Tag Archives: Fresh Perspective

Be Yourself: Erring on the Side of Authenticity

I’ve had very spotty internet connectivity over the past week or so and that’s why you haven’t seen any new posts from me for a while. I’ll continue to have spotty internet connectivity probably until next week, but there’s something I wanted to say before I got back into writing regularly here.

Just before the new year clicked over, someone passed along the trailer for Seth Godin’s new book. I’ve included it below:

After watching that trailer — it made sense. While I’m not necessarily an artist, I think the message that Godin is promoting is important: there is a bias for the middle road. And there’s certainly nothing wrong with that, but that bias to the middle road does come at a price. I’d say that this is something that I certainly have been mindful of with the things I’ve written about online. Some may point to my series on psi phenomena (telepathy, precognition, etc.) as evidence that I’ve long since blown past the middle road, but when I wrote those posts, I was careful to make sure that I cited a litany of scientific studies supporting the existence of such phenomena. Others may point to posts like the one I’ve written about hugs instead of handshakes, but that doesn’t seem like it’s too far from the middle road.

Regardless of who points to what, I wanted to say — today — I’m declaring that I’m going to err on the side of authenticity. What does that mean? Well, in the past, I may have shied away from sharing his opinion or that opinion — especially because it’s online! — ‘and things online are forever.’ I’ve come to realize that this is silly. Yes, I’ve read all the things out there about how the pictures you post online or the things you write about online could prevent you from getting job-x or job-y. I understand that, but I still think it’s important to strive to learn. How can I expect myself to grow/learn, if I don’t share some of my sensitive ideas and open them up for discussion and debate? How can I expect to have these ideas challenged and improved? I certainly can’t.

When I started writing on the internet, I had this idea in mind. That is, I was mindful that my ideas in this moment, on January 8th, 2013, might not be the ideas that I have on January 8th, 2014. As a result, I wrote a bit about it in my disclaimer:

I am the creator of this blog and my perspective of five years or five minutes ago do not necessarily reflect my views right now. My thoughts, opinions and viewpoints will change as I learn, grow, and develop my understanding of the world. Therefore, I reserve the right to allow my viewpoints to evolve and to change my thoughts, viewpoints and opinions over time without assigning any reason for such changes.

I truly believe this and hope that those who may look to things I’ve written in the past and try to hold it against me will realize that I fully expect that my ideas will grow, shift, and change. This seems important to make note of because who knows, I may yet one day run for public office and I could totally imagine a clever reporter digging up things I’ve written in the past with glee showing that I was, in fact, on the “other” side of an issue that I may be staunchly for (in that present day). Who knows what the future holds.

I know one thing’s for sure, the kind of change that I want to be part of on a global scale certainly won’t be made by me (or others) erring on the side of the middle road. So long as I’m true to myself — authentic — and keep to my ethics/morals, I feel confident in standing up for whatever I’ve said.

So — this is not to say that I’m going to start advocating some extreme positions in tomorrow’s post (or even the next day’s), but I will, as the title suggests, err on the side of authenticity. I hope you’ll join me in this learning experience — maybe we’ll be able to teach each other something.

If You Want to Be Happy, Tame Your Expectations

I wanted to finish 2012 with what I think is my biggest “insight.” That is, the thing that I felt taught me the most about myself and other people. As you know, if you follow me on Twitter  Facebook, or read what I write about here (follow button on the right-hand side!), I like to learn. I think that learning doesn’t end once you leave school (whether we like it or not) and I think that learning about ourselves never ends.

I’ve certainly came across quite a few techniques, perspectives, and ways for being in the world and handling stress. In particular, I think that Byron Katie‘s The Work can be quite powerful. While I’ve never attended one of her seminars, watching the videos of people “doing The Work” can have its own cathartic experience.

I’ve noticed that one of the revelations I’ve come to this year is very similar to what Katie has said, but I still feel it to be slightly different. It’s the idea that our expectations about the world are what cause us stress, unhappiness, and you name it. I’m speaking very abstractly, so let me give you a concrete example.

