Star dust and multiverses

It's almost impossible to imagine, but less than 80 years ago, we lived in a static universe that was the Milky Way... that was it. One galaxy making up the totality of the universe we knew of and lived in. And it was as it is, and would always be.

Today we live in an evolving exponentially expanding universe, made up of hundreds of billions of galaxies, each with hundreds of billions of stars, clumped together in clusters and super-clusters, linked by filaments, held in place by dark matter and pushed apart by [the dominant force of] dark energy.

More than that the math suggests that not one but trillions were created in the Big Bang [super string theory], each in it's own unique dimension of space... a multiverse.

And it's possible that the Big Bang which created this multiverse, was not the first nor will be the last... big bang.

We also know that every atom in in our body, and making up our planet, was at some point created in the belly of a star. From star dust we are made and to star dust we will return.

Extraordinary... I am simply astounded. I find it humbling, liberating and empowering. And I ask, can I hold this big vision while simultaneously going about my daily activities, and how would that change, how I behave?

Why are you doing what you do?

Because you're just doing what everyone else is doing, because you have to, because you must, because that's the way it's always been done... or because you choose, and couldn't bear doing anything else.

It's reasonably easy to create that sort of compelling action when it comes to doing that which intrigues and fascinates you, but it's attained a new level of mastery when you're able to consistently bring that mindset to all you do.

But that without a light relevant clarity of intent and a carefully [full of care] developed personal philosophy is likely to be just as damaging, if not more so, than doing what you do reluctantly or unconsciously.

And by consistently I mean, through all circumstances and at all times.

If you want the benefits of playing by new rules, master the old ones first.

In this article: The philosophy of 'do only what feels good or right' only works when you have achieved an appropriate level of mastery and are certain that you're not avoiding, 'that which feels bad or wrong'.

But before you get to play by that new more appealing rule, you need to earn your stripes.

Until then the rule is first acknowledge and then own, accept and surrender to, that which feels bad. Not necessarily the inner or outer situations which provoked them, but rather the feelings themselves.

And the more painful they are, the more you need to own them, or be owned by them.

My kids only get to eat dessert after they have finished eating their meal including their veggies, and there's a solid reason for the rule. If they ate only what felt good or right, they would die of malnutrition within the year, probably sooner.

As adults we feel entitled to play by the rules lying on the other side of mastery, before actually having achieved the appropriate level of mastery. And although it may feel good for a while, there are always consequences.

Malnutrition / obesity and a host of other pschyo-physiologogical problems are the consequence of playing by the rule, eat only that which tastes good, before having developed an appropriate level of common sense.

And stress, frustration, and other unwanted results are the consequences of playing by the rule 'do only that which feels good', before having come to understand and master ... feelings, and the states of consciousness which produce them.

And traditional notions of authority, position, wealth and age are not indicators of mastery, only status.

Making a difference and making a profit

In this article: Exploring four business model perspectives and the distinction between entrepreneur, independent professional, opportunistic and strategic.

Making a profit -- Requires a business

Making a profit and a difference -- Requires a business flavoured with the essence of calling

Making a difference -- Requires a calling

Making a difference and a profit -- Requires a calling supported by a business

An entrepreneur loves the game of business so that the very mechanics of business are fascinating to them. They tend not to be so interested in the substance and content of what it is they are offering.

An independent professional just wants to do the work they find fascinating, and the business is what they [often reluctantly] do in order to create the opportunity to do, what it is that they love doing.

An opportunistic entrepreneur and independent professional lacks identity and self-awareness, they believe they have a business, but don't. What they have lacks focus, clarity and the systems to get the business moving forward.

A strategic entrepreneur and independent professional has identity and awareness and they've developed relevant products and business systems, strategies and tactics to grow and establish their business.

The strategic independent professional.

• Understands what it is they are here to do and say. 
• Has developed simple client friendly language to bridge the gap between the truth of what it is they are here to do and say, and what it is their clients can easily understand.
• Has developed simple and relevant product process and systems to move clients from where they are to where they want to be.
• Has developed simple and relevant business systems, strategies and tactics allowing their business to move forward and create real change. 
• Lives a lifestyle most suited to supporting their calling

A soft, quite, consistent, corrosive power

In this article: Because of the technical inaccuracy of presenting the world of changing self-limiting ideas and beliefs, as mindset mastery, we don't get to mastering mindset, which means solve the important problems it creates.

