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

“Who in the world am I?

Ah, that’s the great puzzle.”

Alice in Wonderland

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

  “We ignored truths for temporary happiness.

six word story

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

“Most people do not realize that thinking about something is inviting the essence of that something into their experience.”

Abraham Hicks

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

One of the most discussed behavioral things in today’s world is how algorithms trigger dopamine thru outrage and anger and fear to create perceptions and drive behavior.  We speak a bit less about, well, happiness and the fact the people are ‘pleasure-seeking’ entities. With that said, one of the most difficult things to figure out is what to do ‘now’ when given a choice particularly if that ‘now decision’ would appear to provide some happiness.

I mean, WTF, who would pass on happiness?

Well. We have a tendency to either not think long term when facing happiness .or maybe we weight present happiness to such an extent it appears to have a higher value then it may actually have.

Fortunately for us we actually have an inner scale.

This scale makes this decision a fairly easy one.  That inner scale is the , as Alice puts it, “I know who in the world you are’ scale. What this means is that if you know that your happiness assessment glasses are clear, not smudgy and provide you at least fairly good vision, well, you have a better than even chance of actually figuring out whether it represents temporary happiness or ongoing happiness.

Regardless. The desire or seeking of Happiness cloaks everything. Even truth. And maybe exponentially so for truth.

Truth is tricky.

We confuse it with common sense, intuition & instinct.

All of which suggest the real truth about truth without actually being true. What I mean by that is none of those things truly reflect truth, just an aspect of what could be truth.

The aspect consists of Glimpses. Glimpses of truth are temporary. That isn’t to suggest truth is not everlasting or steadfast, but rather our viewing of truth comes in glimpses. I imagine this is a reflection of a larger truth in that the world is extremely complex, is never stagnant and the amount of information necessary to increase the probability of truth in any given moment is most likely too overwhelming for most brains to assimilate.

That said I will offer a word to everyone on temporary. A word, if you take some time and consider it a little, which partially explains ignoring truth – evanescent.

Evanescent refers to that which almost vanishes as soon as it appears, implying that a thing is ‘tenuous, delicate or unsubstantial ‘ as part of its nature <an evanescent glimpse of the truth>

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

“If you put your happiness in temporary things – your happiness will be temporary.“

Nick Vujicic

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

I chose evanescent to make a point because I could have used momentary, passing or fleeing.

All synonyms of temporary.

I could have used transient or transitory both of which stress brevity and impermanence and the fact it will not endure.

Both synonyms of temporary.

I could have even used ephemera which denotes that which changes aspect rapidly and continuously.

Another synonym of temporary.

I could have even focused on temporary which is a nice general term that implies measurable but of limited duration.

But I didn’t.

I didn’t because truth, more often than not, can vanish just as quickly as it appears.

Let me explain why.

Truth is rarely simple and is even more rarely a “it just is” factoid. Instead it is more likely represented in a disparate range of factoids and fragments coexisting in the past, present and future <kind of like the quantum theory of truth and happiness>. They all swirl around this truth and most often we, seeking simplicity & happiness, ignore all the fragments and put our arms around the easier happiness, i.e., the temporary one.

The danger in this is that we then have no depth of understanding. We are not forced to assess the fragments and think. We don’t because , in our heads, truth should be simple, clear and obvious <hence the reason we far too often confuse it with common sense>.

This is where evanescent comes back into the conversation.

As noted earlier truth is most often represented in a big blob of swirling disparate fragments and, yet, on occasion if we look at just the right time all the fragments align and truth appears.

Some may call this an “ah ha” moment. I would suggest it is simply a moment of clarity.

It is a moment in which you truly become a conduit of truth.

It is a moment where everything is aligned and Truth stands there, right in front of you, still amidst the swirl & chaos of Life.

I would be remiss if I did not also point out that this moment is temporary <with threads of infinite existence>.

====

“Liberty of thought is the life of the soul.”

Voltaire

=====

Of course you actually have to be paying attention.

Of course you actually have to not be distracted by temporary happiness.

Of course, as a human, you actually hate having to do both of what I just wrote.

I mean, c’mon, to have the opportunity to be wrapped in a nice cozy blanket of happiness for the rest of our existence <because that is what we hope every time happiness snuggles up against us … that this is the time it lasts forever>?

Uhm.

What a fucking fairy tale.

That is like basing truth and happiness on unicorn farts.

Here is what everyone needs to remember as they ponder ignoring truth for happiness.

Everlasting happiness is a myth.

Shit.

Everlasting truth is a myth.

Whew. How ironic is that?

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

“I have lived with a sense of irony and cold curiosity.”

Friedrich Nietzsche

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

Two of the most valued things in Life are myths.

Well.

It sure sucks to think that.

Anyway.

Here is the most basic truth of all <a non temporary truth but an everlasting one>.

Truth will always be truth, but it will never be easy — easy to gather, to understand and to believe. And because it is not easy and we would much prefer happiness <even temporary happiness> we will accept being right sometimes … wrong sometimes … and at all times believe things on insufficient evidence.

Yeah.

We should just face the fact that even on the things we believe, and claim we understand, we are actually doing so often in an incomplete way <even if we are correct>.

I believe my smartphone works, but I have no clue how. I believe, well, fill in your own Life “black box belief” here — the things you just assume will work and assume we understand how to make it work but certainly do not understand the ins & outs of its workings.

This is the economy.

This is effective government.

This is climate change.

This is finance.

This is business.

This is most of the big stuff in Life.

Which leads me back to something little — evanescent.

The glimpse of truth.

It is the moment when all the disparate fragments align and truth stands in front of you.

It is the moment when things are sufficient enough to understand and believe.

It is the moment we should not ignore truth for either temporary happiness or the temptation of what may appear to be everlasting happiness.

It is the moment when we have the opportunity to, well, “see who I am” and place an important piece of the puzzle in place.

Well.

That sounds like an important moment, doesn’t it?

You bet.

Pay attention for it.

Pay very very close attention.

Pay attention because the glimpse of truth is evanescent.

Pay attention because the last haven of truth often resides in the evanescent.

Pay attention because you shouldn’t ignore truth for a temporary happiness.

Ponder.

=====

“Digital freedom stops where that of users begins… Nowadays, digital evolution must no longer be offered to a customer in trade-off between privacy and security. Privacy is not for sale, it’s a valuable asset to protect.”
Stephane Nappo

=====

“Ultimately, saying that you don’t care about privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different from saying you don’t care about freedom of speech because you have nothing to say.”

Edward Snowden

=====

Data privacy is a hot issue for a couple of reasons both based on the foundational thought we, the people, keep getting fucked by our own data. Basically, other people make money off our data by them using our data to get us to spend money. How fucked up is that? Beyond that there are some real pragmatic issues that with all of our data floating out there beyond our control it can be used in some quite nefarious ways. All that said. Some people with integrity are attempting to change it all. The majority of this discussion is focused on regulation, i.e., regulating how companies gather and use our data.

