nerdy as fuck about something they love.”

Leah Raeder

——-

Caring enough about what you do is a good thing … and it makes you good at something.

It’s not passion.

It’s maybe not any real ability.

It’s just about the fact that you care.

By the way. Getting back to the first quote I used.

This also suggests, on those tough days and tough stretches in Life, simple survival is a talent because it means you care about Life.

Uhm. And that is a good thing to be good at.

Care about Life and never, never, apologize for how you choose to survive.

——-

“I’ve noticed something about people who make a difference in the world: They hold the unshakable conviction that individuals are extremely important, that every life matters.

They get excited over one smile.

They are willing to feed one stomach, educate one mind, and treat one wound.

They aren’t determined to revolutionize the world all at once; they’re satisfied with small changes. Over time, though, the small changes add up.   Sometimes they even transform cities and nations, and yes, the world.” 

= 

Beth Clar

——

This is about responding.

First. What does RSVP mean? In the context of social invitations RSVP is a request for a response from the invited person or people. It is derived from the French phrase répondez s’il vous plaît, meaning ‘please respond’ <”respond if you please”>.

Sticking with the formal aspect of an RSVP … there are some guidelines. 

———

If RSVP is written on an invitation it means the invited guest must tell the host whether or not they plan to attend the party.  It does not mean to respond only if you’re coming, and it does not mean respond only if you’re not coming (the expression “regrets only” is reserved for that instance).   It means the host needs to know who is going to attend, get a definite head count, the planned event … and needs it by the date specified on the invitation.

———–

Second. RSVP also has to do with Life, not just parties.

Think about it. Life, in many ways, says ‘please respond.’ My fear, and belief, is that many of us simply haven’t read the rules of etiquette and do not respond.

Look. I often write about how Life is difficult and how Life is tricky and how Life has a warped sense of humor.

But. Life can also be quite respectful and act with true etiquette and grace. I don’t mean big pomp and circumstance moments, but little moments in which doing the little things well matters. Uhm. Like an rsvp for example.

—–

“When you do something noble and beautiful and nobody notices, do not be sad. For the sun every morning is a beautiful spectacle and yet most of the audience still sleeps.”

John Lennon

—–

I sometimes worry people no longer understand what RSVP means. In social event scenarios as well as Life.

Assuming the best, and that the reason guests don’t RSVP to an invitation is a case of ignorance, not rudeness, let me suggest this.

People have a tendency to not respond because … well … it is safer.

Less chance of conflict. And it may seem like the easiest path but think about it from this quote’s perspective.

—–

“Every time we choose safety, we reinforce fear.”

Cheri Huber

—

Sure. I could simply believe most people don’t get involved with Life because they are too busy.

Or they are ignorant of the fact their absence is not noted or meaningful.

But I can’t. I can’t because I don’t believe it is true.

I think we do it, subconsciously or consciously, because it is safer — we get to avoid possible conflict.

Oh. The risk in doing this over & over & over? We become disengaged with Life.

But. Here is the good news. Life will keep sending you invitations. Over & over & over again.

You just gotta RSVP every once in a while.

To be clear. You are not always being invited to a ‘big party.’ Sometimes the RSVP is just for something small.

Saying that permits me to circle back to where I began … willing to feed one stomach, educate one mind, and treat one wound.  They aren’t determined to revolutionize the world all at once; they’re satisfied with small changes.

Over time, though, the small changes add up.

That’s why you RSVP to life.

Small changes add up.

Small moments add up.

Small gestures add up.

It is true that Life, in general, is indifferent to you and what you want. However. What Life does do is create event after event which you DO get invited to. That means its up to you to respond. And, yeah, I do believe RSVPing matters even in this scenario. Just showing up is good but not as good as telling Life you are gonna show up. Why? Because it increases the odds Life may actually NOT be indifferent when you show up.

My advice? Just make sure you RSVP to Life one response at a time.

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

“We’re in a time of rapidly expanding insights about human motivation and connection, but meanwhile our companies continue to be run with a perspective on human psychology and sociology circa 1970.”

Stowe Boyd

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

My quick response to the “No Boss, no Thanks” piece. I believe there is some misguided thinking (central authority is necessary, buck stops somewhere dependent upon one person, democratic decision making is inefficient/slow), but it was this particular part that galled me:

“Third, while technological miracles such as the internet, cheap and reliable wireless communication, Moore’s law, miniaturisation and information markets have induced sweeping changes in manufacturing, retail, transportation and communication, the laws of economics are still the laws of economics. And human nature hasn’t changed. The basic problem of management and business – how to assemble, organise and motivate groups of people and resources to produce goods and services that consumers want – is still the same. Since the industrial revolution, entrepreneurs have been organising extremely complex activities in firms that are neither completely centralised nor completely flat. Imagine the complexity involved in operating a national railroad, a steel mill or an automobile assembly plant in the 19th and early 20th centuries. These were all ‘knowledge-based activities’ and were conducted in teams organised in various structures. Are things so different today?”