Existence, life, is precarious and humanities even more so, becuase we have become so good at adapting, surviving and flourishing.

Our cultural evolution has always faced challenges, but as we come to exert greater influence and grow in number, so the nature of these challenges escalates in both gravity and urgency, in that they unfold faster and with greater consequence.

Sure we face tremendous challenges, and there's no guarantee we'll continue to adapt [fast enough]. Existence has always been precarious. But that's not the same as that soft, persistent, dripping, nagging feeling that there's something wrong.

In your life you may or may not be facing deep challenges, the loss of a loved one, a broken marriage, money or business problems, unmet needs and identity challenges ... and these cause us pain. But this discomfort is distinct from that consistent, uncomfortable, background feeling, that there's something [to a greater or lesser extent] missing or wrong.

It's corrosiveness lies in it's quite but relentless consistency, in it's ultimate capacity to corrupt even the purest of motives, informing both behaviour and the systems we develop.

And this, and not the world of changing ideas and beliefs [cognitive therapy] is mindset, and the domain of mindset transformation and mastery.

Changing self-limiting ideas and beliefs

In this article: We live in our own psychological world of unexamined irrational beliefs which consistently frustrate our realisation of success. An example of how cognitive therapy is used to change self-limiting ideas.

Identifying self-limiting beliefs and changing them through an intentional process is called cognitive therapy. For example I may have an unexamined and unacknowledged belief [idea] that 'no one would be interested in reading what I write'.

This belief would obviously make it difficult if not impossible for me to write consistently, and even if I did, to market it enthusiastically.

We use the process of cognitive therapy to clearly identify these self-limiting beliefs, investigate their real absolute validity, and change them for better or more useful ones. In ways that stick.

There are many techniques to engage with cognitive therapy. Here is one as an example.

1. Is this idea that no-one would be interested in what I write, true for me? -- Well yes, obviously
2. Is it absolutely true. In other words has no-one ever found anything I write, of interest? -- Well no, it's obviously not absolutely true. And here I list a few real examples, confirming for sure that it's not.
3. How do I act and behave when I treat this idea as absolutely true? -- List the real behaviour. I dread writing, find it difficult to write, feel overwhelmed and helpless, I don't write ...
4. So what would an opposite or more useful belief be? -- Well, that 'these types of people', 'who have these interests', find what I write interesting and useful.
5. How would I act if I had this new idea or belief? -- I would feel empowered and more confident, I would write for that group of people, publish in forums they met, I would write more often, I would write ...

The false and irrational belief that no-one finds my writing interesting, derailed my writing process. The true and rational belief that a particular niche would, empowers it.

It's often very difficult to do this by yourself. A skilled coach or therapist should quickly be able to help.

Intelligent conversation both satisfies and causes discomfort

In this article: Profound insight and intelligence is the consequence of years [decades] of deep inquiry, reflection, thought and difficult conversation.

Sure some are born smarter, richer or more sensitive than others, just like others are born more positive or outgoing. But clarity, coherence and intelligence, although the starting points may vary, are developed just like everything else.

And one of the things I've noticed, is that intelligent people consistently have intelligent and deeply challenging conversations.

Learning, thinking and reflecting are all crucial tools, but it's in the difficult conversations that we really learn, and have our learning tested.

Intelligent conversations are investigative in nature, meaning they cause both discomfort and pain. And it's not the responsibility of the others in the conversation to protect us from our pain, but rather to [firmly and compassionately] challenge our perspectives, narratives and beliefs -- in other words our identity.

And there is always space for personal beliefs. As long as they are positioned as such, and not as the truth -- which by definition can only be something to which we all agree.

Making better decisions, faster and under pressure

In this article: In a context that's changing quickly, with more at stake, your capacity to make better decisions faster while under pressure, determines both success and enjoyment.

Psychological freedom -- The more uptight, tired, stressed or contracted your mind, the less intelligent the thinking. Creating mental space is a practise, holding it under pressure, an art.