Here is the problem. While most of us care, we don’t <and, more importantly, a bunch of the big tech boys who gather & use the data, don’t actually care>. For a variety of reasons any time people are offered opportunities to try and manage their data, they don’t (or certainly don’t to the extent that would enable some larger structural changes to how much data is accumulated and used).

I speculate this mostly happens because our personal data is one big black box of shit that most of us feel like we have zero control over, sense we may actually benefit from sharing it – on occasion gaining some convenience – and the penalties for sharing don’t seem to be so bad.

Basically, we’ve given up believing we can control, not clear on benefits of limiting, or even understand, pragmatically, what occurs when we tighten our data privacy. That trifecta encourages most of us to just do what we are doing and just sit around and bitch that evil technology companies don’t have any ethics.

To be honest. Even I, who knows enough to be dangerous about privacy and data, when I see the terms and conditions I very rarely accept because I don’t know what it will cost me. What I mean by that is by limiting something I assume it will limit something else. Its kind of like limiting cookies or certain website features, you get less popups (sometimes), but ease of website use seems to get a little wonky. Just to be clear. It is quite possible I am either conflating causation and correlation or even that because I actually took an action, my mind is creating an expected response (which isn’t really there). But. Maybe that makes my larger point. Because I don’t exactly know the consequences my mind will create them, they will most likely be negative, and that doesn’t exactly encourage me to do it more often in the future.

So.  How do we get people to care? How do we get people to think it will matter what they accept or reject will deter the powerful unseen “tech” from doing whatever they want in the blackbox?

===

“Here in your mind you have complete privacy. Here there’s no difference between what is and what could be.”
Chuck Palahniuk

===

Let’s think about an indirect approach.

People have to see the value, before caring, before doing anything. So, I have some thoughts on how to nudge the mindset.  I believe there are two indirect things that could affect people’s mindsets.

1. Origin ID.

Its not flashy nor does it appear to be directly related to communicating the importance of data privacy, but in my mind, it begins to establish some validity to one’s own data within the black box. In other words, if all of a sudden, I know for sure the data that I am receiving (information is data) is valid and not some bot, well, then all of a sudden I start thinking “hey, mine has been evaluated and is valid too.” Its an indirect way of establishing some value proposition. I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that, collectively, it also begins establishing some shared sense of truth (or truthiness) and that is an excellent foundation for establishing my personal value within that shared sense of truth.

The internet world needs to clean up its validation origin act and this seems like a good place to start the data privacy ballgame.

To be clear. I am relatively sure the moment we validate origin ID (proof everyone is human and verified ID) someone with less than good intentions will subvert the system, but anything has to be better than the current anarchist system. In fact. Maybe that is my last point in this idea. Creating a system that doesn’t feel like anarchy, alone, furthers the concept of data privacy by suggesting it could possibly be controllable. I think this idea is attainable in a reasonable amount of time. The trick to this one is who is trustworthy enough to not only validate but have some records of everyone’s origin ID. My gut tells me blockchain technology offers a viable solution, but someone smarter than I would have to noodle that.

2. Business use (with employees).

This one is trickier than Origin ID but, in my mind, if businesses can show an employee that their data has actual value in their own personal progress/growth within a business it becomes a platform for understanding how their data has value in a grander narrative. Maybe think about this as ‘if I can show on a smaller more personal case study than communicating a larger case study is the logical next step.’ Personally, I think its nuts that a business does nothing with data of their employees to better understand, better develop and better assess each employee’s potential growth opportunities. I think its even nuttier that it doesn’t happen in organizations talking about “digital transformation.” I mean if you are going to create a digital infrastructure wouldn’t you want to connect it with, uhm, the digital imprints of the people/humans who will be optimizing that infrastructure? And, yet, while I think its nuts, I also think this particular idea is years away from being implemented.

** note: I actually have outlined a Knowledge Distribution business model where AI-driven information flow is customized and tied to personal data of each employee suggesting it is something like a Human Nanofactory and offered something called ‘technology-distributed information’.

In the end.

While the world desperately needs a globally coherent plan of action for data privacy, it will not happen until the people of the world actually care and want it and will actually do something when given an opportunity. Along that point, I bet if you asked 100 random people they would (a) probably think data privacy is a good thing and, simultaneously, (b) have it number 101 on their list of 100 things they need to be thinking about.

I say it that way to make the point that this is actually a good equation for the future of data privacy. The ability to make something more important to someone increases exponentially if their existing mindset is that something is most likely a good idea. All we have to do is to make them care and, in my mind, it should begin by making their own data more tangible to them. Like, origin ID and the business they work at showing how their data can be used. Look. I am sure there are hundreds of better ideas than the ones I offered but I feel relatively confident my ideas would go a long way to getting people to care. So just think about it.

===========

“For our own success to be real, it must contribute to the success of others.”

–

Eleanor Roosevelt

======

“The way to achieve your own success is to be willing to help somebody else get it first.”

Iyanla Vanzant

=========

Business, as businesses should, think about how to improve their business. The good ones balance effectiveness and efficiency, the poor ones triple down on efficiency. But. 95% (I made that # up) of businesses focus on customers, service, process, systems and “best practices” — in their pursuit of efficiency (with head nods to effectiveness). This means 95% typically think of people as interchangeable pieces who can deliver all the service, process and outputs. All the systems are designed to ‘output’ and people simply make the systems ‘go.’

I would argue this is at the root of why organizations begrudgingly train employees. I would argue this is not only a bad ‘grudge’ if you really want to improve your business, but it is also stupid.

I always made a promise to anyone who ever worked for me – “if you ever leave this job I promise you will be well prepared to do well at your next job.” I’m not sure I was particularly good at preparing people for life, but I always said if you had a title/job responsibility with me you would be able to do that title/job responsibility wherever you went.

3 reasons:

• I knew people outgrew jobs & organizations and often organizations sucked at meeting peoples ‘grow’ needs. In other words, there is an incredibly high likelihood a current employee would become an ex-employee. I felt a responsibility to prepare them for their next job believing I/we would benefit for as long as they stayed where they were.
• Word of mouth is the most powerful recruiter. If you give, you get. The more people I sent out to build successful careers of their own, the more people recommended new employees to me or past co-workers sent people to me.
• I didn’t care about training per se, I cared about preparation to do jobs well. That may sound like semantics, but I think its important semantics. I believe businesses get hung up on “training people and receiving benefit.” And they may be right because, if you view training as simply training, you will most likely will not reap any meaningful benefits. On the other hand. If you look at maximizing an individual and enabling someone to do their job well, you will not only build individual strengths & potential, but also receive the direct benefit of them doing the job well. Choose wisely.

Regardless of your own view on this topic, the bottom line is a decision to invest in a person. Not some nebulous, often vapid, “invest in your people”, but rather ‘a person.’

I, honestly, can’t figure out why this is so difficult for businesses to grasp.

