I have found that breaking things down allows flexibility to think, the direction determined by a combination of connections between words and images in a neuronic way (similar to the structures of neurons), using tags, making available links some random, some deliberate.
The method allows for more honest appraisal of each point, since instead of using simple lists of items, each item in the list can have a note. Many times I found I had given myself orders-to-do according to the principal of one-man-business-management without any regard to the cost or the time required, rather just a list of must dos. Here, I have taken the time to appraise each one, do a quick SWOT if necessary or an ROI.
Previously, I knew that within the great mass of stuff to do there was some stuff to do one day. The paradox is that the more you break down, the more you analyse and create ideas and so corollary of inventing, must be taking the bull by the horns and do!
The initial objective of the analysis, to find purpose, has not in itself been achieved. While I was effectively reviewing three years strategic and tactical thinking, the succinct resume Eisenhower grid failed to show me my purpose, I think because the items in my list are very operational. I should put in some longer term things, some wider objectives.
Now I understand more deeply the importance of endgame visualization. So I added the note Find My Purpose and am just waiting for it to pop up.
What is purpose then if it is not an accumulation of the parts? When I look at the most important and most urgent tasks I do not see a reflection of what I want to do in the short-term. So I started to review all items relative to one another to try and get the balance right.
As I’m currently spending much time talking about the past, the change of lifestyle, society etc, I’m wondering what is important about it.
I suspected initially that there was a judgement here; that the world is not a better place now. But its not bad in every way. My fear is that this is related to my own human incapacity to accept change, in particular, the distant approach of death.
But to answer the question is life better now, produces paradoxical answers; yes and no. No matter how I try, I must face my own incapacity not be able to solve all the world’s problems, and just to highlight some of them.
In particular, society, by which I mean the group, human values, friendship.
Some attribute some of modern individualism to the computer as the root of all evil.
Balance in all things. The computer has good effects; communication, the ability to do things, connexions and yet cutting people off from those around them.
It enables people however to choose, we don’t choose our family, but we do choose our friends and lovers. The escapism possible is a way of finding like-minded folk when not possible in the local community.
So the conclusion is not clear cut; we should not spend all our time inside machines interacting with people elsewhere, to the exlusion of those lovers and friends around us, even if good can come from it. On the other hand, we cannot spend all our time locally, the computer is a tool for stimulation, used in good measure
I have much stronger feelings for Israel since my trip there; the pleasure of seeing people openly able to display their Judaism.
On my return I found myself defending Israeli military action in Syria to stop the transfer of missiles as legitimate self defence and even the creation of the state of Israel in 1948.
Even before leaving, some had said that they would not consider Israel a holiday destination, because of the perceived danger; some also expressed their aversion to the politics there.
Israel is getting stick abroad because of the Palestinian situation and the politics of settlements.
However, we came to understand, despite the unescapable symbolism of division in the parallel with Berlin, that since the construction of the wall, there are no more bombs in Tel Aviv.
May the peace be long-lasting; mazel tov.
I was looking back over my cv career and found that in each case I could say that there were areas in each job that were not a success for me and thus my career is rather built on mediocrity.
I could also make excuses or be easier on myself, lower self expectations but I hear Clayton Christensen talking about excellence, high flyers, brilliance and find myself aspiring to brilliance without ever the feeling of achieving it.
Can I repair this now by finding purpose and moving further towards work that I enjoy and do well?
I recently travelled to Israel, to Tel Aviv, where I had my bar mitzvah in the square having laid Tefillin and thus was effectively renamed. And I got a blessing: the guy said this was a great day for me and wished big things to happen. Which did, starting with losing my iPhone later that night. While it seemed a big thing at the time, the real process came later.
Because I lost my phone, I concentrated on my Kindle and bought the book How Will You Measure Your Life by Clayton Christensen. I was quickly captivated by the fact that a man of his caliber could discuss the same issues that I have been struggling with for years, in such a clear and understandable way. The issue of Purpose. But now I am confronted with the greatest question of my life: what is my purpose?
I said prior to my trip that I did not believe in God and yet recently I went to my local church to light a candle. Do I now believe in God because a man in Tel Aviv talked of God’s commandments, or because I saw the fervent kissing Jesus’s tombstone? Like Clayton, I should perhaps ask God what my purpose is. God, what is my purpose?
Clayton defines purpose as being composed of three elements; Likeness, Commitment and a Metric. Who do I want to become or what do I want my business to look like, what will drive me every day to strive to become what I want or what I want my business to become and a metric to measure whether I am moving towards or away from my projected likeness.
But just now I do not know what I want to become. I followed the advice of Steve Pavlina and started writing what my purpose could be. So far nothing has made me cry. Patience is a virtue; I will try again and keep coming back to it until I can articulate it. The importance of words.
Thanks to the Charles Wurth website that I was perusing and found this charming image.
Arguments for and against centralized water treatment and electricity generation.
|Water companies||Water companies efficiently organize water treatment, at a cost||Society takes water treatment for granted and therefore pollutes, increasing the costs|
|Having Clean Water||Water is clean and available conveniently and at low cost||Nothing against having clean water in itself, poverty, misery and disease are present when water is not clean|
|UN clean water programs in Africa||The UN promotes clean water programs in Africa as a genuine attempt to improve people’s lives||Some may say that this is indirectly a cynical attempt by industry to sell water technology, now privatized, and exploit poor African countries|
|Electricity||Enables so many things, industry, society enumerable electrical devices||While electricity enables interesting and entertaining technology it opens the way for exploitation by marketeers through sale of non-essential goods.|
|Electricity companies||Provides electricity, at a cost||Makes people dependent on a way of life. When the oil runs out what will we do? Continue Reading →|
If land consolidation in the sixties was a consequence of the industrialization of farming and its effect on the countryside, both may have resulted in the individualization of land and the depopulation of the countryside.
But did people leave the country because of land consolidation, because of the arrival of electricity and water networks and a general movement to the towns, or was it something else? Was there a general movement out of the countryside, which was inevitable?
How can anyone criticize or resent the changes to society that have occurred over the last two generations? It’s a difficult subject. The basis for criticism is the change in values that has accompanied the change in society. The question is not black and white, it is not sufficient to say that Internet is bad, that modern society is evil, that people are egotistical, individualistic, selfish and self-seeking.
It is not possible to say that in the past either during or before the war that people were altruistic, generous and self-effacing for there will always be people of all persuasions.
However, from a general point of view, were people in general more likely and disposed to help one another and are they today more likely to be self-centred?
I was reading that democracy is not really present in Egypt despite the revolution. The fears of the population that the transition would be slow and that despite elections, the old regime would still hold power seem to be true at least to some extent.
Is it just the name that has changed or is it the old case of power going to heads? Here’s hoping that forethecoming elections will advance true democracy for Egyptians, real democracy and freedom of expression.