First.

Yes. Things are ‘so different’. The uthors have completely missed what is the same and what is different about today’s business. I would suggest they read my piece, Distribution Revolution,  on what I believe is functionally the same and it also outlines what I believe is different.

Second.

I would highly recommend the authors pick up a copy of Toffler Future Shock, Third Wave and even Powershift, if they have the time, because they would find the answer to “are things so different today?” in books written in 1970 & 1980 if they cared to look. In fact. Part of my whole aggravation with this article is I feel like we have been debating the same ideas Toffler offered us since 1970.

Anyway.

If you ignore everything else I write, pay attention to this. Maximizing people’s potential doesn’t mean doing away with managers; it just means you maximize the potential of people AS managers. I am not naïve enough to believe we will do away with titles and experience based ‘management’. But. People are managers and managers are people. Period.

Anyway.

Let me use some Toffler to point out where the authors of the article went wrong.

context: accelerated world

Solving business challenges can be complicated, but business itself is complex (& always has been). Business people cannot afford to confuse complicated and complex. Now. What technology did is accelerate the complexity. The business atoms were placed into a supercollider. In fact, it accelerated business dynamics beyond the structure of a hierarchy or even centralized “buck stops somewhere” managers. That said. I think we confuse speed and acceleration all the time to the detriment of organizational design and behavior. Organizational design almost seems to inherently have a desire to decelerate to permit some sense of “its okay, you can feel comfortable with the speed of business” where I think we would be better off addressing the larger issue Toffler outlined: overstimulation. Acceleration tests our attention, cognitive skills and ability to discern what is important and what is not – which is actually a ‘speed’ versus velocity discussion. The article, by suggesting the basic business world is the same, ignores that, in a grander context, it is not. In fact, the article is incredibly misguided because it would appear to encourage insular cocooning rather than suggesting the challenge is to fully engage & manage overstimulation. I am not suggesting acceleration & overstimulation is not an issue, but I will suggest it is a reality and hierarchies (centralizing overstimulation) is not the way to increase the likelihood of business success. If I were to choose one aspect I wish organizational psychology would address, this is it.

Which leads me to connectedness.

everything is connected with everything

When I read simplistic tripe like “The basic problem of management and business – how to assemble, organise and motivate groups of people and resources to produce goods and services that consumers want” I can understand how hierarchies have been so resilient to a better way of doing things. In the past it was arranging lego blocks, now it is arranging molecules. Toffler discussed this in a variety of ways, but the most interesting was “porous organizations” in which teams assembled, and reassembled, in order to meet specific challenges. He outlined this in 1970. Nowhere in that concept did he discuss no bosses, but he did suggest in 1990 (Powershift) that the biggest challenge to this idea would be power. The new business normal faces two dynamics: power & interconnectedness. Needless to say, they are connected.

Which leads me to connecting.

the world as a merry go round

We seem to ‘design’ organizations on the playground then demand it to jump on the merry go round. Or, worse, leave it on the playground and suggest business is about plucking opportunities as they spin ‘round the merry go round. The best organizations will jump on the merry go round with the resources they have on hand and meet the demands of the business. The truth is the centrifugal force of the accelerated merry go round demands different configurations at different times. This will demand a variety of ‘bosses’ (albeit I dislike that word). Management is contextual. Unless you happen to have a Swiss army knife person (they exist but are fewer than most businesses have) this means everyone will lead & manage at some point. If the authors don’t understand this I fear they don’t understand today’s business world.

Which leads me to untidiness.

discomfort with untidiness

Businesses inherently love tidiness and hate untidiness. They associate predictability & certainty with being tidy and inefficiency & failures/mistakes with untidiness. Unfortunately, for business, mediocrity (or even slippery slope to irrelevance) resides in tidiness and spectacular success resides in untidiness.

While we like to think of organizations as a ship sailing into a tumultuous sea it is actually a fleet of smaller ships being pushed & shoved by tides and waves through storm & calm all trying to go in one direction together <without crashing into each other>. Each smaller ship has a captain and a crew <often skilled in managing that particular ship if needed>.

The ‘No Boss’ authors seem to associate ‘building a dynamic organization’ or even ‘motivating employees’ by inevitably suggesting one big ship making progress in some direction (although they give a head nod to a matrix organization). If you don’t like that metaphor just accept this: the “No Boss” authors seek tidiness. They are wrong.

I say all that because you invariably need to grow your business unevenly. Yup. Sorry. A business isn’t, probably shouldn’t be and most likely cannot be <and be successful> ‘even.’ Or smooth. Or without any ragged edges. It needs to be grown unevenly <which is actually a natural growth rather than some manufactured growth>.

“Sureness will always elude you.

The detective will always circle around what he wants, never seeing it whole. We do not go on despite this. We go on because of it.”