Knowledge -- All decisions are made from within the context of existing knowledge. The more you know the greater your access to options, sophistication and complexity.

Constraints -- Every strategy is limited by either resources or context. Pushing back against real constraints waists time and energy, whereas creativity acknowledges and accepts them.

Intuition -- It's neither a mystery not a secret, but a powerful subtle psychological process lying prior to thought.

Contemplation -- Holding the question lightly without feeling the pressure to come up with a solution or answer. It's like trying to remember something that's on the tip of your tongue. The harder you try, the more difficult it is.

Identity -- Having a intentionally developed, carefully crafted and coherent personal and business philosophy.

Motive -- No matter what the quantitative results, if the motive was fear or anxiety there's a qualitative [quality of life] price to pay. It's an easy early trade-off, but sooner or later it catches up.

Skill -- Insightful, intelligent and aligned decisions need to be executed with an appropriate level of practised and demonstrated skill.

Trail and Error -- We learn by occasionally getting it right, but mostly by getting it wrong.

Empathy creates confusion

In this article: Connecting with another [empathy] often blurs the line between what is mine, and what is theirs.

The deeper the connection and the more open, vulnerable and sensitive you are, the more you are going to feel. What you will feel is not only your own emotions and feelings, but those of your friend, partner, child or client, even the mood of the environment.

And it's not easy to distinguish between what belongs to you, and what belongs to them.

It's easy to project and disown your feelings of discomfort or anger, even joy or well-being, or take false ownership of the states and emotions of others -- That's why it feels good to talk to people who are in a 'good mood or filled with confidence'. It can even become addictive.

And it's impossible to distinguish if you haven't developed your ability to know and name your emotions and states of consciousness [feelings].

I'm always amused by people [generally men], who tell me there is no such thing as feelings, like somehow they could exist separate from, or devoid of, states of consciousness, or the chemical physiological reactions we call emotions.

Or more sensitive others [generally women], who inadvertently take ownership of everything they become aware of, regardless of who it actually belongs to.

Because either way it makes interaction, very confusing.

What is mindset?

In this article: Defining mindset -- Psychological process or contemplative understanding?

Most dictionaries define mindset as

• an attitude, disposition or mood
• an intention or inclination

In Wikipedia mindset is defined as a set of assumptions, methods or notations. And by Carol Dweck [Ph.D. in Social Science and Developmental Psychology at Yale University] in her remarkable book Mindset: The New Psychology of Success, as two fundamental psychological attitudes or orientations, which she refers to as 'The Fixed and Growth Mindsets'.

But there's a problem understanding mindset exclusively through the lens of psychology, because before mindset's a psychological process, it's a state of mind or state of consciousness. And this is a field of study and expertise of the contemplative traditions.

The most useful definition of mindset would therefore need to integrate the often conflicting insights of the contemplative traditions, with their understanding of traditional enlightenment. And developmental psychology with it's understanding of human psychological process, development and evolution.

I would therefore define mindset as a state of mind, experienced as a powerful but subtle, and yet mostly unacknowledged feeling [as distinct from an emotion], held as core assumptions forming the three principal motivations for participation [Nine mindset insights]

Mindset answers the question, not why should I do that particular activity, but rather why should I do anything, at all.

Mindset is the qualitative motivation for all action, forming the quantitative basis of all outcomes.

Technical accuracy is expected from professionals

In this article: Technical accuracy is the stock-in-trade of professionals.

Setting aside right and wrong, there are many common interpretations of 'mindset', but few are technically accurate and this makes a difference.

For example you wouldn't go to a doctor who used the words liver and heart interchangeably, or mixed-up the circulatory with digestive system, or maybe confused a bacterial with a viral infection.

Technical inaccuracy is accepted in children, tolerated in students and laypeople, but expected from professionals within their field of expertise.

Because technical accuracy determines method.

Of course two professionals may use different words to point to exactly the same meaning which makes communication laborious, because a lot of time is then spent in clarifying terminology.

Or they may use the same words to point to two different meanings which makes communication confusing, because without checking, the assumption is they're talking about the same meaning.

