Every decision you have made has been created by two things: 1) Your past experience, and 2) your knowledge of the choice to be made. When you make a decision it is based on reactions you have had to similar situations in the past. Our brains are very unique and engage differently than we might expect them to. We usually only remember a positive reaction, but if a negative reaction is implanted into our cognitive reality it will derail even the simplest of choices. The past, mainly the past we do not want to face, is a major factor in the process we use to decide right or left, yes or no, right or wrong.
The other side of this coin, is the ability we have to accept new information. When you look at a new menu, how quickly you can process the massive amount of choices you face, determines how simple this decision becomes. Most of us cannot take it all in, so the decision rests squarely on the shoulders of what we know. "I know I like chicken, it is not often that I do not like a chicken dish, therefore I will have chicken".
Interestingly enough, we live in a constant state of reaction. Distinction comes at points in our lives when strategic action replaces reactive reasoning. Think about this: if I meet a homeless gentleman who asks me for money and I react to his need with a dollar, this response does not affect this man's state of being, but only a momentary blip in his life. If on the other hand I am strategizing in ways to enter into his life with a question of change then the reactive duty lies in his court and he must make a shift.
My quandary lies here; if the obvious change happens in the moments of active planning then why do we live in a state of reaction? We are all capable of ingenious ideas, or know of others who have ideas that can effect change, yet we choose to react. Why?
The better route seems obvious, so why not take it? Why not face the past that will sway our choice with bias? Why not execute the ideas we have that may change the world? Why not try the steak even though you know you like chicken? Why not? What is keeping us from living to the fullest potential we were made for? This dear friends is a deep question, one I hope you will wrestle with as I am. Maybe together we can, and will, change the world.
The other side of this coin, is the ability we have to accept new information. When you look at a new menu, how quickly you can process the massive amount of choices you face, determines how simple this decision becomes. Most of us cannot take it all in, so the decision rests squarely on the shoulders of what we know. "I know I like chicken, it is not often that I do not like a chicken dish, therefore I will have chicken".
Interestingly enough, we live in a constant state of reaction. Distinction comes at points in our lives when strategic action replaces reactive reasoning. Think about this: if I meet a homeless gentleman who asks me for money and I react to his need with a dollar, this response does not affect this man's state of being, but only a momentary blip in his life. If on the other hand I am strategizing in ways to enter into his life with a question of change then the reactive duty lies in his court and he must make a shift.
My quandary lies here; if the obvious change happens in the moments of active planning then why do we live in a state of reaction? We are all capable of ingenious ideas, or know of others who have ideas that can effect change, yet we choose to react. Why?
The better route seems obvious, so why not take it? Why not face the past that will sway our choice with bias? Why not execute the ideas we have that may change the world? Why not try the steak even though you know you like chicken? Why not? What is keeping us from living to the fullest potential we were made for? This dear friends is a deep question, one I hope you will wrestle with as I am. Maybe together we can, and will, change the world.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment