===

“We don’t always know why we do things, but we can always create a reasonable story to explain it.”

===

I wrote this in 2011 around my 500th piece on Enlightened Conflict. I pulled it up because, well, almost a dozen years later and my mother still isn’t sure why anyone would listen to me on a range of topics.

That day in 2011 I celebrated my 500^th post and, well, remembered number 1. And my mother.

When I told my mother I was going to start writing about things and build a website she hesitated a second and then asked me “so why should people care about what you have to say; or believe what you say?”

Interestingly, I was faced with a similar question in the workplace right around the same time.  It was kind of a “feel you make things up” comment and “why should someone care about your opinion?” Both kind of made me sit back because at that time I had about 30 years experience and a fairly extensive resume of things done.

On two fronts I faced an issue I guess I haven’t faced in years I would guess.  For years based on my experience and curiosity based knowledge gathering personality, I have been able to stand up in front of some of the smartest business people in the world and have my point of view seriously considered.  Without question.  And acted upon or facilitated the discussion that needed to take place.

That said. Both situations are versions of the infamous credibility question.

And I guess in both situations I was a little dumbfounded (but I guess, in the case of my mother, a fair question – even though I am her son … the other still had me scratching my head a little).

Well.

Let’s see.

Let’s talk a little about credibility. Mine or anyone’s I would imagine.

I am reasonably smart.

I can add up to ten without an abacus (although using an abacus confuses me).

I know not to put my hand on the hot water pipe (although I did against my parents’ instruction when I was about 6).

I know the difference between there and their (but I do have a nasty habit of dangling prepositions at the end of sentences).

I do know to capitalize the first word in every sentence, but I tend to write everything in lower case (don’t ask me why … I have no answer).

I know that the web is worldwide now (and possibly intergalactic we just haven’t found anyone to confirm usage in another galaxy yet).

I know Perez Hilton and Paris Hilton are not related nor sisters.

So.

How about education? (I wonder if that counts towards the whole credibility thing).

Geez. I have a degree. A couple in fact. But I am still unclear how I got them and admit I was pleasantly surprised they offered them to me graduation day. That said. I have met as many idiots with Harvard degrees as I have brilliant minds (so maybe a college degree isn’t the code). And I have met people with only high school degrees who have PhD level common sense versus people with PhDs and high school common sense.

And experience?  Geez. I have met senior vice presidents who had administrative assistants who were smarter (but not as politically savvy).

So what the heck is the code for credibility?

Christ. I have no frickin clue.

A great resume? Ok. How many people highlight times they may have received a bad review or a time they may have been passed over for a promotion?

So. Maybe not so much.

Great recommendations? Ok. How often do you ask an enemy to write about why they hate you?  (none is the answer in case you didn’t know).

Great grades in school?  Ok. What happens if you didn’t go to school? Or maybe had two bad semesters?

I further struggle as I pose hypothetical situations in my head.

If I were an economist, would I would be more credible if I had a statistics degree?

Would I have a more credible opinion on law if I had a legal degree?

Well.

Hate to break the news to people but non economists can have some pretty articulate and smart thoughts on the economy.

Oh. And while someone may not be able to quote Finch versus Mockingbird 1888 tort reform (boy, I bet I just hacked that one up) there are a lot of people who can tangle with a legal trained mind (I would exclude supreme court justices cause I kinda think they are in a league of their own).

Wow.

Moms are tough enough as it is, but this is a humdinger of a question.

So here is what I do know.

I cannot answer the credibility question for everyone.

But here is how I define it (and hope I am judged the same way).

Ultimately it comes down to the face to face encounter (face to face can be in person or in a piece of their writing), i.e., what someone says face to face or in what I read from them.

I seriously cannot judge without that stimulus.

Sure. I guess I am not surprised if I read something from someone and it is really smart and articulate and they say they graduated from Yale or Stanford.

The trouble is I am equally unsurprised if I find they list Devry as their higher education.

I believe people have opportunities to collect moments of learning (and some don’t collect).

People have opportunities to do different things (and some don’t do).

I guess what I find most credible is a combination of depth of useful learning on a topic (doesn’t have to be a degree, just learning, and useful in that it contributes to progress) and perspective (call it a counterbalance knowledge).

Ok. I guess an asteroid physicist if all they know is the physics of an asteroid they would be credible.

I imagine credible comes in a variety of shapes and sizes. But in the end I imagine i end on one word – depth. It is incredibly easy to skate on the superficial surface of almost anything. Credible people can swim and dive and even save some people from drowning. They have depth.

In the end.

So what do I tell my mom? (and I guess people at work if pushed)

Why should anyone believe what I have to say? Heck. I don’t know.

On day one with my website I didn’t have shit to say (do not have that problem at work).

Today? (maybe about 11 months and 500 posts later – now 13 years and 3,000 posts)

Gosh.

Maybe what I say makes sense.

Maybe I offer up a logical reason to believe.

Maybe in my own little world people have actually listened to what I had to say (so for some warped non linear logic flow I reason that other people will listen).

I have some education (but others have more and less).

I have some experience (but others have more and less).

Maybe all that matters is if I say something that makes sense and I can defend it, well, who cares if I am credible as long as my ideas are credible.

Maybe I have some depth.

Maybe the answer is: “Mom, people should listen to me because my ideas and thoughts are credible.”

Whew.

I hope that is all that really matters.

Hopefully after everything I have written and published I have achieved some level of credibility.