—–

Claire DeWitt

Which leads me to freedom.

discomfort with freedom

Business, for decades & thru hierarchy, has always been built around selective freedoms – maybe ‘controlled freedom.’ Business people, in general, are much more comfortable building stop signs than they are highways.  Toffler spent almost an entire book outlining how technology will create a freedom ‘shock’ (Future Shock) and an entire book on the shock to the power structures (Powershift).

“No Boss” reflects a fear of freedom & loss of power. Period.

Which leads me to belief.

belief.

Unfettered freedom CAN lead to chaos. So we come up with a number of behavioral & motivational tricks to attach to versions & steps to implement aspects of distributed leadership mostly because we ignore what we know about individual behavior and we have a healthy skepticism toward managers & management in general.

Gamification, carrots & sticks, incentives, milestones are all derivatives of hierarchy thinking trying to adapt to a relentlessly uncertain world. They are attempts to build in some certainty. Yet. Behaviorally we know the most powerful motivation has nothing to do with ‘defeating’ a system/objective/goal, but rather it’s about ‘belief.’ Defeating is someone wins, someone loses. Belief is like hope. It draws people toward it.

That said. It’s a twofold belief challenge.

Business owners, managers as such, need to believe in people. They need to believe if given the opportunity to make choices, do the right things, the arc of people behavior (driven by intentions) will bend toward productivity & profitability. Note. This means business community needs to embrace a lack of output smoothness (a perception & reality challenge in & of itself).

========

“I don’t exactly know what I mean by that, but I mean it.”

The Catcher in the Rye

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

As a corollary. People need to believe in people (themselves). While we may innately know we can make decisions, assume responsibility & do the right things, the business world has not encouraged people to think that way. In fact. It has often penalized us for thinking that way. Many people almost don’t believe they should have responsibility or that they will not benefit by doing the right things. If we can align belief, than construct, as it currently exists, falls apart naturally (as not conducive to the belief) & people will inherently access their potential because barriers to believing they have that potential are stripped away.

Yes. Some of the ‘tricks’ may be useful but looking at the gobs of absurd articles & books with regard to organizational psychology it appears we have missed they are all means to an end and maybe we should seek to identify the end and encourage managers and people to believe in the power of belief.

I ended with Belief because at the core of “No Boss” is a belief that control, in some dimension, is necessary. I wrote in my “Purpose of Business is to benefit People” piece   that this is a reflection of not believing in people. I don’t blame the authors here because, well, there are a shitload of business thought leaders who not only do not believe in people but don’t believe “belief” is enough to guide people.

In the end.

The “No Boss” article is exactly what I hear from 50somethings holding onto the existing business construct with ragged claws.

Self-governing organizations are nothing new, even the Greeks were big fans, and Toffler began the vague outlines of how technology would widen the cracks in what we already knew – hierarchies were standardization models and people, and business, tend to thrive when non standardized. All that said. “No Boss, No Thanks” is tripe. Business drivel. Stowe Boyd called it “misunderstanding the nature of management” ; I call it just another example of fear of freedom couched in some poisoned fortune cookie wisdom. It ignores the most basic principles laid out in Toffler’s Future Shock & Third Wave that business normal was being shaken like an etch a sketch. And, in particular, it ignores Toffler’s third book, Powershift, by thinking power will always reside within some aspect of centralization & centralized thinking. It will not. They confuse centralized thinking with coalesced thinking. Centralized is inside out and coalesced is outside in where it is a reflection of, as Stowe suggests, ‘everyone is management.’

I’m certainly not as smart & insightful as Alvin Toffler, or Stowe Boyd, but even I know this “No Boss” article reflects not only a misunderstanding of distributed leadership but, more concerning, a misunderstanding of ‘business normal’ as it exists today.

Postscript:

I encourage everyone to revisit the Toffler trilogy. He shares a number of interesting thoughts:

• The Electronic Cottage: where remote work force becomes integral part of organizations
• The New Worker: where responsibilities become agile & diverse

=======

“The primary cause of unhappiness is never the situation, but thoughts about it.

Be aware of the thoughts you are thinking.”

–

Eckhart Tolle

====

I am not a big fan of simply saying “it is what it is” mostly because … well … most times it is much much more than that. However. Sometimes. Yes. Sometimes it “is” simply because it, well, is. At these times I would note we get unhappy. Usually not because of the situation, but rather because of the thought behind it.

<please note: I imagine I have just bastardized Tolle’s real thinking, but it fits what I want to say>

Anyway. I attribute the our true unhappiness behind the thinking of “it is what it is” to one of two things:

–          Occam’s razor:

This is the thought that “the simplest explanation that fits the facts is usually right.”

I like to think it is called Occam’s razor probably because the thought cuts straight to the truth, but ‘experts’ suggest the term razor refers to distinguishing between two hypotheses either by “shaving away” unnecessary assumptions or cutting apart two similar conclusions.

Whatever.

Sometimes the simplest explanation is all there is. It is what it is.

And we hate not only Occam, but his frickin’ razor.