Is it lack of trust in people?

Is it a leadership ego thing?

Is it simply a misunderstanding of culture as a ‘we’ thing .. that you can enable & empower individuals and still be a ‘we’ culture?

I don’t know, but I do know any lasting change or effect in a business is not organizational or on systems or even on some broader cultural narrative. People leave, therefore, if your modus operandi is to enforce or impose (this includes ‘best practices’) systems, I can guarantee you that enforcing or imposing is not motivating nor long term effective (nor even optimizing short term effectiveness).

Truly lasting change & organization effect is within people themselves. Effectiveness is emergent. And because it is emergent it is something they not only embody when within the business, but also take with them outside the business (in life, family, community and other jobs). Therefore. To effectively lead people you actually need to view people beyond the limits of the organizational boundaries. This may sound odd, even inefficient. Its not. It doesn’t ignore the job that existing responsibilities demand, but it also enables individual potential to cross and bridge normal divides & barriers. Or, as Peter Drucker said, ‘business is of the community and the community is of the business.” And that is where true benefits reside. We far too often discuss ‘getting out of your comfort zone’ when instead we should suggest there is no zone or even if there is you should just push out on the limits and boundaries and give people the freedom to grow (and the business will grow). When a person is engaged as part of who & what they are they have the ability to engage to their fullest potential.

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

Veronica Roth

Simplistically this is investing in people, not an organization. This leads me to the eternal question in business: “why train employees (people) if all they are going to do is leave? (and someone else will benefit by my investment).”

This is a valid, and important, topic.

At its core is, well, business’s decision to make business better. It’s like believing if you plant healthy seeds they will bloom here, there and everywhere and the entire forest grows.

Believing this demands we view a business in a non traditional way – you don’t ‘push down’ beliefs, behavior, responsibilities, etc. because, honestly, any time anything is ‘pushed down’ the world shudders to a halt as the people who are actually doing the work take the round peg senior leadership has created and try to figure out how to put it in the square hole of reality. In order to do so, most times, instead of convincing leadership they actually need a square peg, the teams design a mish mash version of a round peg that will fit into the square hole.

“In our consumer culture, we are encouraged to assume roles that aren’t truly authentic to who we are. In a way, this culture is its own kind of simulation, one that requires us to make more and more purchases to maintain the integrity of the illusion.”

Stowe Boyd

To be clear. I am not suggesting a ‘bossless’ organization. And while I do believe business has become more complex than in the past, I have always believed maximizing an individual maximizes the business. What was true then is exponentially true as business becomes more complex.

Stowe Boyd said “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.” I slightly disagree. While, as a generalization, it may be true, I would suggest some people have always known this is the best way to maximize an organization — its just that leadership doesn’t trust it to be done that way.

Of course I believe discussing new organizational models is important and, in some cases, a business should have a new business model. But at the core of any organizational discussion it really isn’t about models but rather “how do you think about individuals?”

Because until you answer that question autonomy, empowerment, self management, is all irrelevant. If you do not believe in people, than you do believe in control. Period. Full stop.

If you do believe in people, than you will stop talking about leaders, and what makes great leaders, but instead talk about resource management – how can we get the proper resources into the proper hands at the proper times to maximize each individual and group of individuals.

This expands the business by expanding the individual. Therefore leadership isn’t about direction or control, but rather managing/optimizing expansion. Ponder.

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

obfuscate

This is the word to use when evasion is achieved by clouding the issue.

Creating a smoke-screen.

prevaricate, evade, dodge

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

“When shrouded meanings and grim intentions are nicely polished up and pokerfaced personae are generously palming off their fantasy constructs, caution is the watchword, since rimpling water on the well of truth swiftly obscures our vision and perception.

(“Trompe le pied/wrong foot.”)”

Erik Pevernagie

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

So. There is possibly nothing more aggravating in business than someone not answering “the” question. To be clear on what I am speaking about. The person answers a question just not the one you asked.

I am not going to argue that some questions are not easy to answer. I won’t even argue that we get asked questions we don’t know the answers to, but the situation dictates we make something up <yes … that happens in business>. But abandoning the question completely is complete bullshit.

But you know what?

I think the main reason it is so aggravating is because it is truly a reflection of intentions. There is even a book called The Anthropology of Intentions by a professor, Alessandro Duranti, who kind of tackles this whole discussion of intentions and words. He offers us the thought of ‘intentional discourse’ wherein an individual filters words through their beliefs & desires and their plans & goals to guide the discourse <regardless of whether the rest of the people want it guided that way>. In other words, using another phrase he offers us, by engaging in an intentional continuum people ponder their use of words through self-interest motivations <some good & some bad>.

By the way I am fairly sure I mangled his academic masterpiece, but you get the point.

Ah. “You get the point.” I share that again because while we sit there aggravated at someone who completely avoided answering the question asked we almost always also sit there wanting to invest a little of our own energy trying to assess why they did it. Because, in our aggravated minds, in its most simplistic viewing, avoiding the question is solely about shifting attention – away from something and toward something else.

…………… question deflection …………

Sure. It could be something as simple as steering you away from their lack of knowledge and steering you toward something they may actually know. But, in most cases, a full abandonment of a specific question is complete & utter deflection.

In the intelligence community they call this effort to shift attention as deflection or misdirection. Magicians do something similar getting people to focus on one thing and away from the trick itself. Completely avoiding the question is the business version of a distract-the-audience approach. It is this weird moment in which someone pretends to answer the question by actually answering some other question that magically appeared to replace the question really asked. It’s almost like entering an alternative universe for a while.

Sadly, aggravated or not, the more practiced the deception <the more practiced the business magician is> the more likely you hesitate to step in <and the more you get aggravated as you hesitate> and correspondingly … the more many of these people actually believe deception works.

It is maddening.

Worse? If they are good at it, when someone responds to a question by not addressing the points of the question, thereby avoiding the issue itself, it doesn’t create unrelated discussion to the issue … it simply avoids the issue in totality.

Well. I am fairly sure we have all sat there in a meeting and watched something like this unfolding right before our eyes. The visceral response, the aggravation, we have to this ‘answer evasion’ situation is most likely found in the revelation it is occurring (watching it unfold before our eyes). Philosophically, we can see that through some internal conviction to retain something they feel like they should own <their reputation, their title, their perceived intelligence, their whatever> they justify evading the question.

Conviction. Yeah. I just used ‘internal conviction.’ This means their intentions reflect they are more important than not only the question itself … but you. You are not even dignified with an answer.

It is irksome <at its least worst>.

It is loathsome <at its most worst>.

Look. I give a partial pass to the asshats you can see who have some answer they want to give everyone, regardless of what question is asked, and blurt it out when given the opportunity. They haven’t deflected the question they just ignored it as unimportant to what they want to say and have been planning to say no matter what has been said up to that point. It’s the ones you know heard the question and just ignored it. Or avoided it. Or just didn’t answer it despite the fact they heard every word, every syllable and every intention from the question giver. In other words, they intentionally do not answer the question.