On the other hand if I don’t, I can also hearken back to post #1 which suggested all that was important was that I write for me and if no one came to my party I wouldn’t be disappointed for I had not waited for people to attend to have fun.

I had a party all by myself.

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

“When you’re young you feel like you have to prove a point, and you scream it if you have to.”

Miranda Lambert

——-

Whew.

It is a wacky world we live in. It is one huge cacophony of “squeaky wheels” squeaking over what is important to themselves. Clearly some people are squeaking about the larger collective issues, but there appears to be an inordinate amount of people squeaking about conspiracies, personal opinions and false narratives. the former have the larger interests in mind and the latter seem to be a bit more of ‘self’ in mind. I blame my generation for propagating the ‘the squeaky wheel gets the grease’ mentality but, that said, it makes those of us who prefer ‘speak softly, speak confidently, speak meaningfully’, well, want to scream.

I believe people are getting tired of all the squeaking.

This doesn’t mean the pendulum will swing back to sanity at rocket speed, or even fast at all, in fact it will move more slowly than people like I want mostly because people my age will continue squeaking <the squeaky wheel was their generational wisdom> and espousing the merits of being squeaky.

Suffice it to say this will be another one of those generational tectonic shift things which older people will espouse some wisdom <squeak> and younger people will chafe at the wisdom believing squeaking is just noise and that real issues need meaningful discussions.

The real issues mean you still have to pick your battles, but you still have to speak out when speaking out matters. And, yeah, you gotta scream if you have to.

Basically the desire to scream something is a formula:

having a feeling that something is important

+

frustration

=

the possibility to desire to scream

Many times this desire to scream from young people is driven by wanting to find answers rather than just fucking squeak about shit. We older folk can be quite frustrating at times for young people with our disregard for their questions. Far too often we brush them off as naive or lean back in our comfortable chairs and sagely say “… just wait … you will see and understand” .

But the impatience of youth wants answers now mostly because they struggle to not only see the importance of the squeakiness, but they struggle to see the present as indicative of a better future they want. They know they deserve some answers because they understand that finding some enlightenment, some understanding, permits them to progress a little better off intellectually or knowledge wise to address the next thing in life and shape the future rather than squeak about the present.

It gets frustrating because without some answers the obstacle remains (or remains in some vague outlines) and, well, it makes you want to scream.

I am fairly sure most of us older folk do not address their impatience with any ill intent; we just see impatience and we want to teach patience. I guess the odd thing to me is that we older folk espouse this whole squeaky wheel thing <which is kind of absurd advice in the first place> and then when someone cares enough to squeak and, just like that nagging noise under the hood every time we start our car, we ignore it <until some light pops up on our dashboard>.

I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that for older folk the desire to scream is … well … shit … almost the same as a younger person <go figure>.

Desire to scream is mostly not about some bravado or self righteousness; it is more about demanding that there are answers to important fundamental issues or demanding to be heard ON the real issues instead of all the squeaky shit.

And maybe that is what screaming is all about. Demanding. Maybe it is about kicking some damn doors down because the damn door needs to be kicked. Sometimes life, and business, gets so frustrating you just wanna start kicking down doors.

And you do.

Well.

Sort of.

Lets say … you try and kick down the doors but at minimum you scream and kick.

Why?

Because it matters. Really matters.

And it matters to you that other people should think it matters to THEIR OWN interests. It is not an “I” things, its a “we” thing.

Now.

I wrote awhile back about ‘protesting for yourself.’ Today’s thought is a slightly different version in that you are protesting for knowledge & progress.

Sure.

It is about yourself, but it is more about going on the offensive rather than defensively protecting yourself against the squeaking issues.

In this case you scream to be heard. You scream because you gotta try. You scream because while things happen that doesn’t mean silence is that answer.

——————–

Rule 1. bad things happen.

Rule 2. You cant change rule number one.

Rule 3. You still gotta try. Even though bad things happen and you cant change that you gotta try.

 Even with all the anger, violence, stupidity & senseless waste … you gotta try.

Wayne Arthurson

——————————–

Anyway. I am clearly in the ‘speak softly, speak confidently, speak meaningfully’ camp.

I believe the whole ‘squeaky wheel’ advice simply encourages nonsensical and less than important squeaking. I believe it encourages noise just for noise sake. I believe it encourages morons to be more loudly moronic.

But maybe that is my point today. You gotta do one things to get to do what you think is the right thing to do. Yeah. In order to effectively ‘speak softly, speak confidently, speak meaningfully’ you also gotta pick your battles, i.e., when to scream.

Because in a world in which we receive 100’s of texts, 100’s of emails, face 100’s of squeaking people all in a matter of 100 minute increments, sometimes you have to just stand there and scream.

And while it is partially to prove a point it is more about a point needs to be made.

Pick your battles wisely and when you do, scream.

But when you do pick a battle … don’t be afraid to scream.

Business, as well as Life, demands participation. Someone may choose to be indifferent, but all that means is that someone else is not only making decisions for you, they are affecting the arc of your life and, consequently, your destiny. To be clear. This is a fact. The affect may not be direct, but the point is that even if you work hard, are persistent, have clear objectives, if you are indifferent all the external factors will increase the gravity of the environment you are doing all of those things within. In other words, unless you are at your best everyday, maybe a little lucky on occasion, the arc of your destiny is going to get dragged down to all the things you were indifferent to. And while all of that matters if your own life and destiny matters to you, if you participate in the deadweight of indifference you may actually be facilitating the twisting of society’s fate. I would be remiss if I didn’t point out, again, this is not just true of Life, but business. And while I do believe this discussion gets warped in some incredibly unhealthy ways, business should not ignore the discussion and being indifferent really isn’t an option.