–          Illogical pragmatism:

Some things just cannot be explained. It sounds illogical, but, pragmatically, any explanation is illogical. Or just illogically complex. Therefore, there is no explanation. Pragmatically, it is just what it is. Illogical as it may sound. And while we like pragmatism, we hate anything illogical. And we particularly hate if the pragmatic is illogical.

That said. Very few things frustrate us more than when there is no explanation for something. It drives business people frickin’ crazy.

Oh. What do business people hate maybe even worse? That Occam thing. The simple concise explanation. The understanding that simpler explanations are, other things being equal, generally better than more complex ones is not an idea we really like in business. Yeah. We talk about simplicity in a fond way, but most times we hate it. More often we struggle to accept the simple and revel in the complex.

This love of complex really has nothing to do with solutions but rather we like having things explained to us. That is typically where things get complex. Simple explanations are, well, unbelievable <crazy, huh?>.

Now. I actually believe we manage this fairly well in everyday life, but really suck at this in business.

Whew. “It is what it is” at work? Never. Or maybe at best … rarely.

My point? Most things have an explanation. Let’s say maybe 90% or so.

Most things obviously have real definitive explanations and some things have enough of an explanation that they have some edge or tangibleness to them, but it’s the stuff in the middle that requires a more subtle explanation or even an admittance of sheer uncertainty of “why is this as it is.”

Ah. That’s 10% or so.

Well. Sometimes things just “are.” And explanations are too complex … and frankly … unnecessary <albeit frustrating to not have one>.

Sure. We should be diligent with regard to inevitable straying into a complacent belief believing that things ‘just are’ and there is nothing you can do <or should do> to change it to make it better or to actually avoid true explanations where they are merited. And while it frickin’ kills me to suggest “it is what it is” … some things just are, and no matter how much you wish they were different, they’re not.

That said. We have difficulty in trying to understand that there can be some things that fall in the non-explanation category <that wretched ‘middle’> that it is neither in the good nor the bad category <by the way … not being able to explain does not make it inevitably bad>.

We seem too often to have to have an explanation to satisfy us. And it’s this sense of ‘satisfaction seeking’ that we should be wary of <or maybe it simply leads us astray and we should be wary of getting lost – insert ‘weeds’ here ->.

The unexplained is very unsatisfying. Someone wrote this:

“The Unexplained” has a somewhat sinister connotation to our adult minds because it puts us on shaky ground. Our reason has nothing to hang on to. When circumstances are not to our liking, we are likely to use phrases like, “I demand an explanation” or “You’ve got some explaining to do!” Of course this has not so much to do with shedding some light on the situation as it has to do with making ourselves feel safer, more secure in the midst of something which has inconvenienced us.

We can even become suspicious, paranoid, fearful and neurotic if our dependence on explanations is too strong and we cannot actually find one.

In my words … it can kind of drive us nuts. We need to realize that sometimes we put way too much emphasis on trying to figure out what is right and wrong … or even worse … seeking an explanation for something that just ‘is.’

Look. With so much unpredictability and seeming chaos in business <because shit moves so fast> sometimes the explanation really doesn’t matter.

It just is.

It is the way it’s supposed to be.

It is just the way it happened.

All the over analysis, over thinking, over planning, over explaining doesn’t accomplish anything. While it may make us feel better putting an ultimate <but incredibly convoluted and complex> explanation on something, sometimes it doesn’t accomplish anything <useful>.

In fact all that thinking trying to identify ‘the explanation’ can freeze you to a point where you get stuck over thinking  — all in the attempt in trying to rationalize everything.

You can get overwhelmed not by the situation <or the amount of situations> but simply by the lack of explanation.

You can get overwhelmed not by the chaos of complexity, but rather by the act of ignoring, or even arguing against, the simple solution <the fact it ‘just is’>.

So much of our stress and anxiety comes from our attempts at finding an explanation or even a simpler ‘is it good or bad’ definition to the challenge or situation. Yeah. We like things to be a certain way <mostly not simple>. Yeah. We like the feeling that things in life should be generally good. And, yeah, explanations help us define good or bad <or at least help us define blame or resolution or whatever>. Yeah. We just like explanations. Simple, complex, any size shape or form … we will take anyone we can get.

Regardless.

The bottom line? We are reluctant to accept things that cannot be defined or explained. We hate “it just is what it is” things.

Look. Explanations are good … and bad.

Good in that it helps to have some boundaries and guidelines and … well … definition <or Life would just be some nebulous blob … disgusting thought, huh?>.

Bad in that some things are simply undefinable therefore forcing an explanation into a ‘it is what it is’ scenario creates some unfair & untrue conclusions.

Anyway.

Some things are simpler than we make them out to be.

And  some things just cannot be rationally explained.

And sometimes it just isn’t worth investing the energy trying to rationalize it.

It is what it is.

And it drives us frickin’ crazy.

———

“Maybe who we are isn’t so much about what we do, but rather what we’re capable of when we least expect it.”

Jodi Picoult

———-

“After all, our lives are but a sequence of accidents – a clanking chain of chance events. A string of choices, casual or deliberate, which add up to that one big calamity we call life.”