<envision a deep sigh here>

I want people to face questions head on. And what makes this even more aggravating is that you know these people are quite capable of taking things head on.

How do I know that? These are the same people who will attack, or ‘aggressively question’, the intentions of the question giver themselves. It is a common tactic for the answer avoiders. The natural instinct is to ‘defend’; to answer the attack. Fuck that. I want to say “just answer the fucking question asked.”

How else do I know these people are quite capable of taking questions head on? These are the same people who will attack, or ‘aggressively question’, the question itself. This is not a deflection tactic. This is a ‘turn the question back on itself’ tactic. And, once again, your natural instinct is to defend or, well, answer the question you are asked.  Aggravating. I want to say “just answer the fucking question asked, you shithead.”

And maybe what makes this ‘not answering the question asked’ so maddening is that we, most sane pragmatic business people, tend to sit back <after saying “WTF”> and try and unravel why it happened and what the hell just happened. Unless you are in an interview scenario <in which you always have an opportunity, one-to-one, to hunker down and hammer out a clear answer> you are most likely in a room with other people and the non-answer has sent at least some of the people careening down a completely different road.

That makes it even MORE aggravating.

One intentional non answer to a question can completely derail a meeting or a discussion. That is intentional discourse. Or how about the other phrase from that academic’s book: engaging in an intentional continuum.

Oh. One last way you know these asshats are intentionally not answering the question is when they cleverly decline to answer the question with the infamous head fake answer: “I don’t know the answer to that question. I’ll work on finding the information for you and then get back to you with an answer” <and they have no intention of ever getting back to you>.

Yeah. You know … sure as shit … they have no plans to work on it and will never ‘get back to you’ unless you call them on it. They are intentionally refusing to answer the question assuming the conversation will move on and, in a laundry list of other shit to do, that this one will either never make the list or be so low on the list they can stiff arm you on answering based on “working on things more important.”

Its bullshit. You know its bullshit. They know its bullshit.

Well.

Fuck you.

Fuck you and the non-answering horse you rode in on.

In my mind a good well-articulated question demands some accountability. The one given the question is now accountable for the answer. They may try and deflect and they may just answer a completely different question, but a question asked exists, it does not disappear. You cannot get away from it.

Let me share a graphic example of why accountability remains whether the question dodger likes it or not.

You open your front door in the morning and there is a nice pile of dog shit squarely in the middle of your front door opening. You either clean it up or you avoid it. The question dodger never acknowledges the pile and steps over it moving on to something else. The shit stays at the front door and over time the smell increases and the flies crowd around. A good question unanswered is just like that. And a question dodger cannot avoid the smell in the end.

All that said. My message to the asshats who completely do not answer the question asked:  You will be accountable to the question and to cleaning up the mess … now … or later <and quit aggravating me by not answering the question, you shithead>.

====

Author note:

When I reread this, which took me less than a ½ hour to write, I was a little surprised by how … well … aggravated the tone was.

Some ‘fucks’ and ‘asshats’.

I left it as is because as a 50something business guy who has always attempted to take on what needs to be taken on regardless of how painful it may have been <and career wise possibly less than prudent> I get a little angry about how the business world has become incredibly unkind to the risk takers & truth tellers and seems to reward the less-than-competent and ‘political maneuverers’ more often than it should. That’s my excuse for why I let this one stand as it does.

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

———————

Compromise makes a good umbrella, but a poor roof; it is temporary expedient, often wise in party politics, almost sure to be unwise in statesmanship.

James Russell Lowell

———————-

“I would rather die right then live wrong.”

———————–

“Winners win.” This is a popular theme across LinkedIn, twitter and, well, social media in general. Every time it pops up at the end of some thought I cringe. Not all of those who win are created equal. Shitbags win, too. Which leads me to say not all who win really ‘winners.’

In fact. It is a self-evident phrase, a backwards looking results phrase, which emits a slightly odious taint:

• • A caste system: where winners rule over losers

  • A system of winning: an emphasis on being a winner tends to beget a ‘win at all cost’ mentality

  • An implied system: anything other than winning is of less value (it could have some value but never as much as a win) and anyone who wins has something that a loser does not have (it doesn’t have to be good, just something)

Let me begin with winning is a finite game pursuit – someone wins, someone loses. Bluntly, the only way to win is to end something and in that end, one arises as alive and another, or others, lie dead in the winner’s wake.  This has a number of problems but from a people perspective, with business outcome perspective, the visionaries, long term strategists or ‘future proof’ performers tend to be Infinite players. Infinite players do not seek wins, they seek progress, new beginnings and new iterations. In fact. They create games for winners to win. I begin with that thought with an understanding that most of the world, and business, operates in a zero-sum game universe where we compete for wins, victories and what would be taken away from us if we didn’t approach it this way.

Regardless.

Let’s talk about winning.

Let me begin with Roberto Duran – “a loser.”

 

“No mas, no mas,” Roberto told the referee.

“No more box.”

And he walked to his corner.

 

Now. As a boxer Roberto Duran was known as an intense warrior in the ring. His nickname was Hands of Stone <Manos de Piedra>. He was the lightweight champ and had lost only one decision in 72 bouts <or something close to that>. It was said that he never thought he could ever lose. And, yet, in possibly the biggest fight in his career, he walked away, he ‘quit’. A big check in the win/loss column <on a number of levels>.

But.

Here’s the deal.

“No mas” didn’t mean ‘I quit.’ It just meant ‘fuck this.’ It was purely a comment made in disgust.

Yup.

Duran wasn’t hurt. He was disgusted.

Once Duran realized Leonard wouldn’t play ‘quien es mas macho’ he just walked away. Winning, if he couldn’t fight the way he thought a fight should be fought … well … it just wasn’t a fight to him.

Was he right or wrong?

Shit. I do not know.

In his head he was right.

In many other people’s heads? He was wrong – it made him a quitter in their eyes, you know, “winners win” no matter what.

But maybe it’s not as simple as that. Maybe this is all about winning the way you want to win. Remember his words: “Getting hit motivates me. It makes me punish the guy more. A fighter takes a punch, hits back with three punches.” Look. Duran was the champ. He probably was smart enough to figure out a way to win the way Sugar Ray was fighting the fight <which wasn’t fighting that evening, it was avoiding>, but that wasn’t the win he wanted.

He wanted to know who the best fighter was.

He wanted to be hit and see if he could take it.

He wanted to see if Sugar Ray could take his best hits.

When Sugar Ray decided he wasn’t going to allow that to happen Duran just said ‘not only do I not want to play this game but I don’t want to win this way.’ In other words: “no mas.”

To be clear. Other people who think winning is all that matters will think he was full of shit and I am full of shit. It doesn’t really matter because, well, that’s my point.

My point is we will all, at some point, have to make this same type of decision – in sports, in Life, in relationships, in business. We all have to decide how important how we win is to us.

