Meditation is intermittent fasting for the mind. Too much sugar leads to a heavy body, and too many distractions lead to a heavy mind. Time spent undistracted and alone, in self-examination, journaling, meditation, resolves the unresolved and takes us from mentally fat to fit.
~ Naval Ravikant
slip:4a594.
First tell yourself what sort of man you want to be; then act accordingly in all you do. For in almost everything else we see this to be the practice. Athletes first determine what kind of athlete they want to be, and then act accordingly. … You will find the same in the arts. If you are a carpenter, you will have these procedures, if a blacksmith, those. For, if we do not refer each of our actions to some standard, we shall be acting at random; if to an improper standard, we shall fail utterly.
~ Epictetus
slip:4a280.
The problem is that our New Tools are winning the battle of attention. We’ve gotten to the point where the tools use us as much as we use them. This new reality means we need to re-examine our relationship with our New Tools.
~ Shane Parrish from, Don’t Let Your (Technology) Tools Use You
slip:4ufodo1.
Also see, Jaron Lanier‘s comments about the Internet in general and social networks in particular. I consider myself fully innoculated against information overload and against my tools using me.
And yet, my mind wanders. I sit down to try to write out a blog post or three, and I find myself doing other things. The majority of my disruptions these days are simply ducking into my various projects and messaging platforms. The problem is that when I do, there’s always something to do. It’s not some inifite scroll that catches my eye, but rather a new message—from one of dozens of ongoing conversations—or something I spot which can be improved.
It’s not enough to simply do only productive things. No rather, I actually do far too many different productive things. A minute here replying to this person, two minutes there improving this little feature, 5 minutes writing a bug report, 10 minutes responding to a product vendor, … where was I? Right, trying to write this blog post.
ɕ
If you remember what an author says, you have learned something from reading him. If what he says is true, you have even learned something about the world. But whether it is a fact about the book or a fact about the world that you have learned, you have gained nothing but information if you have exercised only your memory. You have not been enlightened. Enlightenment is achieved only when, in addition to knowing what an author says, you know what he means and why he says it.
~ Mortimer Adler
slip:4a360.
Your ideas are worth less than you think—it’s all about how you execute upon them.
~ Chris Bailey from, Your ideas aren’t that unique – Chris Bailey
slip:4uaiyo2.
The pull-quote says it all. I recently had a pleasant conversation, wherein the idea of the “why” and the “how” came up. Thanks to Simon Sinek, we all know to, “start with why,” (that is to say, start with the idea.) The idea is important, but it’s literally worthless without the execution. Because anything, multiplied by zero, is zero.
To my 20-something-year-old’s surprise, knowing Al Gebra turned out to actually be useful. Take, for example, evaluating some idea and its execution: The total value could be calculated by multiplying the value of the idea by the value of the execution. (Note my use of, “could be.”) Great ideas are represented by a large, positive value, and terrible ideas by a large, negative value; Similarly for the execution. Great idea multiplied by great execution? Huge total value.
This simple model also shows me how I regularly ruin my life: Terrible idea, (represented by a negative value,) with great execution… Or, great idea, with terrible execution, (represented by a negative value,)… either leads to a large negative total. Interestingly, the slightest negativity—in either of those cases—amplifies the magnitude of the other parameter’s greatness.
This leads to an algebra of idea-and-execution. If you’re going to half-ass the execution, (a negative value,) or you’re concerned that you cannot execute well, it’s better to do so with a “small” idea. Only if you’re sure you can do the execution passably well, (“positive”,) should you try a really great idea. If you work through the logic with the roles flipped, the same feels true. This leads to a question that can be used in the fuzzy, real world: Is this pairing of idea and execution in alignment? Am I pairing the risk of negative-execution align with a “small” idea, or pairing the risk of a bad idea with “small” execution. That to me is a very interesting “soft” analysis tool, which falls surprising out of some very simple algebra.
What I’m not sure about though is what to do with the double-negative scenarios. (Which I’ll leave as an exercise for you, Dear Reader.) Perhaps, I should be using a quadratic equation?
ɕ
What, then, is wrong with you? I tell you, it is this, that you have neglected and corrupted that part of you, whatever it may be, with which we feel desire or aversion, and the impulse to act or not to act. Neglected in what way? By letting it remian ignorant of the true nature of the good, to which it was born, and of the nature of evil, and of what it has as its own and what is not its own.
~ Epictetus
slip:4a321.
To thrive amid unprecedented amounts of novelty, we must shift from being mere seekers of the new to being connoisseurs of it.
~ Winifred Gallagher
slip:4a358.
Like an ape, you imitate whatever you see, and one thing after another is sure to please you, but no longer to please you as soon as it becomes familiar. For you have never entered upon anything with due consideration, nor after examining the whole matter carefully and systematically, but always approach things in a random and poorly motivated manner.
~ Epictetus
slip:4a563.
When you think that one of your ideas is a billion dollar one, remember the S-logo. Your idea is probably not as unique as you think it is. After a game-chasing [sic] insight strikes you, focus on how well you can execute upon that idea instead.
~ Chris Bailey from, Your ideas aren’t that unique – Chris Bailey
slip:4uaiyo2.
I agree and I will go farther: An idea alone is worthless. It becomes increasingly valuable only if one thinks through the second-order, (and third and so on,) effects. Only when one thinks about how the idea connects to everything else one knows. Only when the idea has been connected to, and tested against, reality.
A good idea has some real, objective—others see the effect too and their observations agree—effect in the world. That part is trivially easy; “I think moving this chair is a good idea!” and then move the chair. But to be a good idea, it must also create value which can be traded, (in the most general sense,) with others. Moving the chair out of someone’s way is a good idea. Moving it to make them trip is not.
I can easily become trapped in my own thoughts. So many ideas! So many possibilities! But instead of ruminating in a whirlwind of worthless ideas, if I pick one, think it through, and then stand up to go make it happen— Magic. Efficacy for the win.
ɕ