The stories we tell ourselves are often more romantic than the truth.
Truth is standing right in front of us, yet we have a hard time accepting it. Because we don’t like what we see.
Our narration works overtime to preserve ourselves. It is a defense mechanism. While it can protect us, it can also block us from seeing the world as it really is.
There can be beauty in truth but that doesn’t necessarily mean there is truth in beauty.
With that being said, I still choose to believe the world is better than it really is. Because my life is better this way.
It’s a fine line to walk. See clearly. Choose wisely.
You should choose a life’s vocation–find a greater purpose in the work you do.
When someone feels that they have been called from a higher power, spectators should be skeptical though.
To clarify, I don’t think there is a problem if someone believes God has commissioned them to do a greater work. The problem is when leaders see themselves above criticism, followers may believe their leaders can do no wrong.
No job or title or person is above evaluation. And no one has the market on the divine. No matter how “important” the work is.
…
I’m going to be blunt: I thought for many cultural conservatives their obsession with Operation Underground Railroad this last year was an attempt to gaslight Black Lives Matter movement. Peaking behind the curtain, there seems to be more going on than what appears on fan’s Facebook feed.
Bob Dylan once asked Leonard Cohen how long it took to write the song “Hallelujah.” Cohen replied, “Two years.”
But in fact, it took Cohen five years to write the song and when it was done, his label didn’t even want to release the album it appeared on.
Just because you poured your heart and soul into making a song, it doesn’t mean you’re going to get the recognition you deserve.
When we can learn is to divorce the effort with outcomes, it frees us. We don’t need all of our work to all pan out. We just need some of it to resonate with the people we seek to change.
Sometimes it takes time for your work to resonate. Other times, it won’t pan out.
You can’t control the outcomes but you can always control your effort. Once you’ve made a song, your job is to write another one.
When the great author, Stephen Pressfield, finally finished his first novel his mentor said, “Great. Now start the next one. Today.”
It’s as simple as that.
Without effort there are no desired outcomes.
Everything we want is on the other side of hard. Keep climbing.
You have a trolley barreling at full speed towards five people. Next to you is a lever, where if you pull-it it would shift the trolley to another track where one bystander is standing. The question is, What is the right thing to do?
It has been used as an example for all sorts of ethical dilemmas, but what I find fascinating is when we are present with a choice, we often get locked into those choices. (That is what standardized test reinforce.) A or B, which would you choose?
What we don’t see is another option: derail the train.
We are not usually in a position with no choices. It’s just the choices in front of us are not very good ones. But if we take a step back and recognize the degrees of freedom, we can find another solution that isn’t present in the moment.
Can you hold the tension while you wait for a solution to appear? Most of us don’t have the faith. We act quickly not because we want to be done, it’s because we lack the patience to wait and see.
You have a 1 in 13,983,816 chance in winning the lottery. And yet, some still choose to play knowing the odds but are not disappointed when they lose as a result.
Vegas creates an idea that if you are skilled enough than you could win. But when we do the math, the house always wins.
Yet again, despite the probabilities we overestimate our own abilities while we underestimate the challenge.
Numbers matter.
In the case of climate change, it is difficult to assign a number to the melting of the Greenland ice caps.
We know that it is happening. We don’t know exactly when they will be completely melted. 50 years? 100? Either way, it is hard to measure the damage it will cause. We just don’t know exactly. So, many don’t treat it as a threat. We don’t know the costs of inaction if the threat isn’t perceived.
Much like bankruptcy, it happens slowly then suddenly.
When we don’t know the likely hood of outcomes we apply different standards of probabilities. Difficult to calculate the worst case scenario when we can’t see it firsthand. Instead, we go rely on gut feelings.
“I’ll take that bet.”
When the problem is small enough, we can procrastinate without consequences. That time is already spent. So, what are we going to do about tomorrow? When do we start worrying about it?
If we were to flip a coin–tails I win, heads you win.
The coin is not bias. It has no narrative of the world around it. It doesn’t care how wins or loses. The coin doesn’t feel bad and its day isn’t ruined by the result. It’s an inanimate object.
But we care. We care who wins the toss.
So how can something that is made of matter, made of atoms in one form care, but not in another?
Further, how do you take a seemingly set of inanimate objects like blood and bones and get to “I”?
The same could be said about electricity. Connect a bunch of wires and you get electricity to use your toaster but with people you get thoughts and ideas.
Of course, looking at this patent today, there is a whole bunch of problems:
What happens if a child gets a hold of the gun?
What happens if an innocent bystander accidentally kicks it over?
What happens if the bullet travels further then expected?
What about the patch work you’ll have to do every time the trap goes off?
Is this even ethical?
Seems pretty silly to think about. But then you look around and see many of the same design faults today, you realize we are not so different.
Far too often, we have designed to maximize profit, not to minimize harm. Climate change continues to be a growing problem with most of our industrialized world contributing to carbon outputs.
And yet, the economic train keeps charging.
In Google’s original Code of Conduct it stated, “Don’t be evil.” But we have to be more proactive than this. It isn’t enough to simply design a mousetrap that isn’t cruel. We need to think of design in terms of commission AND omission. In other words:
“Do the right thing.”
Design must continue to evolve. We like to think we are much more sophisticated than the 1882 mousetrap patent. The truth is we have more technology but still fall into the same traps of our pasts. We have never had to design with this many people in mind.
Add in individuals, markets and political systems, each group is looking to apply different types of logic (both short-term and long-term thinking). Everyone has their own plan. Sometimes in the expense of others.
The bottom line here:
It’s not enough to sell a 3/4″ hole anymore. You have to think of impact. Are you contributing to the solution or are you still taking?
It turns out that if you left a frog in a pot of water and turned up the heat, the frog has the instincts to jump out and save her life.
The whole frog not being able to see what’s coming and being boiled alive is a myth. A fable.
Because frogs, like people, can sense danger. Regardless whether the threat is gradual or sudden.
That’s the power of stories, they have the ability to stick in our culture. Humans are story telling creatures and once an idea sticks it’s hard to loosen its grip.
Josh Allred's Blog 