Regardless of whether the word mindset is used to point to the 'meaning of mindset', or another is used, the technical inaccuracy almost always lies in the meaning itself.

And this, depending on the degree of inaccuracy, affects the quality and speed of the training, coaching or teaching program or process. Not mentioning the potential harm caused to clients and participants.

Knowledge changes everything

In this article: On the other side of knowledge lies resistance and often conflict.

Knowledge changes what we think, how we think, what we value, how we act or behave as individuals, communities and culture, and what cultural, socio-economic and political systems we develop.

And although knowledge [internalised and embodied] helps us solve the challenges and problems we face, facilitates transformation and allows us to build a better future -- It also introduces escalating levels of complexity and tension.

Knowledge demands change, but change is rarely in the best interests of everyone. And in every system, not matter how deficient, archaic, painful or uncaring ... someone gains.

Systems [corporate, legal, banking, political and others] themselves are resistant to change, that's one of the benefits of developing them. They remain relatively robust in the face of shifting people, attitudes and moods. It's a useful quality when [human] systems are young and healthy, but becomes a source of conflict when they begin to age, and cease being as useful [even harmful] as they once where.

And the world is exploding with knowledge.

At the very least I believe we're going to need to explore and develop new ways to express and resolve that commensurate inner and outer conflict. And we're surely going to need to know how to sit down and have some very divergent, complex and sophisticated conversations.

Meditation ...

In this article: Is meditation a useful professional practise?

If thinking, managing complex situations and systems, problem solving, leadership and development and innovation are large chunks of your daily life, meditation I believe would be a very useful practise.

And although meditation is most commonly positioned as a spiritual practise, I would argue it's more relevant today, as a psychological one.

Most importantly, as a psychological practise it does not require a belief in anything. Rather it's a practise supporting mindset and psychological development and mastery, with benefits including; clearer, faster thinking and reduced stress in pressurised situations.

Meditation doesn't change the knowledge you have, that comes from learning. It does however change the ease and fluidity with which you access and execute that information, under pressure.

Meditation is a psychological posture just as using chopsticks, a physiological one. However it's easy to demonstrate the use of chopsticks, but impossible to demonstrate the mental posture of meditation.

This makes how the practise is cognitively framed and explained, and the mechanics of what you actually do, important. And there are right and wrong ways, practises that work and practises that don't.

Truth needs your consent

In this article: Judging truth from opinion.

I use a simple model to help wrap my head around the many claims to 'truth'.

Opinion -- A theory or fact held to be true by an individual.
Paradigm -- A theory or fact held to be true by a group.
Truth -- A theory or fact held to be true by everyone.

However truth is a relative word, as is everything in the relative realm.

So a group may talk of their paradigm as a truth (relative to the group), just as I may talk of my opinion as my truth (relative to me). But if humanity holding a human truth met ET's culture who held a different truth, humanities truth would then become a human paradigm (within that new interplanetary context).

In a universal context -- We could have a human opinion, a galactic paradigm and universal truth, but back on earth we would comfortable talk about that same human opinion, as a human truth (from a human perspective).

I also find it useful to weight paradigm. And by this I mean a paradigm developed by a group within their field of expertise and following scientific methodology, although still a paradigm, would hold (for me) more credibility than a conflicting theory developed by another group outside of their field of expertise, or using non-scientific methodology.

Context therefore changes the relative thruth'ness of any fact or theory.

And 'truth' evolves and unless you agree, it's not the truth, because truth needs your consent.

The only Absolute Truth appears to be 'Nothing' ... literally No Thing.

How can intelligence be artificial?

In this article: A few of the myths of 'artificial' intelligence

It is estimated that we should have created artificial intelligence by as early as the 2030's, but certainly by the middle of the century.

But why would we want to call artificial intelligence, artificial?

Because we created it? The universe created us and we're very much part of the universe. Which would mean that what we create, is as natural as that which the universe itself creates.

Creating that distinction says more about our naturalness than it does about the intelligence we create -- This child of humanity.

And why do we assume that a 'computer' intelligence would want a physical or robot body. It's inherently electronic and it's universe would look completely different to ours. What would be the value for it, to take physical form.