Let’s say I’m having a problem with a coworker. Let’s say that coworker does something that I don’t like. Why does this upset me? Without getting into any psychological underpinnings and staying right at the surface, it’s simply about my expectations of what that coworker should (or shouldn’t) be doing that’s causing me trouble. How? Well, assuming you believe that each human being is entitled to their own autonomy, they have free will to do as they please (within the law, I suppose). If the person is acting in a way that displeases me, it’s probably because I expect them to be acting in some other way — and they aren’t. Again, still kind of abstract, so let’s make it really concrete.

Let’s say that this coworker (by the way, this example works for family, friends, spouses, pets, pretty much anything), has a particular way of answering a question with a question. And let’s say that I find this really annoying (in fact, I’d find it intriguing, but let’s go with annoying, for now). Every time I see this coworker, I’m going to remember that this coworker asks me questions whenever I ask them questions — so it’s going to make me unhappy, just seeing this person! If I happen to need to ask them something and they ask me a question back, I might begin to feel angry. Why am I feeling angry? Simply because my expectations are that this coworker should not ask me questions when I ask them questions. Should this really matter? No! This coworker can ask me questions when I ask them questions — they’re certainly allowed to do that.

Let’s try another example for which I’m sure we can all relate: traffic. Have you ever been sitting in traffic, late for something? I know I have. While sitting in this traffic, do you ever notice that sometimes people will try to “jump the line?” Does that bother you? If I’m being honest, this has certainly bothered me at times. Why should this bother me (or you)? Well, we expect that people will be kind and wait their turn right. We expect… Oh boy — there it is again! Expectations! If I didn’t have expectations that people wouldn’t try to jump the line, this wouldn’t make me upset. I might think, ‘Oh, maybe they’re in a really big hurry. Maybe someone they know is in trouble and they’re trying to go save them.’ It’s really impossible to know why someone would try to jump the line in traffic, so far be it from me to expect something from them in the way that they behave to the other drivers.

So, if I had to choose one thing to offer you from 2012, moving into 2013, it would be your expectations. Notice when you get upset/angry about something and try to discern what it is that you’re expecting should be happening in that situation. If you want to take it a step beyond, try to tame that expectations. Though, for starters, I think it’s important to notice what it is that you’re expecting in a situation. From here, you’ll certainly be well on your way to determining the root of your unhappiness.

Love it or Hate it: Cloud Atlas is Worth Seeing

Cloud AtlasA little while ago, I mentioned that I’d seen a bunch of movies recently. One of those movies: Cloud Atlas. I rather liked the movie and think that you should most definitely consider seeing it. I tend to like the kinds of movies that Tom Hanks is in and I thoroughly enjoyed The Matrix trilogy. Yes, Tom Hanks was not in the The Matrix, but two of the directors (there were three) and producers  (there were five), also directed/produced The Matrix.

I really like movies that make you think and The Matrix certainly did that. In fact, from Wikipedia:

The Matrix makes numerous references to recent films and literature, and to historical myths and philosophy including Buddhism, Vedanta, Advaita Hinduism, Christianity, Messianism, Judaism, Gnosticism, Existentialism, Nihilism. The film’s premise resembles Plato’s Allegory of the cave, René Descartes‘s evil demon, Kant‘s reflections on the Phenomenon versus theDing an sich, Zhuangzi‘s “Zhuangzi dreamed he was a butterfly“, Marx’s social theory and thebrain in a vat thought experiment. Many references to Jean Baudrillard‘s Simulacra and Simulation appear in the film, although Baudrillard himself considered this a misrepresentation.

A movie that invokes that much has to make you think. In fact, if you get the chance, I’d read the interview between one of the directors of the Matrix (Larry Wachowski) and Ken Wilber, who has done a great deal to forwarding the integral movement.

Anyway, back to Cloud Atlas. The movie weaves together a bunch of different stories and some of the actors overlap between the stories (paying homage to the idea of reincarnation). Some of the stories are quite powerful and address issues that society has struggled with or is still struggling with. There are two quotes that I came across from one of the directors (Lana Wachowski) that I think are worth keeping in mind when reading reviews of this film (or The Matrix, for that matter). Here’s the first:

As soon as they encounter a piece of art they don’t fully understand the first time going through it, they think it’s the fault of the movie or the work of art. They think, [dramatic voice] “It’s a mess.”

“This doesn’t make any sense.” And they reject it, just out of an almost knee-jerk response to some ambiguity or some gulf between what they expect they should be able to understand, and what they understand.