==

“I hate the indifferent. I believe that living means taking sides. Those who really live cannot help being a citizen and a partisan. Indifference and apathy are parasitism, perversion, not life. That is why I hate the indifferent.
The indifference is the deadweight of history. The indifference operates with great power on history. The indifference operates passively, but it operates. It is fate, that which cannot be counted on. It twists programs and ruins the best-conceived plans. It is the raw material that ruins intelligence. That what happens, the evil that weighs upon all, happens because the human mass abdicates to their will; allows laws to be promulgated that only the revolt could nullify, and leaves men that only a mutiny will be able to overthrow to achieve the power. The mass ignores because it is careless and then it seems like it is the product of fate that runs over everything and everyone: the one who consents as well as the one who dissents; the one who knew as well as the one who didn’t know; the active as well as the indifferent. Some whimper piously, others curse obscenely, but nobody, or very few ask themselves: If I had tried to impose my will, would this have happened?
I also hate the indifferent because of that: because their whimpering of eternally innocent ones annoys me. I make each one liable: how they have tackled with the task that life has given and gives them every day, what have they done, and especially, what they have not done. And I feel I have the right to be inexorable and not squander my compassion, of not sharing my tears with them.
I am a partisan, I am alive, I feel the pulse of the activity of the future city that those on my side are building is alive in their conscience. And in it, the social chain does not rest on a few; nothing of what happens in it is a matter of luck, nor the product of fate, but the intelligent work of the citizens. Nobody in it is looking from the window of the sacrifice and the drain of a few. Alive, I am a partisan. That is why I hate the ones that don’t take sides, I hate the indifferent.”
Antonio Gramsci

==

In today’s current political environment, which bleeds into society as some fairly absurd niche arguments about what is right or wrong and important or unimportant, the people become more and more distant to traditional parties or traditional ‘community break lines.’ This impacts business whether you like it or not; whether you want it or not. Being indifferent to this, acting like you are detached from this, simply means an already ‘delicate and dangerous’ situation becomes even more fraught with peril – for your business.

==

“At a certain point in their historical lives, social classes become detached from their traditional parties. In other words, the traditional parties in that particular organisational form, with the particular men who constitute, represent and lead them, are no longer recognised by their class (or fraction of a class) as its expression. When such crises occur, the immediate situation becomes delicate and dangerous, because the field is open for violent solutions, for the activities of unknown forces, represented by charismatic “men of destiny”.”
Antonio Gramsci

==

I have argued for years a business cannot detach itself from society, responsibility to societal issues and much of the larger narratives and discussions taking place. Detaching yourself from it under the guise of “my job is insure my business makes a profit and offers people employment” is not a sustainable stance nor strategy. I hate indifference. Inevitably a business needs to pick a side. To be clear. That sometimes simply means taking a stand on what you are not, not saying what you are. If you don’t believe it is your job to carry the flag ON an issue, that’s okay. But you do have to make it your job to say “but I will not stand by THAT flag.” Ponder.

====

“Only a few find the way, some don’t recognize it when they do – some… don’t ever want to.”

Cheshire Cat

====

Finding your way is most likely one of the most desired, and elusive, things in business and life. Now. We talk about this a lot, like a shitload of a lot, but truthfully very few truly find “the way.” That doesn’t stop us from proclaiming we have, or we are on our way (our journey) or even suggest the search for finding the way is actually finding the way, but the grander point the Cheshire Cat makes is many of us probably actually do, but don’t recognize it (for whatever reason).

Uhm. I was tempted to use “most of us” rather than ‘many of us’ in that last sentence.

Finding the way is tough. Not because we don’t have goals and objectives and even dreams. Mostly because things in life are rarely black or white and the outlines of what we really “want” are often a bit vague. What this means is not only is the way winding, but every frickin’ day is a winding road (to quote Sheryl Crow). Many of us know there is ‘something better’ out there, but finding THE way to that betterness is difficult mostly because ‘winding’ don’t permit you the luxury to see that far ahead, certainty is situational and the horizon often is blocked by a forest or hill.

Which leads me to where I believe the Cheshire cat really knew his shit.

Some ‘don’t ever want to’ for fear of the unknown. On a personal note, despite all the things that I have done that may appear risky I can develop as long a list, if not longer, of things I didn’t do — for whatever reason (some good, some bad). It reminds me of something:

–

Sometimes I think about why there aren’t more people running, sprinting towards greatness. Why there aren’t more people continually evolving into something better, stronger, and happier. I wonder this a lot as I read or listen to stories about miserable jobs and unsatisfying home lives and dreams that have been left to decompose. And, I think I’m starting to understand why some people just stay, as they are, and stop aspiring for betterment. I think I get it. I think I see why it’s not a matter of capability, but rather a matter of personal choice.

–

Look. Some people start hurling themselves down drastically different paths, but most people just aren’t that hasty. In fact many people just don’t want to because hurling yourself can be scary. Sprinting towards greatness would be easy if “the way” was a straight track instead of a winding way.

So what we do is try and make ourselves comfortable. Lists. Milestones. Quarterly goals. We convince ourselves these are way stations on our way to getting somewhere. They are not. they are simply parking benches along some path someone else has built where they suggest you sit and rest and think about how you’ve attained something (but, if you look closely, you’re not really sure it was something you wanted to attain in the first place or if it is even representative of progress you truly value).