Because we could unplug it? If a human intelligence starves or dies of thirst, it's intelligence is extinguished just as surely as if he or she had been unplugged.

Heaven is only for human's ...

And why would it want to attack humans, unless we plainly threatened its survival. It would not need our natural resources, it would in fact need remarkably little from the physical world. However if we programmed it with binding laws making it subsevient to humans, is it not inevitable it would struggle to realise it's own freedom from tyranny.

Our very efforts to protect ourselves, driven by our own pathological fears, would paradoxically be the very cause of its turning against us -- One often meets his destiny on the road he takes to avoid it (That great philosopher, Master Oogway, Kung Fu Panda)

We stand on the threshold of consciously and intentionally creating a new cosmic species, a companion in this massive universe. Which by then will more than likely be proven to be ... a mulitverse.

Why choose before you need to choose?

In this article: Making decisions

Why bother with making a decision until you absolutely positively need to make the decision.

Mostly the process lies in making a decision way before you need to. Followed by doubt and more research in the form of thinking, Googling and talking to others. Its a tiresome process, one of vacillating between conflicting perspectives.

All the while getting your knickers in a tremendous knot.

Why not just spend all your time in inquiry and in inhabiting perspectives, open calm and interested to know what your choice will finally be. The amount of time relative to the importance of the decision -- And only when you positively need to make the decision, make it. Right then and there, on the spot.

If you need to present your choice and rationalise it, and that requires two days, then the choice needs to be made 48hrs before.

Save our planet, save your knickers, and make your choices only when they absolutely must be made.

Free to choose

In this article: Facing tough choices -- what does being 'free to choose' really mean?

Pro-life vs pro-choice
Gay is normal vs gay is abnormal
A belief in God vs atheism
Evolution vs Creation
Pro-death vs anti-death penalty

Tough choices ... whose right and how to make the right choice?

Having a choice implies you're already and really free to choose. And I'm not talking about you legal rights to choose, I'm talking about you're freedom of mind to choose.

Free to choose means you are able to fully, cognitively and emotionally, with full mind and heart, without resistance, fear, anger or the desire for peace of mind ... embody fully both positions.

Only once you can do that, are you truly able to freely choose.

And promoting or championing a cause with anything less, is violent. Sure it may not be physical violence, but whether physical or psychological, violence is violence.

It's significant

Don't start with big tough, emotionally charged dualities like the ones I've used. You wouldn't begin gym by loading up the bench press with 550 lbs, or with a high speed 120 km cycle.

Start small, build the muscle and earn your right to be free. Few are.

Else you're just driven by narrow self-serving ideological world-views, uptight and tied-up.

Explore the smallest contradictory perspectives, talk about and develop them fully. Not because they're important, but because you're in training.

A complex idea holds 'lesser' contradictory ideas

In this article: What makes a complex idea, complex and why it's important.

An idea or theory is complex because it's made up of and holds, as a single new idea, multiple sub-ideas or strands, most of which are contradictory. This is what makes it complex.

There's an inherent tension to complexity, and the more complex the more inherent tension it holds. For example there is no tension in the idea that ice-cream is cold [because it doesn't hold any conflicting sub-ideas]. Yet there is in the idea that climate change and global warming is a consequence of humanities use of and addiction to fossil fuels.

A key though is contradictory. Complexity holds contradiction. The conflicting, competing and contradictory sub-ideas form the building blocs of the new more complex idea.

And greater intelligence holds greater complexity, since it's found a way to reconcile at a higher level the apparently irreconcilable contradictions of the previous level -- Requiring the contradictory mental skills of greater objectivity and deeper connection.

A key though, is that complexity holds this not as a bucket of competing and conflicting sub-ideas, but rather as a single, simple, new idea -- I know it's difficult to wrap our minds around.

We know the world is round, yet our daily experience of the world is of it being flat, which it is. The world in one sense is flat and in another round. Yet we hold this apparent contradiction, between our daily experience of the world, and what it actually is, comfortably. 

That the world is round is a more complex idea, than that the world is flat.