And the second:

There’s really complex ideas in the [Matrix] trilogy. [Laughs.] We think in some ways, it’s the most experimental, complicated trilogy ever made. And it’s frustrating to see people try to will that to not be true. But we know it’s true. And in the same way, people will try to will Cloud Atlas to be rejected. They will call it messy, or complicated, or undecided whether it’s trying to say something New Agey-profound or not. And we’re wrestling with the same things that Dickens and Hugo and David Mitchell and Herman Melville were wrestling with. We’re wrestling with those same ideas, and we’re just trying to do it in a more exciting context than conventionally you are allowed to.

The Most Important Thing: Ask Good Questions

I’ve read — . And I continue to read — . And I probably will keep reading — . From this reading (and experience) I’ve learned quite a bit. I’ve read a variety of opinions on a variety of subjects. After all of this reading, patterns start to emerge. You start to see the same thing being written, but in a different context. Or, you start to see the same thing written, but with a different twist. There are lots of different ways that people have developed to help make us perform better, be better, or feel better about ourselves. One of the things that I’m surprised I don’t see written about more often is the powerful effect of asking good questions. To me, it as to be one of the most important things you can do.

Why? Well, because in some cases, it’s all you have.

There are different scenarios where we could discuss how asking good questions serves you well: job interviews, “ask the experts,” crisis response, etc. Instead of going down that road, I want to talk about why I think asking good questions (generally) is an important thing.

There’s the idea that if you ask a good question, you may impress (unintentionally) the person you’re talking to and as a result, you may seem smarter to them than you actually are or you may be memorable. While that’s all well and good and may be a motivating factor for some to ask good questions, I’m more interested in asking good questions because I think it’s one of the unique ways that we can contribute (to the world).

As I mentioned above, I’ve done a lot of reading. As a result of that reading, I have a unique perspective on whatever conversation I’m in because it’s unlikely that there will be someone else like me in the conversation who has interacted with all the different things that I have interacted with. And so because of this, the ideas or thoughts that I may have about a given subject will likely be different from the rest of the people in the conversation. I may see connections that no one else sees or that no one else considers (but may be obvious to me because of what I know). In that sense, it’s almost like it’s my duty or obligation to come up with an intelligent question that incorporates that perspective.

I want to make it clear that I’m not advocating asking questions for the sake of asking questions. The question should still be meaningful and add value to the discussion. I’ll give you an example.

This summer, I had the chance to ask a question of the former COO of Obama for America (as he had just been hired to the organization I was working for this ). Because of this person’s unique work experience, I thought he would be able to provide perspective on organizational structure. Specifically, whether or not a “Team of Teams” approach may work in the private sector. In my question, I also made reference to the (then) at Barclay’s and JP Morgan Chase. In asking the question, my plan wasn’t to impress the person answering the question nor was it my intention to impress the crowd. In fact, the question was read as (anonymous). Ironically, after the question was read, there was a bit of a gasp from the crowd and the person answering the question sort of laughed about starting off with an “easy” one.

You Need To Seek Out Ideas and Opinions That Are Different From Your Beliefs

[Editor’s Note: This post’s title was changed on September 16th from “if you’re a conservative, tell me which liberals you read: if you’re a liberal, tell me which conservatives you read.”]

I was born and raised in Canada and really didn’t start paying attention to politics until I moved to the US, so most of my understanding of politics comes through the lens of American politics. Watching the Democrats and the Republicans fight (bicker?) year after year starts to get intolerable. As , many American agree with this sentiment.

Part of this is a result of our to seek out opinions that confirm our own previously held beliefs. That is, if one is more liberal, they are probably more inclined to watch MSNBC and/or read the New York Times. Similarly, if one is more conservative, they are probably more inclined to watch FOX News and/or read the Wall Street Journal. There’s no “good” or “bad” here, though I would .

So, if we know that we have a tendency to seek out opinions that confirm our previously held beliefs, it would behoove us to intentionally seek out opinions that we know are counter to our own! That sounds a lot easier than it actually is — especially in today’s world of RSS, Twitter, Facebook, and personalized news.