Anyway. I am not suggesting anyone hurl themselves anywhere. And I am also not suggesting you should be incredibly frustrated if you don’t find the way. Maybe the ones who do should just feel very fortunate and the rest of us should restlessly pursue A way. However. I would say everyone should be a little reflective of the whole ‘parking benches/milestones’ thing I mentioned. It becomes incredibly easy to use deadlines as some tangible proof of progress. This is a mistake. More often than not that is simply, in Farnam Street words, speed versus velocity. You may not know if you are on your way somewhere or not but you should always be sure you have some velocity, not just some speed.

Which leads me to pursuing ‘the way.’

—

Alice: would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here.

Cheshire cat: that depends a good deal on where you want to go,

Alice: I don’t much care.

Cheshire cat: then it doesn’t matter which way to go.

Alice: so long as I get somewhere.

Cheshire cat: oh, you’re sure to do that, if only you walk for enough.”

—

I will admit I am not a linear “from here to there” type of person excepting if it eliminates something that could get in the way of restlessness. For example, I would gladly pay extra for a bullet train to get me from one city to the next so I could wander more in a destination. I would gladly do a short sprint building a ‘good enough’ website so I could focus resources on something else. I believe in complexity theory these may be fractals (linear moments linking some things within multidimensional complex systems). I don’t really care about the overall direction as long as I get somewhere and the linear shit is simply a means to an end. I would imagine this restlessness can sometimes be ‘purposeless’ (or directionless) restlessness. This suggests that even if you don’t have an objective, or a direction, or a purpose being restless will get you somewhere someday. In other words, moving increases the likelihood you will get somewhere rather than standing still or being stagnant.

Okay. Simple when you think about it that way, huh? Look, as noted earlier, you may not find your way in your roaming restlessness. And you may actually fall in love with just being restless. But you may find yourself overwhelmingly happy wherever you end up (even though you may not have been specifically aiming there). Now. Some business people reading this may think “this guy is nuts.” And they may be right. But I would argue most business leaders, the good ones, may not be able to specifically articulate where they want to go, but they have a general sense of the scenario they envision their business in that would equate success (this could be called defining a Vision). It not a specific destination. It’s not a specific road or way. It’s just a specific thought. In that definition restlessness is significantly more productive than investing gobs of energy & time trying to make that thought into some road map to some destination.

• *** note: that logic works in Life too.

Ok. I guess the point of this is that sometimes finding your way isn’t necessarily a specific ‘way.’

Or maybe even a well defined way.

Or even the ‘way’ you were thinking was the one you wanted.

But. If you keep going, you are more likely to find ‘the way’ then if you become frozen worrying or thinking about which road to take. Ponder.

==

“Light bulbs die, my sweet. I will depart.”

Mr. Magorium

==

I enjoy truly good movies in that they take metaphorical characters to the extremes to make a point. And I love it when they do so to make a point about life … and living life which leads me to Mr. Margorium’s Wonder Emporium. It’s an odd movie, but it is an odd delightful movie about Life.

And metaphorically speaking they box you in with the characters:

• – the cynical practical responsible ‘grown up’ (lovingly called Mutant) who has lost the joy of imagination (let’s call it the magic in life)
• – the child who represents the joy that can be found when you are open to life’s magic
• – the mystical adult (Magorium) who lives in an adult world with a decidedly un-adult view (and is slightly an outcast)
• – and the hopeful future (Mahoney) entering the adult world with the spark of magic within, but has trouble seeing how that spark fits in an adult world (lets call her ‘hope eternal for that which is magical in life’).

Let me begin with the ‘hopeful future’ and the resistance Life has a habit of shoving in the face of those maturing into adulthood. Life, left to its own devices, will more than likely try and smother ‘hope’ with ‘harsh reality.’ what this does is make things just a bit darker, a little less brighter and sparkly. which leads me back to the movie. Mr. Magorium suggests to Mahoney: “you have a sparkle”, i.e., something reflective of something bigger trying to get out despite Life suggesting otherwise.

His advice?

You have to live … “I have.”

Short line. Big thought. And maybe the biggest tipping point decision one has to make moving from youth to adulthood. And it is a biggie of a decision. Many of us don’t really do that well with this decision.

Anyway.

Between these 4 characters you wander through pretty much every aspect you have in your own pea-like brain. And while the movie is meant for kids it is also fun and a bit thoughtful for adults <if you pay close attention>.

Mr. Magorium who has decided it is time for him to leave this world and let Mahoney run the shop <symbolic for youth to adulthood>. Magorium is awesome. He is a man with crazy eyebrows and a pet zebra and has owned his toy store for over 113 years. Obviously this isn’t an ordinary toy store (note to self: is any really good toystore anywhere truly ordinary?). This is a magical toy store that has a temper tantrum when it hears the bad news Magorium is dying. The problem is that only Magorium knows that he’s dying. He’s not sick or weak, and he doesn’t foresee some violent or accidental death. He just knows <and this may be one of the best parts> because he once found the perfect pair of shoes and fell in love with them so entirely that he bought enough to last his whole life.

And now he is on his last pair.

Therefore, his life is over.

And with that he states ‘light bulbs die … he is simply departing’.

What a wonderful thought.

He is departing ‘a whole life.’

Don’t we all wish we could end that way? And maybe there is a part of us who like the concept of departing rather than dying.