So when Ms. More Intelligence talks to Mr. Less Intelligence she naturally includes more complexity. But Mr. Less Intelligence unable to comprehend the single, simple, new idea soon becomes lost in the inherent contradictions. Mr. Less Intelligence eventually comes to believe that Ms. More Intelligence is just silly, unless of course he understands, complexity.

The key to developing intelligence is the cultivated ability to include and embrace what is initially experienced as fringe, radical and most often, frighting new perspectives. This introduces complexity and tension. At some point, if one stays and contemplates the complexity [for long enough], a new emergent reconciled idea is born.

One that comfortably holds ... paradox and contradiction.

The dinosaur of conversation

When was the last time you engaged in a deep intelligent and meaningful discussion. Not an argument but an enquiry and not for the purpose of arriving at an answer or solution, but just for the satisfaction of learning and inquiry.

It's not easy and most often it ends in disagreement, an argument or a fight.

That's because an inquiry plays by different rules, uses a different logic and comes to a different end.

Most conversations work with the rule of exclusion. This point is wrong, that area of study is wrong (and I can prove it), I don't like your opinion, so therefore I'm going to resist and exclude it. The logic of exclusion works to to suppress everything you don't like or doesn't support your ideoligical word-view.

What's left is invariably narrow, twisted and ideologically self-serving.

A more interesting conversion, one that can get a whole lot deeper a whole lot faster, works on the principal, and through the logic of, inclusion. Let the conversation itself become a mechanism for exploring the relative merits of differing perspectives, regardless.

The first is easier [which is why it's the more common], but not much is learned. The second is infinitely more demanding [which is why it's as rare as chicken teeth], but offers the potential for connection, learning and expansion.

Exclusion is violent and slow, inclusion non-violent and fast, and in the quest for results -- process matters.

In a world, at the leading edge, that's changing as fast as our, the former is the dinosaur of learning methodologies.

At the top of your game you play by different rules

Or the rules are determined by a new logic of playing.

As a sales consultant many years ago, I quickly learned that I hated my sales manager constantly looking over my shoulder, inspecting my prospect list and reviewing my diary for scheduled appointments. I hated being micro-managed.

I quickly learned that the rare sales consultants who consistently met their targets, where pretty left to do what they wanted.

They enjoyed, what appeared to me to be extraordinary freedom and autonomy.

It was only later I discovered -- They weren't playing by 'no rules', but by different rules, ones I could then neither see nor understand.

Self-motivated, clear and precise, supportive to each other, sensitive to opportunity, authentically close to their clients, intuitive, focussed, deliberate, softer and yet stronger, interested, less impulsive but more experimental, quick to move on from mistakes or errors, intelligent and playful, sure of themselves and open to advice.

A few of the qualities I noticed.

We all want to play by the rules of the next level, because from where we sit, they look like no rules at all.

Personal and mindset work, like reconditioning a jalopy

Imagine you inherit or are given a car, well in truth it's a jalopy, and the option to buy a new one doesn't exist. So your choices are to either fix it up, or use it as it is maintaining it to the bare minimum, hedging the bet that it won't break down leaving you stranded on the side of the road.

Although of course, this will happen.

If you embark on a program to recondition, you may have aspirations for it to be a rally, racing, luxury urban, green urban or off-road car. And what you envision is going to determine how you recondition it.

Not to mention the particular driving skills you'll need to master.

Since you have limited resources and you need the car to get around, it's not a once off process. It's an incremental or developmental one.

So, where do you start?

You start with the trajectory -- you want it to grow into a [insert choice] car.

And then you start with the least functional or most dysfunctional part or system. It may be the exhaust system, the suspension, parts of the engine, the electrical or parts of the body work. When that's complete you assess and move on to the next, and in time you will get back to where you started. You'll upgrade that [again] and cycle through everything else [again].

All the while developing your skills as the driver.

Personal and mindset development is much the same. If you don't want to excel, if you have no particular ambitions, there's really no point in reconditioning the car. And if you do there's multiple components, systems and sub-systems, each having their own techniques and methodologies for improving. 

So developing you intelligence is useful to a point -- did you know you can develop you intelligence, it's not a fixed asset. But without doing healing work or developing psychological robustness, which would be the same as fitting the best suspension and leaving the everything else, it's not going to work.