Rohinton Mistry

———-

So, I tend to believe we measure ourselves by what we expect of ourselves when … well … we have expectations of ourselves.

But.

If this big ‘calamity we call Life’ is simply a sequence of accidents … a chain of chance events … maybe we should be measuring ourselves by what we are capable of when we least expect it.

I feel confident suggesting this because most of us are capable of a shitload.

Yet. Most of us give ourselves a shitload of criticism for not meeting expectations when we expect to do something.

Yet. Most of life is a shitload of unexpected things.

It would be nice if Life acted upon the same principle as the programming technology industry: the principle of least astonishment. In other words, if some key technology feature has a high astonishment factor <the surprise factor> they immediately conclude it may be necessary to redesign the feature. The design should match the user’s experience, expectations, and mental models <in other words … surprises are bad>.

Well. Unfortunately Life doesn’t work that way.

And neither do we. Life astonishes us on a fairly consistent basis and we astonish ourselves on a far equal amount of the time.
Least expected typically refers to something that is the least likely <or most unlikely> to happen. And yet what we do, what we are capable of, in these least expected moments are actually the least unexpected. Because least unexpected refers to something that is the least unlikely <or most likely> to happen and, yet, it is incredibly likely we are more than capable.

In our heads, and often in our words, unlikely or unexpected get jumbled up with least likely and least expected and in all the jumbledness the result ends up as, well, actually the least unexpected.

<don’t worry … my head started getting confused & hurting when I wrote that>

I would suggest that what we are capable of when we least expect it is typically pretty frickin’ amazing.

In the unplanned calamity of Life we make choices … and in a least unexpected way we do pretty fucking well. Remember this:

———

“Adventures do occur, but not punctually.”

E.M. Forster

———

Life is not punctual. Nor is Life planned ahead of time.

Life is often one big calamity. The only thing we can expect of Life is the unexpected.

The least unexpected thing? What we are capable of.  Who we are is not just defined by what we do <in general>, but rather what we do in the unexpected calamity of Life. The choices we make in the unexpected chain of moments that make up most of Life. To paraphrase Chekov:

Any idiot can ‘do’ in the expected moments.

The measure of a person is truly found in what you do in the unexpected moments.

===

a weheartit contributor

—————

This quote is fucking awesome.

At some point in our lives pretty much all of us have had a little bit of ‘I want to save the world’ in us. Of course, that was before the world & Life beat it out of us and suggested that maybe we aim a little lower.

Ok.

A lot lower.

Well. The world, and Life, was, and is, wrong. This is one of those things we should never have beaten out of us.

Let me repeat.

NEVER let it get beaten out of you.

Let me tell you why this may be one of the most important things we should pay attention to.

There is no lack of problems in today’s world.

There is no lack of people who need saving.

There is no lack of ideas that need saving.

And let’s be clear … you do not need an “everything is fucked and we’re all going to die” attitude to see this.

It just is.

Its quite possible when you do ponder this it may appear easier to just say “I need to focus on my own happiness” .

Well. Research has shown over and over again that our true happiness and self worth is attained when we aspire to being dynamic beyond our own purpose <be part of something bigger than just ‘me’>. Our happiness is actually more like ‘meaningfulness’ and meaningfulness is most likely achieved when our purpose isn’t about us (self), but rather investing energy in just making things better. There are a number of people who I highly recommend (Zach Mercurio, Perry Timms, Gustavo Razzetti, Dr. Jason Fox) who will speak to this thought with research and psychological underpinnings.

I take a simple approach to the topic.

Here is a Life truth.

Life can suck if you let it.

And things will always remain sucky if you let it.

You can either do something or not do something. And you can do some important things or you can do unimportant things.

That’s the gig. Simple as that.

But here is what I can tell you for sure. Doing something … and doing important things … gives meaning & purpose and all that Maslow stuff which makes you feel self-value. In other words, in a world that may suck or at least may appear to suck <and has some obvious sucky things about it>, if you choose to try and save the world in some way you will not suck.

You don’t have to save the world all at once. You can start saving small … a penny at a time. All you gotta do is choose any frickin’ penny you see lying on the ground <that’s a bad metaphor for ‘some issue’ by the way>.

Just pick a problem and start saving the world one penny at a time. Before you know it you will have made a dollar difference … and maybe more if you are really lucky.

Education, Jobs, Homelessness. Poverty. Domestic violence. Women’s rights. Mental health. Big Brothers/Sisters.

Heck. Every day just supporting ‘doing what is right.’

There are so many to choose from you cannot go wrong in saving the world … you can start saving at any time in fact.

Will you solve it? Most likely not.

Will you contribute to the solution? Most likely yes.

Most importantly … will you make a difference? Yes.

Like small pebbles dropped in a pond the ripple reaches much much farther than you can see from where you stand.

And you know what?

You will feel better about yourself. Even if you are only one penny richer at the end of the day … well … you are richer.