How you win, or play the game, is a very personal decision. It really ends up being your choice with regard to your attitude <which ultimately influences your own behavior … even when that behavior is within a group or business organization>.

Conversely, when it isn’t your choice how to play <i.e., someone else is dictating how you play> and you really do not want to play that way, well, there is trouble <in River City my friends>.

Ok. Please note I am going to make some generalizations soon to make some points and I fully understand there are degrees within each generalization.

Regardless. Let’s say there are three types of wins and winners:

–          A ‘whatever it takes to win’ win

–          An intellectual win

–          An ability win

And while this is probably relevant to Life, in general, as well as sports <obviously> and personal, I am going to discuss this idea in a business environment. 

Why? Because I tend to believe this is one of the most difficult attitude & behavior decisions someone has to make in business. Organizations ask, and demand, many things of you and you have to reconcile all of it with your own attitude and inevitably your actions <behavior>.

As a junior person this is very difficult to manage, but my suggestion is that you get things set <with the best knowledge you have> in your own head and then look to the leaders behavior. Watch the senior people and how they treat going after a win, the process in win decision making and then how they define & evaluate the win.

Make sure it matches up with what you have decided attitudinally.

If you do not, you run the risk of being constantly put in positions where you do not like what you are not only being asked to do, but what you are doing.

Senior business people have no excuses.

No if, ands or buts. How they win defines them as a business person.

All I can say to them is accept it <whichever type you are> and know that others may view ‘winning’ in a different way.

The only point I have to really make to leaders is that once you accept how you go after a win then begin recruiting people who think as you do. If you do not, then you will be forcing your attitudes & behavior upon others who probably do not want to, let alone like to, do it that way. And I can also promise you when it comes to evaluation time, as a leader, you will be continuously disappointed in their performance.

** note: I am aware that this advice, on occasion, breeds some fairly toxic business cultures but I would suggest that this keeps the ‘win at all cost people’ in their own pasture so that the other types of winners can foster their own business cultures. In addition, it is my personal belief that, in the end, the ‘win at all cost people’ will lose to the others.

Anyway.

The three wins <my perspective> and how they are different aspects of ‘adept, adapt & adopt.”

A whatever it takes to win.

I actually refer to this as an empty win. This is typically the type of win done by someone who says afterwards “all that matters is the result” or “it’s not the journey it is the destination” or “winning is everything.” It is empty because the person runs a very large risk that how you actually got to the win is ignored and everything gets measured <in their personal character measurement> on a scorecard.

I admit. I don’t like these types of wins.

But there is a personality type out there, and some very successful people, who take pride in how many checks are in the win column and could care less how they got to them.

To these people all wins are quality wins because, well, it is a win.

Typically, really competitive people fall into this group.

I call this “adept” winning. You compete because you are adept at reading what it takes to win and doing it.

“Competition brings out the best in products and the worst in people.”

This person isn’t adapting because they understand winning is about lining up the necessary variables each time. So, they aren’t adapting, but rather simply building each time to win. And they aren’t adopting anything because while some things can be reused it is mostly one time usage, transactional, winning. These types of winners are very difficult to replicate through training. And these types of winners have to be very careful in how far they will go to win.

They have bigger boundaries of accepted behavior because of the adept attitude and because of that they can stray to the boundary margins of character, laws, principles and dignity. 

But it is the win numbers in this group that is most satisfying.

Just to put things into perspective. Out of all three groups I have listed this one probably will chalk up the most quantity of wins in the end.

The intellectual win.

You truly outsmart someone <or outsmart the problem or situation>. You out think or tear apart the challenge in such an innovative way that your competition can just look afterwards and say … “wow … that was smart.” Heck. It doesn’t even have to be innovative. It could simply be effective navigation of a complex system and dynamic situation. This is as good as a physical <ability> win, but unfortunately many people do not evaluate it that way.

In fact many of the intellectual winners kind of wish they had some other tangible contribution because thinking is intangible.

This type of winning is ‘adapt & adopt” winning. You compete by adapting your thinking to the situation and adopting new ideas/thinking <it’s a contextual win>.

These types of winners I tend to believe are just born this way. Yes. Some aspects can be trained, but these types of winners just seem to have an innate ability to see things, have excellent situational awareness skills, assess what matters versus what doesn’t matter and assimilate the “what matters” information into either unique, or refreshingly different, useful ideas and thoughts. 

This is a very satisfying win because you out thought someone AND the situation.

An ability win.

This is ‘mano y mano.’ You bring your best and I will bring my best and let the best win.

Here is the deal. Sometimes your best isn’t the better. And you lose. Oh. But what a loss. 

This one is near & dear to my heart.

I admit that I got really really lucky early in my career in that I was encouraged to go for this kind of ‘no frills’ winning and use losses to make my best better so that each consecutive ‘game’ I was able to stay true to what I was good at and it got better and better. Maybe it was partially I was stubborn on my definition of best or maybe I figured out what I was good at <even if it wasn’t the best of the best … just good while still being my personal best> early on and figured that if this was what I was good at, well, then I would only rise as high as my ‘best’ would take me. To be clear. As I pointed out in the ‘whatever it takes’ win, I imagine my win scorecard would be less full than theirs. They, I imagine, have a higher quantity of wins.

Anyway. This type of continuous winning is “adopt & adapt” winning. You compete … learn … adopt some new skills <skill level or new skill> and then adapt within your existing skill set to the next challenge. This means your muscle group gets stronger and stronger. This type of win is extremely satisfying. I also envision this group has the lowest actual total wins. They are the highest quality wins just not a shitload of them.

Well. 

I would argue that is the real differentiator in quality wins, how good you really are. And I guess that is going to be my point having used one of the best boxers of all time. He was one of the best.

“Manos de Piedra”, is true, Hands of Stone. Every punch, and I’m not exaggerating, every punch that he hit me with, from the body to the head, felt like bricks, stone, rocks”.

Sugar Ray Leonard

And not all of us are of that level of ‘best.’ In fact, not many people are. So, you have to figure what is most important to you in the win.

The numbers?

The intellectual win?

The ability win?

Choose and embrace that is what makes you … well … you … in the business world.

Know when to say “no mas.”

Know when to say ‘fuck this.’

Know that ‘winners win’ is bullshit.

Look.

Do I give Sugar Ray credit for figuring out how to win by avoiding the Hands of Stone? Sure.

Would I have done it that way? Nope <and I probably would have lost>.

Do I give Duran credit for just saying ‘no mas’ after 8 frustrating rounds? Yup.

He was the champ. He cared more about how he won the championship than the championship itself.

Now that, my friends, is a lesson that many of us should take to heart in business.

Figure out what you want, and how you want to do it, and find your place in the business world doing it because, in the end, your wins will define what type of winner you are.

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

“Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but of playing a poor hand well.”