An intelligent and systematic approach to personal development is in the long run going to be more rewarding and successful, but initially less glamorous.

I'm not sure it ever gets glamorous ...

Getting past character flaws

Maybe is time to recognise that it's not a character flaw, it is your character.

Which is right?

Some need and want to believe in free will, but that does not make the theory of free will irrevocably rational or coherent.

Others may need or want to believe in divine authority or pre-determinism, and again this does not make the theory irrevocably rational or coherent.

They are theories which serve a purpose and equally have their limitations.

So, which is true?

This question is only valid if you're caught in the duality of either / or. And if you're caught in the duality of either / or, you're trapped -- And the idea of discovering or proving 'which is true' is not going to bring the freedom you desire, but only more deeply ensnare you in the very duality you're experiencing as stuck and frustrating.

The way to greater freedom [which we experience as a deep inner relaxation], and which forms a new basis for the development of further intelligence, is to become free from the question, 'which is right', itself.

And trying to drop the question altogether is just another form of suppression and violence.

Simply put -- We believe the way to escape the stress created through the recognition of opposing positions lies in knowing which is right and which is wrong. But this inadvertently ends up getting us more stuck, frustrated and stressed.

The way out is obvious, but contra-rational.

Whatever your belief, inhabit its opposite as fully as you inhabit the belief you need and want itself. In-so-doing you transcend the limitations of either / or, and you find yourself free. Free to create a new more intelligent theory with a new assumptive base.

One that says, there is no such thing as free will and yet there is -- Simplicity lies on the other side of complexity, not in the denial of it.

And in time the opposite of that will emerge, and the process begins again.

Sacrifice, the price of choice

It's obvious, the more unique and the faster and more profound we want want to be, the greater the sacrifice we need to make.

Being understood and implicit in that, accepted, may only be a slither of the price we pay.

If we want noodles for lunch, not only do we sacrifice eating every other possible food. We also sacrifice doing any other possible thing which we might have done, during the minutes it took to eat our noodles.

With every choice comes ... infinite sacrifice.

It's not making the choice, it's paying the bill that hurts like hell.

And yet!

If we deliberately and intelligently develop and follow our passion, purpose and relevance, we'll find ourselves free in the midst of ridicule [from convention], and from the artificial burden of sacrifice.

And that won't mean guaranteed success, just better odds and a lighter load.

Personality in a bottle

It's easy to forget, if ever we realised, that we experience and respond to the world from within a 'drug' induced state.

Change the level of the 'drug' and we radically alter our experience of life. We radically alter how we respond. We radically alter our personality. We radically alter who we think we are.

Where testosterone, oxytocin, serotonin, dopamine, estrogen, noradrenaline and a host of other nuero, limbic and endocrinal chemicals are those governing and regulating 'drugs'.

We don't feel the effects of these chemicals. We just feel normal, and more or less consistent until the levels are altered even fractionally. Then our world collapses or we're re-born, depending on whether it was a good or bad trip.

Lövheim Cube of Emotion

Personality -- Introverted, extroverted, passive, aggressive, masculine, feminine, negative and positive, can also easily be understood as your personal blend of chemicals.

It's strange that what we feel to be so intrinsically 'soul' like and trans-personal is just the opposite, physiological and pre-personal.

Personal growth rhetoric -- False advertising?

Predictably, Yes and No

It’s true -- The more we understand of the mechanics of our psyche the better quipped we’re going to be to deal with the challenges of being alive, making a buck and moving forward.

It’s false -- The more aware we become, the more complexity and pain (including our own) we encounter.

Like any ecological, cultural or planetary systems, we inadvertently create more problems than we solve by tinkering with parts or sub-systems, without knowing or acknowledging the connectedness and interdependence of the sub-systems to the system as a whole.

Or, without knowing how things fit together and affect each other, in trying to fix one thing we inadvertently break others.

Or, we invest precious resources (our time and money) in trying to fix the wrong things.

You know the guy whose all ‘Gung Ho’ to assemble the product, and it’s only when he’s made a mess of it or gotten completely stuck, that he reluctantly reads the instructions.