So, maybe, rather than falling in love with yourself or investing in ‘being resent’ or even actively seeking to make yourself happy, you might do well to get to work on solving the problems that prevent the world from being truly exceptional. You become richer by making the world around you a richer place to live.

By the way.

If along the way you are the only person you save … well … you have done good, kid.

——- 

You don’t appreciate the chaos and absurdity of life on this planet. 

You don’t understand irony, or ethnicity, or eccentricity, or poetry, or the simple joy of being a regular at the diner on your block. 

I love that.

 You don’t drink coffee or alcohol. You don’t over eat. You don’t cry when you’re alone. You don’t understand sarcasm. You plod through life in a neat, colorless, caffeine free, dairy free, conflict free way.

I’m bold and angry and tortured and tremendous and I notice when someone has changed their hair part, or when someone is wearing two very distinctly different shades of black or when someone changes the natural temperament of their voice on the phone.

I don’t give out empty praise.

I’m not complacent or well-adjusted.

I can’t spend fifteen minutes breathing and stretching and getting in touch with myself.

I can’t spend three minutes finishing an article.

I check my answering machine nine times every day and I can’t sleep at night because I feel that there is so much to do and fix and change in the world, and I wonder every day if I am making a difference and if I will ever express the greatness within me, or if I will remain forever paralyzed by muddled madness inside my head. 

I’ve wept on every birthday I’ve ever had because life is huge and fleeting and I hate certain people and certain shoes and I feel that life is terribly unfair and sometimes beautiful and wonderful and extraordinary but also numbing and horrifying and insurmountable and I hate myself a lot of the time.

The rest of the time I adore myself and I adore my life in this city and in this world we live in.

This huge and wondrous, bewildering, brilliant, horrible world.”

=

Jessica, from Kissing Jessica Stein

——–

Well. I love this monologue pulled from Kissing Jessica Stein.

I love that it sounds like she is a disaster, but it really reflects the complexity residing in, well, any and all of us.

What do I mean? I believe that within each of us resides a kaleidoscope of fragmented pieces of different people and feelings and likes & dislikes. And all of these things swirl around viewing the world from a variety of perspectives.

All of which tends to end up muddling things in our heads and make us question whether we are being the best we can be.

And if we question whether we are at our best then we certainly question whether we are making a difference.

Yeah. There is an inextricable link between those two things.

Yeah. We don’t make that connection enough.

Hmmmmm. Maybe that is why the world is so brilliant … and bewildering.

Brilliant in that we can see the change that can, and could, be. In us and in the world.

That is called Hope.

Bewildering in that because aligning our ‘best’ to when we can actually make a difference <which is a moment that occurs significantly less often than you would imagine> is sometimes difficult to see and experience.

That creates something called Despair.

And therein lies the huge & wondrous & bewildering & brilliant & horribleness of the world … the constant tug of war between hope & despair. That may sound extreme … if not poetic and possibly even too philosophical … but if you think about it … our moments in life are far too often simply defined by feelings of hope <for something better> or despair <that the moment wasn’t the best it could, or should, have been … and maybe it never will be>.

I tried to think of an example of the constant tug between the bewildering & brilliance … that almost irreconcilable angst of hope clashing with despair … and then I found this:

——-

bookmad:

do you ever just think about how shitty you are compared to other writers and give up hope?

Step 1.

Go on goodreads

Step 1.

Look up any book you think is worthy of 5 stars, look at the break down of the star rating.

Someone, somewhere thought that book was a 1 star.

Step 2.

Now go to a book you rate as 1 star.

Again go to the break down… I bet someone has rated it 5 star worthy.

Step 3.

Stop being so hard on yourself.

Someone will love what you’ve written.

Yes, it’s important to be proud of what you’re doing, but I guarantee you are being too hard on yourself.

——-

Lastly. To be clear. The huge and wondrous and horrible bewildering brilliant thing is not really the world. It is us. It is our heads.

We each hold a desire to be huge & wondrous & as brilliant as we can be. In feeling that we naturally get tugged between hope & despair all the while struggling between them in the infiniteness of a relatively indifferent world chuckling at our attempts.

I do tend to believe everyone, at least a little, longs for something big. That is simply being human. Yet most of us are taught day after day after day to collect wood and do tasks. Wood?

—–

If you want to build a ship, don’t drum up people to collect wood and don’t assign them tasks and work, but rather teach them to long for the endless immensity of the sea.

Antoine de Saint-Exupery

—–

Yeah. The world, society, business, our managers, are more likely than not to encourage us, and focus us, on collecting wood (metaphor for ‘doing’, tasks and “the grind” type stuff). However, most of us long for the immensity of the sea.

That conflict can often make life be quite bewildering and, worse, we can often look like a disaster to ourselves.Oh. And there will never be a lack of people ready to point out that disaster.

Ignore them.

Just appreciate the irony, the absurdity, the chaos, the huge & brilliance & wondrous aspects of the world.

Adore it and embrace it.

You will not only be a little calmer about shit, but you most likely will not actually be a disaster and, if you work hard, get a little lucky, you may get to enjoy the immensity of the world.

