by Brian Schwartz
While storytelling has long been one of the most effective ways to communicate, it's also are biggest flaw.
Defined as: "the inclination, after an event has occurred, to see the event as having been predictable, despite there having been little or no objective basis for predicting it."
I write a lot. The writing I do is mostly an effort to better comprehend abstract thoughts, ideas, and experiences that arise. In fact, I have a hard time reading too much of anything without writing something about it.
Stories allow us to we remember. I often look for analogies to explain to myself (and to others) an abstract ideas such as this one.
The more more meaningful your stories, the more they are filled with emotion and relatedness, the more effective you will be in communicating your ideas to others.
Fewer words are often better.
Analogies or stories serve to illustrate the point. When you are able to pull the reader into a relatable experience, they'll better understand it. The more more meaningful your story is to the listener, the more they are filled with emotion and relatedness, the more it will be planted into their memory.
Without the actual experience, can one can ever truly know?
Our thinking is grounded in concrete experiences. Abstract concepts become more real when they are linked to experiences through analogy and metaphor.
An analogy for systems.
What is the function of a computer program? It's to produce an outcome. How does it produce the outcome? It runs code written by a programmer. What makes the code run? The system. What makes the system work? Energy.
Electricity explains how everything works.
Like a program, our awareness is constantly expanding. Like a flashlight filling the room, to see further you must step further. As you step into the light, the darkness is behind you. The past is a chapter that's already been read. You can go back and read it again, but you won't move further through the book when you do. Like a program stuck in a routine, the outputs don't change until the programmer rights a new routine.
When a program is run, it lights up circuits from point A to point B. All that exists for the program is the circuit it's on. It is not 'thinking' about the where it's been or where it's going, it just acts on the circuit it's on. You could say that program is always in one of two states: on or off. Everything in the future (off) is yet to be executed, and everything in the past (off) is no longer relevant to right now.
By design, the program is not even aware of it's next function until it's needed. It's called an if/then statement. It's only objective is to get from point 'A' to point 'B.'
Life is a one-way journey, you get on at the womb and get off at your tomb.
The purpose of your program is to get from point ‘a’ to point 'be.' Our ability to be where we are (be in the here and now). Our past is written by the actions we take, and our path unfolds as the we travel towards an uncertain future created by a system we do not control.
Programs simply carry out an instruction to get from point a to point b. The programmer continues to adjust the inputs to the until it produces the output she desires. The program is dependent on the system upon which it runs. Unexpected outcomes often result. Our efforts to go back and explain why something happened is an effort to explain a system for which we do not control.
If effort is a struggle, then we may be trying to impose conditions that are beyond the capabilities of the system. The program itself, running within a system defines the outcome, not the programmer.
Everything works within a system. The concept of everything is revealed in the workings of the system that produces anything.
Within the system, all things are possible, yet nothing is possible without it.
The system itself produces the outcome, not us.
We can change the inputs we put into the system, but we cannot change the outcome itself. Changes upstream results in changes downstream. But karma does not occur on a one-to-one ratio, and there are other inputs into the system (outside our control) that influence the outcome.
Enacting our will against the system is like swimming against the current.
If life is a river, then the system is the current. It’s feasible to make incremental changes that flow with the current. But our efforts are not seen until we are further downstream. Patience is not only a virtue, it is part of the system. Incremental changes made upstream can and often do result in big changes downstream. It's how tiny ripples in the ocean turn into big waves by the time they reach the shore.
If our will power is an effort to force our will upon the system, we will fail. The system does what it does, and our will has no power over it. We can only enact our will into what we put into the system.
Without putting changes into the system upstream, nothing different will ever result.
It's the changes we put into the system upstream that direct the experience downstream. The things we draw our attention towards are the things we influence. But influence itself is not change, but influence does precede change.
Frustration arises as when we recognize the outcomes produced are not aligned with our desires.
Will power become easy when you see it as an experiment. I will experiment with different inputs into the system (my will) and observe the outputs. When the outputs I desire are produced, I will be motivated to do more of the same. I will stoke the fire if stoking the fire produces the desired result.
It not a hardship, it’s an experiment.
Our ability to generate the outcome we want is directly tied to our belief and acceptance to the outcomes produced. The more we understand how the inputs impact the outputs, the more we can steer the ship in our direction.
Wanting what you have is the simplest way to agree with the system. Change is only possible once you are in agreement to what is.
Disagreeing is resisting what is. Talking about what's wrong, what you don't have, and what's screwed about about the system doesn't allow for anything to change.
If we can't agree with what's wrong, then change is impossible.
Deep down inside, we all know this. We all know that there is nothing wrong with the system. The system simply does what it does. To produce change downstream, we must make changes upstream. The changes downstream are not up to us, but the ones upstream are. And the changes upstream begin right now.
Life is VUCA: Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, and Ambiguous. They are the same components you'll find in a good adventure game.
We reach a state of flow when 4 conditions are met: Selflessness, Timelessness, Effortless, and Richness (STER).
It's when I get out of my own way. When I don't worry about the opinions of others and the inner critic is non-existent. When I trust myself and go with the experience of becoming. It's the
(Continued)
You are in line for a sandwich. You are getting hungry. You order a pastrami sandwich. It's good. But a few hours later, you are thinking, you should have ordered a vegetarian sandwich. It's better for you and you like it better.
Having theory of mind allows one to attribute thoughts, desires, and intentions to others, to predict or explain their actions, and to posit their intentions. It enables one to understand that mental states can be the cause of—and thus be used to explain and predict—the behavior of others.