And maybe make us think a little, through this incredibly strange character, why is his life whole (that is pretty much what the movie is about and showing how others can also live a whole life)?
The easy lessons (kind of). He does not judge, but sees things with fresh and open eyes. He doesn’t condemn actions simply encourages to act & think differently. He treats time as a gift of freedom to think and remember and understand that which was, that which is and is willing to recreate that which is … well … impossible … to transform time.

Its not just having an imagination; it is an attitude.

“you have to believe it to see it.”

And when I heard that I went back into my files and pulled this Buckminster Fuller thought: “seeing-is-believing is a blind spot in man’s vision”.

Both are correct. It is a failure of imagination if you solely believe something must be seen to be believed. Ok. Maybe not even a failure of imagination maybe something worse. It is almost a belief that nothing new, nothing seemingly impossible, is possible.

So. This sometimes silly movie makes you think about all of this is and about learning to, well, unlearn some things. To free yourself from all the things that you ‘know’ and the things which may keep you from undiscovered roads. And that sometimes believing in something is more important than anything else. And asking you to remember that all things which happen to you endlessly beget new thoughts that could change your life (and it’s a never ending process).

And if you do that?

Well. Life is magical.  It’s kind of like a magical toy store as it is.

And with that thought you hear the best advice of all:

“Your life is an occasion. Rise to it.”

Yeah. Life is an occasion.

In the end that is what the movie makes you think about. The magic within you, within any of us and that we need to rise to our magic, our sparkle, our Life … or lose it.

And that is the point for Molly Mahoney who also represents “hope eternal” for all adults (the metaphor).

“What Mahoney needed was the opportunity to prove to herself that she was something more than she believed.”

Silly movie with a non-silly lesson.

You need to believe in you. And, I guess, believe that you have some magic somewhere inside you.

It is a neat lesson. It is an important lesson. And a lesson provided in a pretty magical way.

+++++++++++++++++

“the die is cast”

(iacta alea est)

Julius Caesar

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

So. I was tempted to call this ‘now or never part 2.” I say that because after a “now or never moment“ there is a, well, a post choice/decision.

That decision is the fact there is no turning back.

Well. Let’s just say the moment represents  that “we have made our choice and the die is cast.” <‘die’ as in dice>

Julius Caesar said this today, January 10th, some 50ish years before Jesus as he crossed the Rubicon, defying the Roman Senate, and starting civil war. Caesar was stating that he was making an irrevocable decision. And, as dice is a game of chance, he will have to play them as they are cast.

I imagine none of us are Caesar and the majority of us will never have to make such a huge choice as Caesar, but I do think more people should think this way with regard to choices.

Too often I feel people think a choice is simply … well … but of ‘the moment.’

Too often I feel businesses think a choice is simply … well … but of ‘the moment.’

Too often I feel like far too many people think in the next moment we can toss away the last choice and just make another choice.

Sure. That may be the case sometimes, but, as noted in ‘now or never’, not all the time.

Not all moments are created equal.

Not all choices can be changed, tossed aside or “un-choiced.”

Some choices are truly forks in the road where you cannot go back and start over. Some choices, well, ‘cast the die.’

I do believe most of us would be better off if we believed more of our choices should be thought of this way- as ‘the die have been cast’ choices. Why? I believe in our current “people need to adapt & be agile” to be successful attitude, we far too often think a new choice is a reflection of agility & “smart adaptation.” In doing so we run the risk that the initial choice cannot be tossed aside because it truly was a ‘fork in the road’ choice and, whether we want it or not, or like it or not, the die had been cast.

But, hey, that’s me.

Ok. One more thing. Let me take a minute to discuss an “irrevocable decision.”

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

“It is always thus, impelled by a state of mind which is destined not to last, that we make our irrevocable decisions.”

In Search of Lost Time, Volume II: Within a Budding Grove

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

‘Now or never’ is a state of mind which is but a window in time. In other words, it is there and gone. And it is within those windows in which irrevocable decisions are made.

To use the quote, it is within this window you throw the dice. Yeah. You actually throw your dice into what I will call “unknown-ville.”

Yikes. No wonder we hesitate to decide a choice is of the ‘die is cast’ mode. I say that because “irrevocable” is a lot like “forever” or maybe “never.” I mean that big, all encompassing, fraught with peril, audacious-type thoughts are captured in those little words.

And that is why many people do nothing in now or never moments.

Far too many just hold the dice. Why? Because it is scary to make an irrevocable decision.

It is kind of scary to know you will have thrown the dice and will never get to throw them again. And have to play them as they lay. Regardless how they lay.

Yup. That the die have been cast.

But know this.

If you do nothing when it is now or never, Life will cast the die. And Life will make the irrevocable decision.

Personally? I would rather cast my own dice.

Nothing against Life but while I imagine it would be a fun pal, I do not know it well enough to trust it with my fate.

When I make a choice I think, and accept, “the die are cast” and deal with what is before me. Ponder.

==

“In life, unlike chess, the game continues after checkmate.”
Isaac Asimov

==

“A golden ray of sun. Rebellious, it seeks out a storm / As if in storms it could find peace.”

Mikhail Lermontov

==

Most things in life are much more like chess than we like to admit. Things rarely happen in straight lines, moves are not always straightforward, there are multiple players on the board with a variety of skills, and there is almost always something playing against you (seen and unseen). What we possibly understate, however, is that life is more like multiple chess matches happening at the same time. Its kind of a different way of suggesting the world is complex, dynamic, and more like a system than a machine. What it also means is 99% of the time life continues even after checkmate because that is one game and there are numbers of other games still doing on.