—-

Robert Louis Stevenson

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

Whew. This quote is often used and used with such a tone and inflection that does more damage than good. What I mean is that in discussing Life with someone, particularly in reference to their Life <business or personal>, if you are not careful how you use these words it can either:

<a> come across as condescending,

<b> come across as blatant ignorance as to someone’s situation, i.e., it is often used toward people in low income, low education geography as ‘inspirational words of wisdom, or even

<c> come across as flippant tripe.

Regardless.

I imagine it is a Life truth that pretty much anyone can play a good hand <or at minimum be less likely to screw it up>. Unfortunately, pretty much no one ever <or rarely> gets dealt a perfect hand. Almost everyone gets dealt some bad cards and some people just get dealt shitty hand after shitty hand. What I will say is that the institutional systems are clearly not equitable and simply working hard and playing an incredibly poor hand you are dealt well does not guarantee success, but, you gotta play the hand you are dealt.

That said. Suffice it to say playing a poor hand sucks.

But just because you are in a situation you don’t want to be in, well, in Life you really can’t fold. You need to work with what you have.  Sometimes you, if you are really good, you can take a poor hand and play it out much better than someone with a much better hand.  You are just more clever or smart or thoughtful & industrious.

Anyway.

Rather than discussing Life in general I want to use this quote to talk about business. Because, frankly, business is very rarely a matter of holding good cards, but rather of playing a poor hand well. If you are worth even half a shit in business you can play a good hand <and, in fact, you learn to not waste a good hand>, but if you are worth even half a shit in business you also know you very <very> rarely get a good hand.

Pretty much every hand you get dealt is flawed in some way and, in fact, often it is a poor hand.

Almost every successful person I know has been dealt some bad cards in their business lifetime. Sometimes some really bad cards. Cards you simply want to toss off to the side in disgust. But you don’t toss them. You keep them in your hand and think about what the fuck you can do with them. These people figure out how to take those cards and use them to put together a victory. They don’t give up when others thought their hand was unwinnable. They found ways to use those cards for the benefit and growth of the business.

They owned the hand and figured out how to win. By the way, that is business in a nutshell.

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

“We are all dealt a hand and we have to decide how to play it.”

Voltaire

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

We all go through things in our business life that we don’t always like.

Things that we have no control over.

Things that others have in place that we have to deal with <and can’t change>.

Things that put us in a place and position we can’t change.

All that said.

You can’t fold.

We have to play the hand that we were dealt. You have to choose progress over waiting for ‘the perfect hand’ <which – sorry to say – does not exist> or even waiting around for a better hand to be dealt.

I am writing this because while I have found many business people use great cards to increase the chance to win the hand I have also seen that it doesn’t really guarantee them a victory.

In fact <part 1>, more often than not, having a less than desirable hand doesn’t mean you automatically lose. There are other factors that go into winning <or finding some success>.

In fact <part 2>, I would suggest that more often than not, a less than desirable hand wins.

The best business people know you don’t get to trade cards with anyone else or pay extra to upgrade your hand so they work the hand they have as well as it can be played.

Look.

Each of us is dealt a hand when we come into work every day. I say that because it is important to remember most of the circumstances around you are out of your control, you don’t decide what circumstances you walk into every day and it does no good to complain about them or expect that they will determine your success.

That said.

<1> Many people think that a great hand, good circumstances, will guarantee their success <and increase the likelihood of happiness>.

Nothing could be farther from the truth.

<2> Others will use their less than desirable circumstances as a crutch for why they don’t succeed. They take a look at the hand they were dealt and fold immediately.

They are foolish.

The hand you were dealt cannot be changed, but the way you play it can.

When you go through shit as we all do we all also have the choice how that ‘hand you were dealt’ is played … and inevitably you will do what you believe is best.

Or the best of the worst choices.

Or making the worst best.

Regardless.

You are simply doing what you think it right. And you know what?

In retrospect, if you line up all the choices you made, it will be difficult to see how some of the choices in the left hand column are right … if some of the ones in the right hand column are right. Why? Because you played the cards you had <which were imperfect in the first place>.

But you don’t get to do it over. Part of growing up in business is simply learning to live with regrets and choices made. In an odd way business is a little different than Life in this whole ‘play the cards you have been dealt’ thing.

You will actually find that business is made up of mostly bad choices. Or maybe better said … making the best of the less than best choices. All you really try and do is to keep your balance between them.

In addition … you will actually find that in business, versus Life, is every hand … even if it is bad … even really bad … still has the potential to be a winning hand. And because it is business … as we view the hands we are dealt … I imagine we seek some learning from the past. In other words … you will want to look at some past hands and examine how others have played them.

<note 1: often we do this to some absurd levels>

<note 2: this is sometimes called “procrastination” or “avoiding making the decision”>

Well.

Don’t waste your time.

Fundamental business human behavior doesn’t change over time. You can explore the functional and/or ethical choices <because people inevitably do get affected by how you play your hand> made by others in the past … and we often want to super-examine those made in the most extreme circumstances … but I cannot envision they were any more or less capable to deal with the situations than we are. You can go backwards and judge their decisions and you can be criticize … or applaud … their decisions.

But inevitably the questions lurking behind all that you examine is … what if it had been you? What would you have done in their shoes in that moment?

That’s it. Not their learning, but rather what you would do with those cards in that circumstance. And you know what? I do not need to go backwards in time to figure out what I would do now. Frankly, I will not be any more comfortable knowing that I am doing something that someone else did in the past or something different than someone else did in the past, I have to seek comfort in my decision and my choice.

In the end.

In business … in life … you play the cards you are dealt the best you can. No excuses.You just play ‘em.

And you know what? You will get deal another hand and you play that one the best you can. And maybe that is what this quote tries to tell us.

The last hand doesn’t affect the current cards you hold in hand. And it shouldn’t affect the way you play the next hand. And you certainly don’t get judged by how you played the last hand in the cards you are dealt. People may look at you differently but the cards make no judgment.

They simply get dealt. And you play ‘em.

In the end.

As stated earlier, in business you are more likely than not simply making the best of bad, or less than optimal, choices, therefore, business is pretty much all about playing poor hands well. Ponder that.

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

<

p style=”text-align: center;”>Originally posted in 2012

---

 

“Fate is like a strange, unpopular restaurant filled with odd little waiters who bring you things you never asked for and don’t always like.”

Lemony Snicket

---

So. “I shall seize fate by the throat” was said by Beethoven which means Beethoven would have strangled a shitload of odd little waiters.

Ok. It’s easy to think of Fate as odd little waiters who are some strange unknown people guiding our direction in life … often by giving us the unasked for dishes.

This is kind of an uncomfortable thought. There is some randomness to it that ca make you a little uneasy.

Yeah. I admit. I like the thought that we have some destiny … some fate … awaiting us. I like the thought that there is some reason for being here.

Yup.

Every.

Single.

One.

Of.

Us.