Not to pick on Facebook, but the friends you have on Facebook, more than likely, share your political affiliation. It’s just natural for us to befriend those and even if you have a few friends from the “other side,” the news that they share on Facebook will most likely: a) get drowned out by all your other friends’ sharing news; or b) won’t be elevated to the top of your newsfeed because you tended not to click on the links provided by these friends.

While I don’t think there’s anything “wrong” with it, I do think that there’s something that we should be doing about it. If you’re a conservative, there are a critical mass of people out there who think that your opinion on issues of the day are wrong. If you’re a liberal, there are a critical mass of people out there who think that your opinion on issues of the day are wrong. What are you doing to try to understand why they think your opinion is wrong?

And yes, there are things that you can do.

Lifehacker proposed to do this:

  • Get random reading content delivered to your inbox
“The easiest, no hassle way to get a random selection of news is to have it delivered right to your inbox.”
  • Automatically get different points of view for articles you read
“When you’re browsing the news it’s easy to stick with the sites you know. Sometimes that means you’re missing an entirely different point of view.”
  • Randomize your start page
“Your browser’s home page is a great place to dump interesting and random content for your accidental and automatic discovery. Obviously you don’t want to do this on your work computer in case you get distracted, but it’s a good way to discover new things when you have the time.”

~
Head on over to the for more details and specific suggestions (for your start page). There’s one more suggestion I want to make (as it’s something that I do): Twitter. Instead of just following/reading news from people/accounts that I know are similar to my previously held beliefs, I have sought out those accounts that often discuss the issues from a perspective that is not native to me. This way, I’m able to read about the news from an entirely different perspective and from one that I may not have considered were it not for someone giving words to it.

So, I ask: if you’re a conservative, tell me who are the liberals that you read — if you’re a liberal, tell me who are the conservatives that you read.

Operation Cat Drop: A Lesson in Externalities or Unintended Consequences

In the last 3+ months, I’ve been meaning to write a post about “.” With my recent “” of having to write an “article,” I feel more comfortable recounting the story and adding a few of my ideas to the post. For those unfamiliar with the story of Operation Cat Drop, here’s a that has collected many versions of the story. According to said site, there are at least  of the story. Regardless of the number of variants on the story there are and the , the lessons from the story still stand. Here’s a brief account found on :

In the early 1950s, there was an outbreak of a serious disease called malaria amongst the Dayak people in Borneo. The World Health Organization tried to solve the problem. They sprayed large amounts of a chemical called DDT to kill the mosquitoes that carried the malaria. The mosquitoes died and there was less malaria. That was good. However, there were side effects. One of the first effects was that the roofs of people’s houses began to fall down on their heads. It turned out that the DDT was also killing a parasitic wasp that ate thatch-eating caterpillars. Without the wasps to eat them, there were more and more thatch-eating caterpillars. Worse than that, the insects that died from being poisoned by DDT were eaten by gecko lizards, which were then eaten by cats. The cats started to die, the rats flourished, and the people were threatened by outbreaks of two new serious diseases carried by the rats, sylvatic plague and typhus. To cope with these problems, which it had itself created, the World Health Organization had to parachute live cats into Borneo.

The coincidental nature (for me) of having wanted to write this post so many times in the last few months is striking. Two of my most recent submissions for coursework have involved me explaining: 1) unintended consequences and 2) externalities. They are, essentially, the same thing, but has a history in the economics literature. My point in raising the story about dropping cats into Borneo is that it’s very important to consider the ramifications of the actions being taken.

That’s not to say that those folks who were involved in Operation Cat Drop (if there was one) didn’t think about the unintended consequences or (externalities) of what they were doing, but just to illustrate the importance of these concepts. A perspective that takes into account the “whole system” would — at a minimum — consider the possibility of externalities and unintended consequences. I think that as the world grows closer together (read: ) it is vital that decisions take into account even disparate connections.

What if Business (or ALL Interactions) Ended With Hugs Instead of Handshakes?

According to , the origin of the handshake was thought to be a gesture of peace by demonstrating that you held no weapons. (Of course, this presupposes that everyone is right-handed, but that’s a story for a different post.) When you think about the handshake in that sense, it’s actually kind of nice, isn’t it?