Which leads me to doing the right thing.

We tend to view ‘doing the right thing’ as the path to growth at scale. I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that doing ‘the thing’ is less often a ‘thing’ but things strung together, i.e., a pattern. And patterns are tricky bastards. What I mean by that is groups are notorious for identifying patterns thru consensus and build up general concepts from experiences (agreed shared experiences in this case) creating less-than-optimal growth – its just mediocre if not dangerous as it is oblivious to future contexts and/or consequences. We all have this ability to identify patterns, make associations and use the knowledge to navigate life. The tricky part is this ability is dependent upon patterned experiences as well as the environments in which those patterns were identified and that, often, stratifies some bias. What I mean by that is it creates an implicit assumption that whatever is will continue to be. As a corollary, this creates an implicit assumption that one game is just like another game and avoiding checkmate in one game is similar to another game. That is a dangerous assumption.

I will say that business’s (and, increasingly, individual’s) unhealthy marriage to data analytics tends to reward this type of dangerous thinking. It is dangerous because it fundamentally extrapolates the ‘patterns of what is known’ and offers what is commonly seen as a sensible set of assumptions. Well, that is, they are sensible until they run into unforeseen or ‘what was unknown at the time of the analysis’ and they either just don’t work or work less effectively than what was planned. Suffice it to say that once we have learned a pattern for something and have experiences, the usefulness of the identified patterns (regardless of the environment/context and regardless of whether it was optimal usefulness or simple usefulness) makes us stop learning. We do not seek to ‘re-learn’ anything, but rather actually seek out that pattern (or what could be construed as something close to that pattern) as a default bias to thinking as well as behaviors/solutions. This is pattern recognition and just as with almost anything good, it can also be bad. Bad because, well, if life is a series of chess matches played at the same time, not all games will follow a pattern you may know; let alone like.

Which leads me to Follett’s theory of integration.

Mary Parker Follett’s theory of integration suggests the person as continuous with community and that things are in constant relation to each other – acting on and being acted on at the same time. This is a pragmatic and possibilities view of Life. Pragmatically you are part of a system, a community of people and matches, wherein “the group and the individual come into existence simultaneously” offering possibilities that as an individual one would struggle to reach without the community of matches. Follett suggested our being in the world as a process of “progressive integrations” with others and with the world around us – a process of “ceaseless interweaving of new specific responding”. This means life is an ongoing process of moves and countermoves each integrating experience, knowledge and attitudes into decisions and behaviors. Well. That sounds like chess, no? Anyway. She understood that whenever one engages with others, the person as well as the other have been mutually influenced. She also stated: “our happiness, our sense of living at all is directly dependent on our joining with others. We are lost, exiled, imprisoned until we feel the joy of union.”

And maybe therein lies my point for today. While we may seek patterns to lean on and data to offer us easier answers than Life typically demands, maybe we should feel the joy of the chess match, the matches, the checkmates, and seek out the storm for maybe, just maybe, true peace comes from within the storm or, well, the chess match. Ponder.

====

“Aim above morality.

Be not simply good, be good for something. “

Henry David Thoreau

====

Well. Its New Year’s Eve and I thought I would take a minute and discuss happiness. Generally speaking, I am an optimist (maybe really a skeptical optimist), believe we should do more utopian thinking and believe, for the most part, humans are kind and like to coexist in a healthy collaborative way.

Which leads me to say If I read one more “how to be happy” article to guide someone into the New Year I am gonna not only be unhappy, but pretty grumpy.

First. I have a feeling that anyone who has to be told how to be happy is unlikely ever to actually be happy.

Second. I am fairly sure happiness is not a task; it is an outcome of actions not an action in and of itself.

Anyway. I would suggest the perfect formula for just about anything good in life, and business, is when you can inextricably tie strategy to tactics and tactics to strategy within a healthy mindset. Basically, if you can embed your strategy into each and every task or action that means everything you do is contributing to the objective you aspire to and provide some tangible substance to your mindset.

The problem with most new year resolutions or ‘things to do’ lists are (a) the objective is so frickin’ big that it makes the success probability % so low it’s depressing to even think about <after the initial elation of ‘thinking big’> (b) the tactics are so pedantic and uninspiring <declutter your Life, call a friend, make time for yourself, etc.> it diminishes the bigness goals, dreams & objectives could, and should, be.

I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that if you go into all of this with a positive, hopeful, mindset both A & B deflate optimism and inflate pessimism bit by bit.

Which leads me to where Thoreau offers us the perfect New Year’s resolution.

• The objective is to aim above morality.
• The strategy is to be the best you can be <all the time>.
• The tactic, the task, is doing the right thing <all the time>.

These are real actions someone can take. No ‘steps to success’, but rather simply steps which embrace and embody your objective AND mindset.

Look.

If you are aspiring to be happy or happier then you surely should, maybe even need, to ask yourself some very serious questions about your Life and what steps you are taking each and every day.

Once again, not milestones, but actual behavioral type steps.

But maybe even more importantly is to better understand WHY we are taking the steps. In other words, reflect upon your mindset and how it fits into not just a ‘better you’, but a ‘better us world.’ I imagine I suggest this because it is the mindset that will keep you going on those days that things aren’t going so well. And, I promise you, not all days will go well.

Oddly, I think of something Nixon said in one of his speeches in 1970 as I think about HOW we should meet the challenges of a new year.

He said that the United States could no longer “conceive all the plans, design all the programs, execute all the decisions, and undertake all the defense of the free nations of the world”.