————————————————-

“It’s messing people up, this social pressure to “find your passion” and “know what it is you want to do”.  It’s perfectly fine to just live your moments fully, and marvel as many small and large passions, many small and large purposes enter and leave your life.   For many people there is no realization, no bliss to follow, no discovery of your life’s purpose. This isn’t sad, it’s just the way things are.  

Stop trying to find the forest and just enjoy the trees. “

=

Sally Coulter

———

“Passion has little to do with euphoria and everything to do with patience. It is not about feeling good. It is about endurance. Like patience, passion comes from the same Latin root: pati. It does not mean to flow with exuberance. It means to suffer.”

=

Mark Z. Danielewski

—

I originally wrote this piece, Don’t Find Your Passion, in September 2014 and it is possibly my most unpopular piece I have written to date. Yesterday I felt slightly vindicated when Psychology Today just published a piece called “Why ‘Follow Your Passion’ is Terrible Advice.”

I have always struggled with the ‘find your passion’ advice. Ok. In fact. I believe most ‘find your passion’ advice is bullshit. I say its bullshit mostly because passion and excellence are not inextricably intertwined. In fact. Passion and purpose are not inextricably linked. In other words, I may be passionate about something, but may actually suck at doing that ‘something’.

I may be passionate about something, but it doesn’t feed some grand purpose <in the world or even to myself>.

Ok. The sucking thing I mentioned. Think about it this way – maybe I don’t suck at it, but maybe it is just not what I am best at doing.

Let me be clear. I am very happy for those who have a passion for something specific. And I would like to think everyone should be passionate about something. My point is that, unfortunately, the ‘something’ just may not be the thing you build your career and life around because you just may not be good at it enough to master it enough beyond maybe simple competence (but you can still enjoy it).

What makes me think I am qualified to say this whole follow your passion is bullshit? I am not sure I personally have a singular passion … except for thinking. And, boy, let me tell you, that is not a skill you can be paid for in the business world.

Does that mean I have to settle? Of course not.

Getting paid for thinking is a bonus.

But I assume I get paid <when I do get paid> for something I must be good at <or someone wouldn’t pay me>. In other words, I have to actually do something, not just think.

Does this mean I am grumpy or unsatisfied because I am not ‘following my passion’? Nope.

Practically speaking, I understand that what I am passionate about:

<a> there are more brilliant thinkers than I out there in the world, and

<b>  thinking without doing has significantly less value than thinking & doing. And by value I mean value to others and, frankly, value to self. The doing shows value. It shows the thinking wasn’t simply some pie in the sky rhetoric which ends up in some ‘nice but impractical’ idea folder gathering dust in some vacant office.

Next. I think the whole ‘find your passion’ or ‘find your purpose’ is overly simple in its guidance because following your passion is tricky.

No.

Let me take that back.

It is actually dangerous. If you are not careful, it can empty you.

——-

 “They told me to pour my heart into everything I do. So that’s what I did, I poured and poured and poured. 

Now they ask me why I’m so empty.”

(via florential)

———

This is why I am always hesitant to flippantly suggest ‘do what you are passionate about’ or ‘find something you love.’ I tend to suggest ‘find something you are incredibly good at … and see if you love it.’ In fact if you do that not only do you find out what you are really good at, but you also start jettisoning things you don’t like <or are passionate about>.

Next. I sometimes hear people suggest they are passionate about ‘results’ <sales, money, some outcome>. Well. Sorry. That is bullshit <to define passion that way>.

Ok. Maybe it is just lazy living. Lazy in that you take the easy way out when discussing passion or purpose by suggesting a result as validation for value in life and life pursuits.Lazy in that you are using results because you just don’t want to admit you may not exactly like what you are doing.

Sorry.

Some things just cannot be measured. Like … well … passion.

Ok. That said. I am going to let the ‘I am passionate about results’ people off the hook today because the real issue is that society shouldn’t be forcing people to even have to HAVE some grand passion or purpose.

Let’s be clear. Neither passion nor purpose needs to be grandiose.

They can be little – the trees and not the forest type of Life direction.

Because, frankly, life is mostly avoiding run face first into trees or sitting and enjoying a moment under a tree and not seeking some way to fly above and see a forest.

So what would I suggest instead of finding your passion or purpose as a guiding principle?

Seek to maximize the moments the best you can. Seek to find “good” and … well … be happy with good <and this includes just being good at what you do>.

As the initial quote suggests … larger passions and purposes will inevitably glide through different moments. Don’t worry that you do not ‘own’ the larger purpose … just enjoy the little glimpses of passion and purpose … and maybe even the variety.

—— 

“All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.”

J.R.R Tolkien

—–

What this all really means is that maybe the only decision you truly need to make has nothing to do with some grand passion or huge purpose … but rather simply deciding what to do with the time … the moment. If you do that well … I imagine you will plant a shitload of prosperous trees. And, in the end, will have built a forest for yourself you can be proud of.