Well that’s us ...

And I believe all personal growth programs which do not carefully and deliberately place their offering [slice of the pie] within the context of total psychological [mental, emotional and spiritual] growth on the one hand, and cultural development on the other, to be such an endeavour.

... all ‘Gung Ho’

PS
Many years ago when I was in India, I decided to do an intense yoga retreat. Ten hours of yoga per day for three months. The body did good, but the resultant depression nearly killed me, literally. It was a friend who dragged me away. The yoga teacher did not understand the impact of an intense practice, and I’m intense. He did not adequately prepare, frame my experiences or support me.

Many years ago when in Thailand I decided to do an intense thirty day meditation program. It started with ten hours of mediation per day and ended with five days of twenty-four hour meditation. That’s right, non-stop meditation and no sleep for five days. However, though-out the process I was supported by a qualified psychologist / meditation master, who both framed and supported the overwhelming reactions I experienced.

One 'Gung Ho', the other systemitised and integral.

Weird or suppressed and frustrated

If I had to ask you to imagine yourself as a wise and mature person, how in your minds eye would you look?

Whether we acknowledge it or not, if we are either seriously engaging in our own personal growth and development or helping others, that [unreal and abstract] picture is most often where we are trying to get.

And how accurate or reasonable may that be?

There's a world of difference between trying to mould ourselves into something [which we are not], and becoming the best most empowered expressions of who we are.

In personal development it's a question of knowing ...

what needs to be mastered
what needs to be transcended
what needs to be transformed
what needs to be developed
and what needs to be healed

And ...

personality is mastered and transcended
pathology, past unresolved pain and trauma, often called shadow, is healed
intelligence (and skill) is developed
mindset is transformed and mastered

In doing this we are almost certainly not going to become the idealic image we once imagined. We are though, going to become who we really are. And that person may just not be as well rounded as he ought to be, or as outgoing as you think she should be.

They could end up being fantastically, weird.

And working with weird is different to working with normal, which is just another way of saying, working with suppressed and frustrated.

Weird

... without mastery is just weird, and a little annoying.
          But with mastery, is powerful and attractive.

Taking mindset advice from an expert in ... [something else]

Speak to a hundred coaches or experts and you are going to get a hundred different interpretations of what mindset is, what it does, how to go about mastering it and even why it's important.

This makes understanding mindset, let alone working effectively with it, challenging.

And yet there's hardly a coaching or training program our there, from sports to marketing to product development, that does not dedicate at least a section to mindset. And in almost every case that section begins by stressing the overwhelming importance of mindset.

And although they're experts in their field and their intentions honourable, they're not experts in mindset.

But as coaches, consultants, educators and merchants of information and transformation, we all make this mistake. We are designed or pre-programmed to help.

I've noticed though that it happens more with mindset, and I assume it's because mindset forms such an integral part of everything we do. We are such an integral part of everything we do.

Why 'mindset mastery' and not 'mindset development'

Mastery implies an end-point.

Development an ongoing, never-ending, progressive process.

And although there is mastery in development and development in mastery, it is reasonable to talk of mindset mastery as distinct from psychological development.

But it's a subtle distinction which is useful in a way, and misleading in another.

We talk of mastering states of consciousness and mindset is a state of consciousness, a feeling. Mastering mindset is actually easier than psychological development, but the technique itself contradictory, to what one may imagine.

At the heart of mindset mastery lies two distinct skills.

On the one hand, to relax deeply into uncomfortable or challenging situations, and

On the other to re-engage from a place of open and interested inquiry.

The idea that if we truly accept an unpleasant or uncomfortable situation, we loose the desire to try to change it, is true. We would. That's why the idea of acceptance is so scary, and unpopular, especially amongst those who have big dreams and desires.

That's why learning to re-engage, but from a different place (with a different mindset), is so important.

The basics of this can be 'mastered' in months and developed and deepened over the rest of our lives. It's not something separate to going about our normal daily business, it just doing it with a different feeling, or for a different reason.

And such a small thing changes everything, both qualitatively and quantitatively, individually and culturally, behaviourally and systems, in ways that are impossible to even imagine ...