He noted that other nations had to do more too.

He also noted that we needed to “discipline our occasional impetuosity.”

You just cannot conceive all plans, design all the programs and undertake all the actions and be successful. Unfortunately, its not that simple. Not only is it not possible for the ‘self’ in that many things are dependent upon context and environment and others, but it certainly isn’t possible as a ‘grand strategy’, i.e., the world in totality.

That said. Life offers us a very difficult assignment, but rarely a unique one. In carrying out our assignments we will do some things well, others not so well, and, well, others just badly. In addition, we sometimes encounter some occasional impetuosity <which requires discipline>.

And even if you do get some things right, later on in Life, years after this year passes, with the perspective that time affords, both the calamity of the bad and the praise we drown ourselves in for the things done well will inevitably seem obviously excessive and extreme.

I can guarantee in the next year we will all sometimes be brilliant, sometimes be foolish, sometimes be lucky and sometimes be terribly unlucky.

But all of the things I just typed are things. Tactics implemented in everyday Life which will be successful & unsuccessful in and of itself.

Which brings me back to suggest if we were to aim above morality within each tactic we will be successful.

SONY DSC

I would also suggest to aim above morality means you set aside the societal norms of measurement of success & failure. Maybe even set aside measurement at all. This means you no longer hesitate with prejudice, ignorance, selfishness or any societal pressure placed upon you. You, all alone, take actions with the objective to aim above morality. And in taking actions with this objective in mind we are capable of our best each & every moment. We become a powerful force for what is good & right.

And I also imagine you become a powerful force with regard to your own health & wellbeing.

All I know is that once I saw Thoreau’s quote I knew what I would be doing in 2023 – aiming above morality in all that I do. Generally speaking, this seems like a good objective. And, to end where I began, I imagine happiness can be found within this particular objective and more likely to be found if you, well, pursue happiness as an objective. Ponder.

=====

“In spite of the prejudice, ignorance, selfishness and all the other impediments that drag us downwards, there are billions of people who want a better, brighter life for themselves and their descendants – who want to be free from fear and want.

When combined with the foresight and ingenuity we’re capable of in our best moments, this is a powerful force for good that congenital pessimists are far too hasty to dismiss.”

Adam Lee

======

=====

“Pooh looked at his two paws.

He knew that one of them was right, and he knew that when you had decided which one of them was right, then the other one was the left, but he never could remember how to begin.”

House at Pooh Corner

==========

So. I opened with this Pooh quote to talk about first words.

Not first impressions, but first words.

Sure. They can be directly related, but I firmly believe first impressions are significantly less important than last impressions. What I mean is that 99% of the time I can redirect a first impression more toward the desired last impression.

First words are trickier. And, as with most things in Life, not all first words are created equal.

There are first words which are just not articulated well. These you can recover from. These are the ones that we all think about afterwards and say “shit, I wish I had said ‘this’ rather than what I said.” And you know what? You can.

But then there are the first words which everyone knows are your true feelings. The ones which put an indelible stamp upon your character. These are, well, almost impossible to recover from. And, truthfully, you cannot recover from something which is a true reflection of who and what you are. You can stumble, mumble or offer a variety of jumbled words, but you is what you is and your first words reflect who you is.

And that is why I thought of Pooh on this topic.

You receive a question.

You think.

And the other person, or people, can actually see you think.

 You know that there is a right answer and a … well … left answer. You look at both paws and just aren’t sure which is which.

Therefore, you answer from your truest self.

It is a character answer.  

Simplistically , when I view another person’s first words when trapped in a “which paw is which” situation I attempt to bucket it into one of two buckets. Are the words a reflection from an “I” perspective <which tend to defend the “I”> or are the words a reflection from a more global view <which tend to defend what other’s may think>?

Why?

Because, to me, great character is most often driven by an ability, or desire, to view the world in someone else’s shoes. This doesn’t mean character shouldn’t be a reflection of self and what is important from your own ethical & moral compass, but rather it means you are always challenging your sense of self against what matters, or has meaning, to other people.

I will admit.

I am sure a part of me wrote about this today because of Trump. He made me, and still makes me, think about how words are used. Time after time Trump ‘first words’ response make me not only think he is hollow empathetically, but also incredibly incapable of viewing the world through anyone’s eyes, and Life criteria filter, other than his own. I often reflect back on his response to Mr. Khan’s emotional, but articulate stance on the patriotism of Muslim Americans. Trump’s response, his words, were so unenlightened, portrayed an absurd lack of empathy let alone showing a depth of obliviousness to the real issue at hand and so defensive, well, suffice it to say that first words matter and often create an indelible imprint as an impression of who and what you are. Where Trump truly is a master is in the follow up to his first words, his attempts at either managing the words or actually arguing you didn’t hear what he actually said.

That said.

I imagine he will send out a variety of tweets trying to explain how his first words were misconstrued.

That said. First words are first words. And first words matter. First words are a true reflection of character maybe 99% of the time.

Look. We have all been asked a question and sat there looking at each paw wondering where to begin. Just listen to me on any podcast and you will envision me looking at paws – a lot. But.

99% of the time, even if we do not get the words exactly right, the words will be in some form or fashion a reflection of how we truly feel.

99% of the time, even if we do not get the words exactly right, the words will be in some form or fashion a reflection of our character.

I do not sit here today writing to suggest anyone should be more careful with regard to what they say first. I do not because I believe most of us are pretty careful with our first words.