Some of you may now be saying “well, shit” now. Don’t. All advice is just that, advice. Ultimately you choose what is best for you. You shouldn’t be using my advice, or anyone’s for that matter, to choose your path for you. Decide what is best for you and, well, go prosper in Life. But. I will suggest I am fairly sure you will be happier if you are doing something you are good at, so maybe start there.

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

“At the end of the day, we have to value ourselves as more than just an image.

 An image is just an image.  If you want more, look deeper within.

Are you a good friend? A kind companion? How do you treat others?

Those are the things that are a better definition of beauty.’

—-

Sara Ramirez

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

I imagine all of us want to be seen by everyone as ‘something.’ In my mind this ‘something’ isn’t fame or some high falutin’ title or even being rich, instead, its to be recognized characteristically as something. This is not something shallow, but something a little deeper that defines you. Yes. I think we all want, in some degree, to be recognized for character, not some material or tangible thing.

That said. This means, in reality, driving toward that ‘something’ is incredibly fairly innocuous & incredibly difficult to define in a way everyone knows what good is and what bad is. The ‘something’ will vary from person to person meaning a shitload of us want to be seen as smart, or well rounded, or beautiful, or funny, or … well … pick your personal poison.

I could suggest that is kind of a shallow something.

Okay.

I will.

That is a shallow ‘something.’

And what makes that shallow worse is that by making that a fairly significant portion of how we choose to define ourselves we spend an inordinate amount of time & energy planning for ‘someday’ when that ‘something’ is played back to us as our defining characteristic.

Uhm.

Well.

If you are not careful … someday stealthily sneaks up on you as ‘today … and then yesterday … and then day by day it just becomes your Life.

Unfortunately Life is not just an image.

Unfortunately Life is ultimately not that shallow.

Unfortunately you have to leave the shallow end of the pool at some point and venture into the deep end in order to find … well … value.

Despite what marketing & advertising & branding folk may suggest, image is not everything and image does not equal any meaningful value.

Despite what Instagram suggests, image is not everything and image does not equal any meaningful value.

This doesn’t mean it isn’t tempting nor does it mean society doesn’t spend an inordinate amount of energy trying to convince you image matters.

But the truth is image without substance is simply a façade … a mask.

I can unequivocally state that the number of people who can maintain an entire life behind a mask is minuscule. It is extremely difficult to maintain that façade for an entire Life. It is like trying to play out an act … forever. Someone can do it for a while and fewer can figure out how to build the trappings which can hold the act together, but to hold all of that together for a Lifetime takes some luck, some clever skills, some bravado to appease the cynics & skeptics and, ultimately, some ability to keep the lack of substance out of the spotlight & questioning.

Suffice it to say … it takes a lot of work to wear a mask an entire Life.

And maybe that is my larger point.

We all want to eventually be seen as ‘something.’ And we all would prefer that something be of value to those who recognize it and of value to our self-worth.

That means.

If you are not careful you can spend a significant portion of your Life chasing some definition, some ‘something’ you are recognized by — that has little or no real value to oneself.

By the way. I am not suggesting this is easy. Society encourages shallowness. It can do so in a variety of ways but the main way is simple – measurement.

The shallowest ‘somethings’ are easy to see, easy to assess and easy to measure versus either society standards or versus others. Likes, followers, being labeled an ‘influencer’ or, heck, even earning some ‘label’ which could be construed as approval are all measurements which make the shallow aspects of Life more tangible.

The deepest ‘somethings’ – good, soul, character, integrity … shit like that — are difficult to measure and, frankly, the definition is earned over time and with consistent behavior. You cannot expect instant gratification, at least external gratification, if you pursue a ‘deeper something.’ In other words, you are less likley to gain the visible rwards in as large a quanitty versus pursiing more shallow value.

Sigh.

Well. Here is what I know:

“At the end of the day, we have to value ourselves as more than just an image.

 An image is just an image.  If you want more, look deeper within.

Image is just an image.

How about this.

Image is like masturbation.

A deeper something is like making love.

I tend to believe we all want more.

We all want that kind of self-value that is deeper.

We all want more than just an image.

….. impact of Warehouse of Images (before Instagram existed) …..

It is a Life truth that Image is seductive. And, in fact, this is where technology has made Life more difficult. As Alvin Toffler pointed out in Future Shock before the internet our visual comparisons were limited by the sphere of physical contact with external interspersed creating a semi-controlled universe of ‘standards.’ With the advent of the internet Toffler warned us the sphere would increase exponentially which would be additional psychological pressures upon people they had not faced before. I would argue he was prescient and much of the social pressure young people feel today is driven by a larger universe in Instagram, Facebook, etc. of unrealistic comparisons.

The good news? Shallow pursuit of personal value is, well, shallow. And most of us, given the opportunity to pursue a deeper more meaningful value will choose that path.

We find that path attractive because, well, it is a Life truth that if you want more than image, and look deeper within for that ‘something’, you will find a better definition of yourself.