There’s really a lot that could be said about the evolution of the handshake. We could talk about the different cross-cultural rituals that take the place of handshaking. For instance, , bowing is the norm when it comes to social interactions. However, with the prevalence of globalization, there are now many instances where east-Asians and non-east-Asians will be engaged in some sort crossed bow and handshake.

We could even discuss some of the of the handshake. For instance, Wikipedia lists 6 different kinds of handshakes (hand hug, dominance, cold and clammy, crusher, queens fingertips, and keep back), some of which you could probably figure out the gist of just from the name. Wikipedia also lists a number of modern customs spanning African-American culture to Arabic-speaking people and even for non-business situations in Turkey.

So, as I said, there’s so much information simply from a historical or anthropological point of view. I’m more interested in what it might look like to substitute a hug for the handshake. I’m sure I’m not the first person to imagine this possibility, (and a quick internet search even turns up results in and on the topic of hugs and handshakes), but I think I have a unique perspective on the matter.

Historically, as discussed above, the handshake was meant to show that there wasn’t a weapon in one’s hand. If we look at the of the act of the handshake (including both participants), there isn’t often an opening, specifically with regard to the heart area. If you think about when you shake someone’s hand, this is usually what happens (or some degree of variations thereof): one of the two participants (in the handshake) will stretch thereby shifting their torso out on an angle to the left (can you visualize it?) And the other person, the person who receives the handshake, has their elbow a little closer to their stomach and their hand is usually out in front of themselves (more towards the center). Take a second and picture this in your mind. The person receiving the outstretched hand, in a way, is closing off their heart area by way of their arm/bicep.

Now, I don’t think that either side of this equation is consciously or intentionally shifting their heart away from the action, I just think that this is how the ritual has developed over time. So instead, what if we hugged? I know, I know, this might not work across all cultures. And then you’d probably raise the issue that some people don’t feel comfortable being that ‘intimate’ with strangers. . Okay, but how did the handshake start? By showing the other person that you weren’t carrying a weapon.

Maybe a global movement to replace the handshake with the hug could be a way to promote more compassion and empathy for each other.

One things for sure, we could all use a bit more (through natural means).

Do You Know Your Biases?

“You will learn from others around you being skeptical more than you will learn by becoming skeptical.” –

This past October, a world-renowned psychologist () published his latest book, . I’ve read a lot of reviews of the book and seen many of the interviews of him about this book and one of my favorite quotes (above) comes from the video (below). Take a few minutes and watch:

Kahneman, along with have done so much for the fields of psychology and economics. Some say that this book is the culmination of their work. I have enjoyed reading Kahneman and Tversky’s work through the years and think that their contribution on the subject of is monumental.

The quote I started this post with (…learn more from others around you being skeptical…) is worth talking about for a little bit. When I first heard him say that, I must have replayed it at least a dozen times. I heard the words he was saying, but it took some time for the wisdom to sink in. So what is it that Kahneman was saying?

Have you ever heard of an ? It’s the idea that your ideas and beliefs are reinforced (or amplified) because those that you tell them to share said beliefs. There’s nothing wrong with that, but if you’re familiar with and some of the , you know how hard it is to break from the group’s opinion on a topic. I don’t think that Kahneman was referring to this phenomenon in particular, but if you think about how hard it is to break from the group’s dominant viewpoint, it would make some sense that being “skeptical” yourself is not as easy as it sounds. However, if those around you are skeptical, it will be easier to learn from their skepticism about a given topic.

So, as you think about assembling your next business team or you’re just talking with your friends, remember how important and valuable the dissenting voice can be. Remember that having a  might not be the best idea. Remember how hard it is to be the singular dissenting voice. Remember to encourage healthy disagreement and an analysis from all sides. You’ll be much better off.

The Best Piece of Advice: We’ll See…

One of the best pieces of advice I’ve ever come across is one with regard to . I’ve written about perspective and having a in posts before, but I think that this particular post, or more accurately, the content of this post, is the best summary of my “perspective” when it comes to perspective.

The I’m quoting this from says the story is Taoist, but I’ve heard other people say it’s from different traditions:

[There was] an old farmer who had worked his crops for many years. One day his horse ran away. Upon hearing the news, his neighbors came to visit.

“Such bad luck,” they said sympathetically.

“We’ll see,” the farmer replied.

The next morning the horse returned, bringing with it three other wild horses.

“How wonderful,” the neighbors exclaimed.