Anyway. The struggle I imagine I have in my head with regard to this whole Fate and having odd little waiters bringing my fate to me is … well … that I like doing and not waiting. And the thought of permitting something theoretical like ‘fate’ or ‘destiny’ to take me by the hand and lead me somewhere doesn’t sit well with me. And I also imagine that part of Life is figuring all this shit out.

Figure it out?

Fate is a combination of reacting <to circumstances thrust upon you like dishes you never ordered> and being proactive <thrusting yourself into and against circumstances>.

This also suggests the ability in shifting the course of things.

Yikes.

Whenever people attempt to shift the course of things, things can go horribly wrong. On the other hand, doing nothing and not making the attempt? Things can also go horribly wrong.

But here’s the deal. Fate is more than assuming history, or what will be, has some preexisting shape. Fate actually assumes in some way you have a role in shaping it. Even though we, you & I as individuals, are merely specks in the larger system of Life (or parts of the whole in systems dynamics), you and i can actually impact the system simply by changing our part.

—

“Fate makes demands of flesh and blood.

And what does it most often demand?

Flesh and blood.”

Russian proverb

—-

And this means meeting the dreams of fate, which demands some flesh & blood, within something called ‘Kairos.’ Kairos is the ability to adapt to and take advantage of changing circumstances. In other words kairos suggests you can manage what fate has in store for you if you manage the circumstances as they arise. This also suggests that fate has a whole kitchen of possible dishes to serve you — not just one. And depending on what you do and how you act and what you say … the odd little waiter may end up bringing you something other than what it thought it was going to bring you a moment ago.

This also suggests some boldness.

Not boldness like ‘fate favors the brave’, but rather having the audacity to believe in this wild and wacky and always complex and somewhat chaotic world you can actually have a say in your fate.

This also means that even if you balk at the concept of ‘being bold’ suffice it to say that fate favors those who actually show up: Interestingly it was JK Rowling who said something along the same lines …

—

“Destiny is a name often given in retrospect to choices that had dramatic consequences.”

J.K. Rowling

—-

Fate is all about showing up.

It seems almost weird to even suggest this, but simply showing up can have dramatic consequences.

Yup.

Even something as unspectacular as ‘showing up’ can be a choice which has dramatic consequences to your destiny. That is an important thought because a shitload of us think of fate when looking in a rear view mirror.

And often we do so without thinking about the choices, and the choices WE made, led us to the place where we saw what we saw in that rear view mirror. I mention that because I imagine we rarely think about showing up as a key choice with some dramatic consequences.

Regardless. You know … I imagine we all have to believe in some way we are here for a reason.

And that is where Fate or Destiny resides.

Somewhere in that ever elusive ‘reason’ or maybe some call it ‘purpose’ or it could just be your “ROI in life.” Pick your poison.

What do I mean?

Fate and destiny are the end accomplishment, but it’s kind of up to you to figure out what that destination is.

Uh oh. Unfortunately fate or destiny … well … they tend to be quiet fellows <or women>.

They tend to keep their thoughts to themselves.

Even worse?

They have a tendency to hide so you can’t sit them down and say ‘what is my fate?’ … ‘what is my destiny?’ … ‘tell me where to go’.

That makes life a little tricky because it makes some really important shit unable to be seen. So you have to make some guesses. Maybe assess some probabilities. Certainly embrace some uncertainty and ambiguity. Or maybe we should just suggest accepting some ‘leaps of faith.’ Some leaps within, well, Kairos.

So. I read somewhere there is the seen and the unseen. That not all is certainty in the world because if there were there would be no opportunity for faith. In other words there would never be any opportunities for a ‘leap of faith.’

Well. Certainty sounds pretty frickin’ nice, but, it would also seem to be a pretty dull world without having to take some leaps of faith on occasion.

Therefore, circling back to my opening quote, sometimes you kind of have to reach out … either with faith … or maybe out of sheer frustration … and grab one of the odd little waiters by the throat and say “here is my fate … this is my destiny … now go back to the kitchen and return this frickin’ dish.”

So, in the end, maybe Fate sometimes does need to be seized by the throat.

—

“I shall seize an odd

little waiter by the throat and order my fate.”

Bruce McTague

——–

In the end. You have a choice with regard to your fate and that’s to show up and make some choices and make some leaps of faith.

I cannot suggest nor guarantee that all choices will be good or even guide you well, but making choices at least means your fate is a little less in the hands of some odd little waiters serving you things you haven’t ordered.

I will be honest.

In today’s world, today’s environment, I am hesitant to leave my fate in the hands of some odd little waiters bringing me things I may not like. Ponder whether you are.

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

Coincidence & Fate

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

“It is not in the stars to hold our destiny but in ourselves.”

―

William Shakespeare

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

“Destiny is not a matter of chance; it is a matter of choice. It is not a thing to be waited for, it is a thing to be achieved.”

―

William Jennings Bryan

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

So. Time and destiny. Two things I am relatively sure 100% of people care about. Here is the tricky thing (tricky part Part 1) about time & destiny — they are not constant companions and friends. They are actually like two ships meeting in the night. Which leads me to Kairos.

I first saw the word in a quirky little book called “The Elegance of the Hedgehog”. Kairos is an ancient Greek word meaning the right or opportune moment or ‘the supreme moment’.

The Greeks believed the concept of Kairos is achieved when an opportune moment is actually grasped. Think about that a second. The corollary to that thought is a belief that if you do not grasp the moment … well … the moment is gone and cannot be re-captured.

Here is tricky part Part 2.  According to ancient Greeks, Kairos was the god of the “fleeting moment.”

Oh shit.

So not only do you have to figure out how to grasp this moment where time and destiny met, but you have to do something in that moment because it is fleeting.

I say ‘oh shit’, but I would guess almost everyone reading this will sit back and think of fleeting moments gone by. We all have them. In Life & in business.

Life is actually a little easier for this Kairos thing because mostly it is just us and if we aren’t completely oblivious to everything going on around us we have a fairly good chance to recognize a time & destiny moment. Then we just have to “perform” or take advantage of that moment (but that is a different discussion).

Business is tougher. It is tougher because it is not just you.

First you have a bunch of managers who most likely are just crappy managers constantly creating false sense of urgency over non-urgent things which means should a Kairos moment occur there will be a blur of meaningless activity creating a curtain between you and Time & Destiny.

Second you are not always the “one” who can actually be empowered to do something when Time & Destiny meet. I cannot tell you how many times I was in a room when  I felt Time & Destiny meet and I was not in a position to actually do something. I imagine I point this out because it decreases the windows of opportunities so if you sense a Kairos moment you better get your ass in gear.

** note: with regard to the second point I would be remiss if I didn’t point out this is why collaboration or effective organizational connectivity, relationships between appropriate skills working effectively together, and open dialogue is so important. This is often a complexity discussion as well as a ‘self organizing’ organizational discussion. Frankly, I don’t care who is having the discussion all I know is that Kairos lies at the mercy of that discussion.