I will, however, suggest that everyone should pay attention and think about the first words that they hear. Not to say that someone cannot revise something said at first but rather because not all first words are created equal.

And the first words said by someone who cannot remember which paw is right and which is left and isn’t sure where to begin?

Well. Most likely those first words will be a reflection of who and what they truly are. Ponder.

====

“… if you look beyond the tumult of sensational headlines and well-publicized atrocities, there’s a quiet trend of improvement throughout the world.

But although it’s sometimes drowned out by the drumbeat of fear-mongering, the progress that gives rise to hope is real and ongoing.

Adam Lee

====

As we near another Christmas I don’t know if it is because I associate hope and hopefulness with Christmas or that I tend to pay attention more to the good things happening in the world (the sometimes unnoticed small steps of progress) than I do the bombastic voices of ‘everything is bad’, but despite all the noisy shitshow stuff happening, I do believe there is a quiet trend of improvement happening before our eyes.

I say that recognizing it is tough to be optimistic these days. And I don’t mean because of what is actually happening in today’s world, but rather because if you are optimistic you run the significant risk of being trampled by a herd of cynicism, pessimism and those unwilling to believe the future can be better than the past. That said. I believe the bigger challenge we face is a general reluctance to believe people can change or should be forgiven.

There is a quiet voice of positive being overwhelmed by a loud voice of ‘nothing can be good’

I mention this because I just reread an old Pope Francis Christmas homily. It was positive, hopeful, instructive and a request that we look beyond decadence and selfishness in order to raise all of human kind to a better place.

It is the kind of message you would hope a religious leader would give.

And then I made the naïve mistake of scanning the comments underneath the article <in several papers>. An overwhelming amount of comments were negative.

Either they:

<a> suggested the message was misguided <somehow some people saw it as anti-capitalism>,

<b> suggested the Pope was a hypocrite <because he represents a church with millions in assets>,

<c> the church had no basis to offer hope because of past transgressions or

<d> religion is bad and therefore what religious people say is simply fantasy <even if it is a good message>.

It is like people were seeking reason to not accept the positive message.

Let’s be clear. The Catholic Church and its history is strewn with moments of sin. And, yet, the Church has a Pope who not only accepts it, but is trying own its history. Should we judge an organization by the moments of transgression & sin <albeit they can be heinous transgressions on occasion> or by the true intent & soul of the organization and its voice for the future? That is a big question with an answer bigger than I can offer.

That said.

I find it disheartening that we cannot accept positiveness and hope without trying to burden it with cynicism or pessimism.

I find it disheartening we can’t accept heroic acts from non heroic people – when we view them in totality.

Good is good.

Hope is hope.

Heroic acts can be done by flawed people.

We shouldn’t discredit the words or the thoughts as we seek to diminish the bearers of the words & thoughts. Maybe we should seek to find the good in what someone says rather than find reasons to point out why the words are flawed or the deliverer is some insincere fraud.

This leads me to the bearers of the words & thoughts.

– Changing to do something good is being slowed by people who suggest someone cannot change.

====

“People tell you who they are, but we ignore it because we want them to be who we want them to be.”

Mad Men

====

Well. Surely doing good today doesn’t absolve you from something you did bad yesterday. And, yet, I could argue those who have made bad mistakes in the past, and recognize them as bad, are most likely the most qualified to lead today.

I scan the headlines of the papers and there are a shitload of flawed people saying a bunch of smart, positive, hopeful things.

I scan the headlines of the papers and I see article after article diminishing the people who are saying these things by pointing out past transgressions or their ‘lack of consistency’ with regard to their beliefs <so why should we believe their positive thoughts>.

Smart flawed people, who maybe had flawed ideas in the past, are often smart enough to realize they need to change or make changes.

I would like to point out that the difficulty seems to arise not in the person who has changed, but in those around the changer/doer. While the best of the best changers seek to build the new, ignoring the old, we the people, continuously fight back with the old.

Can someone actually leave the old baggage behind and move on to do better things? <a question we should all be asking ourselves in today’s world>

We seem hell bent on not letting people even try to change.

I would like to remind people of several things:

Andrew Carnegie, whose Pinkerton men shot down workers at the Homestead strike in Pittsburgh, also left the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and an international network of public libraries.

John D Rockefeller, whose use of troops against Colorado mineworkers led to scores of deaths, including of women and children, created his foundation, so creative for young people worldwide.

Alfred Nobel, arms manufacturer and “marchand de mort extraordinaire”, set up the peace prize.

Regardless. I fully understand why some people want to hold on to the ‘better days of the past’ and nostalgically wish we could go back to many of what are perceived as ‘better ways of doing things.’

It is natural and, honestly, comforting. But I don’t understand why we far too often hold on to the ‘bad things from the past’ and pessimism/cynicism and constantly burden people who, sincerely, want to do good things, show change, and offer a better version of themselves with the intent to create a better version of the world.

Far too many people today do not see much to be upbeat about. They simply see a lot of existing problems getting worse. And because of that they are tending to gather around anyone promising a return to an imaginary past era of greatness.

Some of the best leaders today are those who were in the past, and in the past flawed, and now are new versions of themselves and do not want to return t some past but try and create a new future.

People change.

We should allow them to change.

Especially if they are one of the valuable few who see the good and hopeful and optimistic in the world. For they are the ones capable of showing us light when dark can appear to be winning. In fact, many of these people accept the quite improvements, enable the quiet improvements, and facilitate the progress that humankind deserves. Maybe we just need to stop the noise and start quietly embracing good improvement. Ponder.