“We’ll see,” replied the old man.

The following day, his son tried to ride one of the untamed horses, was thrown, and broke his leg. The neighbors again came to offer their sympathy on his misfortune.

“We’ll see,” answered the farmer.

The day after, military officials came to the village to draft young men into the army. Seeing that the son’s leg was broken, they passed him by. The neighbors congratulated the farmer on how well things had turned out.

“We’ll see” said the farmer.

This kind of story could keep going on and on and on — and it has relevance to every subject (you’ll notice that I’ve placed it in every category that I currently have for the posts I write). While there are some things that I categorically disagree with (the death penalty being one), I could see this story or as the answer to many hardships in people’s lives. Having lived through *some* hardships so far, I can understand how hearing these words are not necessarily comforting with regard to certain instances, but well after the fact (in my experience), the perspective created by these words can illuminate some unexpected insights.

~

I thought I’d present some examples from the news where we could apply this wisdom:

– Many Toronto Blue Jays’ fans are pleased (myself included) that they acquired Colby Rasmus (via trade). He may turn out to be a great player for the Jays, or he may not. We’ll see.

– Most economists (and people) following the “” will tell you that the US needs to raise its debt ceiling or there will be ramifications of epic proportions. Most of what I’ve heard/read on the issue seems to be a whole lot of politicking. If the US defaults on its loans will that be the worst thing in the world? If the US averts this “disaster,” will that be a good thing? We’ll see. (This particular We’ll See might not have a concrete answer for another 30 years).

– As Borders’ stores continue to close their doors for the final time, many speculate on what this may mean for other businesses similar to Borders. The outlook isn’t usually positive, but maybe this will free up time for other endeavors. We’ll see.

– (An odd bit of news, to say the least). This particular example is quite similar to the farmer’s son falling off the horse and breaking his leg. While I don’t expect Alex Trebek to be drafted to the military, who knows what this injury will do for his “perspective” on life. And the answer is: We’ll see.

As you can see, these “three” words can apply to pretty much anything you can come up with. I’d like to invite you to share with us in the comments some situations that you initially thought were poor (or great) that turned out to be great (or not so great) with us in the comments section.

For the folks who are visual learners:

Have You Tried… Rearranging Your Space?

Right now, my house is in a bit of an upheaval of sorts – I’m in the process of packing and subsequently moving from the Hawaiian Islands to the east coast (metro DC). As I went to make myself coffee this morning, I realized that the kettle was not in the same place that it was yesterday (or for the majority of the time I’ve lived here). It threw me for a second, until I realized it was on a counter across the kitchen. As I plugged the kettle in to heat up the water, I realized that this situation offered me a new perspective.

How often do you find yourself stuck in a rut? You’re at your desk and you just can’t think of where to go next. You don’t know if you should choose the first option or the second option. Maybe you have writer’s block. Maybe you’re trying to solve a really important problem, but you can’t think of an answer. In fact, all you can think of with regard to answers are all of the answers you’ve already thought of. Has this ever happened to you? What have you tried to do to rectify the situation? Have you thought of rearranging your space?

Some would say the and this is not a concept unbeknownst to the world’s religions (see: ). Have you ever noticed this? Have you ever noticed that your physical world is a mess (and so is your head space)? It doesn’t even have to be this way. As I was saying earlier, it could just be that the way that things are set-up in your environment has become stagnant. Maybe the energy in the room needs to shift (to allow the energy of your thoughts to shift) and allow you to come to a solution.

You may think it’s , but I pause and reflect anytime someone presents an idea from ancient times. In this particular instance, I think that applies. You don’t even have to believe it because it’s ancient wisdom, try it for yourself. Try rearranging your room (either intuitively or counterintuitively). Maybe put your desk in a way that your and see how it feels.

When I first sat down to write this post, I didn’t intend to use Feng Shui as a reference, but so it goes. If you like, you can totally ignore the inclusion of Feng Shui in this post. I just like to have some sort of reference for you to click on (to lend credence to what it is that I am saying), but with what I’m saying today, you can totally just try it out on your own (sans Feng Shui). Whether or not you believe in “unseen energy,” I think you’ll find that when you rearrange your space (physical), you’ll gain a new perspective on things (literally and figuratively).