Now. Interestingly the ancient Greeks had two words for time, chronos and kairos. While chronos is quantitative (measured time), kairos has a qualitative nature. I mention that because while we in the business world love plans, planning, formulas, milestones and almost anything you can think of to identify “critical moments”, Kairos is qualitative. This means it has its own timeline, milestone & plan. Qualitative Time means unscheduled, unplanned &, well, suffice it to say you better be able to handle uncertainty. Kairos means you seize the fleeting moment.

It is not easy. And it is not for the faint of heart.

Anyway. Kairos is the ability to adapt to and take advantage of changing circumstances. It is used with people “who manage well the circumstances which they encounter day by day, and who possess a judgment which is accurate in meeting occasions as they arise and rarely misses the expedient course of action”.

** note: Napoleon is a poster child for Kairos

As things shift around leaders, managers and people in general, there appears that undetermined amount of time in-between what is and what will be in which something truly special can occur. It is those who recognize the moment and act upon it … before it disappears … that achieve Kairos. I have also said this before. I do not believe this can be taught. As the Greeks suggest, it is qualitative in its nature. You either have this ability or you don’t. Some people know this, and see this, and can actually act upon this. But not everyone can.

Kairos.

Awesome word.

Awesome concept.

I will say one thing about “fleeting moments.

As Mr. Magorium suggested … “37 seconds well used is a lifetime.”

If you handle Kairos well, well, I can almost guarantee you that in that moment you will be infinite because when time & destiny meet, and you meet that moment well, it creates velocity and direction simultaneously.

---

originally posted March 2010

======

“I shall seize fate by the throat.”

Ludwig van Beethoven

=====

“Destiny is for losers.

It’s just a stupid excuse to wait for things to happen instead of making them happen.”

Blair Waldorf

===

Today I will use Beethoven and Blair <from Gossip Girl> to make a point. Whoa. Whoda thunk Gossip Girl and Beethoven would be used together to make a thoughtful point.

Anyway.

Fate & destiny.

It’s easy to think of these things as some invisible hand guiding our direction in life. It is equally easy to think of these things as out of your control. Let’s just say it is as easy to think of controlling as much as you can as it is to think the world is so complex you cannot control shit. It is sometimes difficult to see links to anything and even coincidence can be baffling.

Personally?

I like the thought that we have some destiny, some fate, awaiting us. That there is some reason for being here.

Every.

Single.

One.

Of.

Us.

The struggle I imagine I have in my head with destiny and fate is the thought of permitting something theoretical like ‘fate’ or ‘destiny’ to take me by the hand and lead me somewhere doesn’t sit well with me. I also imagine that part of Life is figuring all this shit out.

And, frankly, I don’t think I am unusual in this type of thinking.

We have a tendency to use terms like fate & destiny in hindsight: ‘it was fate’ … or … ‘it was my <or his or her> destiny.’

And when you recognize that hindsight is the only way to actually see something like fate or destiny you really have nowhere else to go, thought-wise, then to keep moving and not waiting. You end up there because hindsight, if you squint hard enough, will tend to show you some causal aspects. They may not be completely linear but you will spot some decisions, actions, etc., that can easily be seen as contributing toward that fate or destiny.

Look.

You can wait.

Or.

You can do.

You can permit fate, or what ‘is supposed to be’, dictate your future as it deems to design for you.

Or

You can seize fate by the throat and refuse to let that particular destiny exist and attempt to replace it with something of your own design.

Let me be clear.

Life is sometimes meant to be battled, wrestled and yes, even grabbed by its throat, to get what you want out of it. Sometimes you have to be stubborn and always you have to be at minimum an active participant — and at maximum you have to be an active combatant. I will admit. There are no guarantees even if you seize fate by its throat. But then again, there are no real guarantees in Life, so, what the hell. All I can guarantee is the outlines are vague, everything is connected with everything (so you may not see much direct ‘effect’ when you attempt to ’cause’ something to happen> and you most likely will have no idea whether all your ‘seizing’ was of any value until you can be a bit reflective. Well. That doesn’t sound so rewarding, does it?

So let’s try this Beethoven thought on for size:

 

Free me of only half this affliction and I shall be a complete, mature man. You must think of me as being as happy as it is possible to be on this earth – not unhappy. No! I cannot endure it. I will seize Fate by the throat. It will not wholly conquer me! Oh, how beautiful it is to live – and live a thousand times over!

Yeah. He seized fate by the throat, shook it mercilessly, and plunged into composing <the rest of his Life>.

“Ah, it seemed impossible to leave the world until I had produced all that I felt called upon me to produce.”

Beethoven

Not as eloquently put, Blair from Gossip girl simply suggests that destiny is for losers. That’s a bit harsh. I would suggest the probabilities of losing your dreams and good destiny increases if you let destiny play its own hand. Once again, seizing fate guarantees nothing, but increases the probabilities of a fate you desire.

Look. The world is fairly relentless at convincing most of us we are simply small fractions in the whole and that at best we may get 15 seconds, or 15 minutes, of some ‘fame’ which is our window of opportunity for destiny or fate to shine through. The truth is what Mary Parker Follett calls “the law of the situation.” The law of the situation is that the context, and environment, of any given situation dictates decisions & choices, not anything you may have planned. In other words, don’t seize a plan by the throat, seize situations by the throat. Yeah. Situations dictate destiny’s path. You can do no more, or less, by seizing the situation at hand, squeezing it by the throat, and doing what you can with what you have.

Here is what I know.

If you are eager to accomplish great deeds, shit, accomplish any deeds, then Fate sometimes needs to be seized by the throat.

Why does this matter? I imagine we all have to believe in some way we are here for a reason. I kind of think that ‘reason’ is where Fate or Destiny resides.

But it’s kind of up to you to figure out where that fate/destiny destination is.

Just a warning. Fate or destiny are quiet fellows. They tend to keep their thoughts to themselves. They will not tell you where they live nor will they tell you how to find them. you will never be able to sit them down and say ‘what is my fate?’ … ‘what is my destiny?’ … ‘tell me where to go’.

Sometimes you kind of have to reach out blindly, grab the sonuvabitches by the throat and say ‘here is my fate’ … this is my destiny.’

Trust me on this.

If you do that, fate or destiny, as they struggle for some air, will tell you if you are being stupid with what you are thinking or if you are on the right path.

I imagine it is an easier thought to think, theoretically, they are waiting somewhere for you to welcome you when you get there. And to think it would be a shitload easier if the bastards would actually tell us maybe even send a short email suggesting some things.

But they aren’t and they don’t. And will not.

I believe.

All of us.

You are here to accomplish something.

You are here to do something that will ‘echo into eternity’.

It may not be a 9^th symphony.

It may not even be a moment in the spotlight as a Gossip Girl.

But.

You should refuse to settle for anything less than what you believe your reason to be here is.

In the end.

Beethoven did say it best.

“Fate shall certainly not bend and crush me completely.”

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

“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.