Corporate memory? The human record?

The human race, like many other entities, operates in cycles. Empires rise and fall. Seasons come and go. And we continue to make the same mistakes many times, over and over.

As individuals, we can rely on our memory (if we have a decent one!) to remember our mistakes and try to avoid them in the future. Even this breaks down if you believe in reincarnation; under this scenario, your memory of past lives is so tenuous that you may very well be making the same mistakes over and over, like in a B-grade execution of ‘Ground Hog’s Day’.

What about corporations? I have just been through some experiences that tell me corporations have no memory, despite (sometimes) their best intentions. If we look at the major corporate disasters of the last decade, we could probably find that the root cause was identified, at the same company or industry, as a major cause of concern sometime over the last century. On a smaller scale, we all experience times when we see our bosses’ bosses make the same mistake over and over, especially when it comes to people matters. It still dumbfounds me that organisations with bonus programmes continue to undermine the ability of management to “share good times” across the team with some form of token payment. I am not arguing that the wealth created by a corporation should go to its’ employees rather than to its shareholders. But we all know that management theory argues we can motivate employees to higher levels of performance when they feel they have ’skin on the game’. Despite the many occasions our corporations have had to experience the mistake of mis-managing these programs and seeing key talent flee the organisation, we continue to see companies making the same mistake over and over; allowing the very few that are politically savvy enough to look after themselves rather than their group to secure the small portion of the bonus pool, whilst the mass goes on with a token excuse for a share of the pie, or even worse, an excuse for why they did not share in record profits.

But is this restricted to corporations? Not by a long shot. If we extend our analysis to the human race, we find that the same principle applies. How many times will our civilisation have to make the same mistakes before it learns? How many wars will we have to wage to realise that, in the long term, it makes no difference? Boundaries are a figment of our imagination. Nations are intellectual constructs we use to create divisions ‘amongst brothers’. We know from experience we are a diverse race. We know from experience that everywhere are ‘good’ people and ‘bad’ people, and that the ‘bad’ people will defy any attempt at pre-identification and classification (dare I say profiling?). And we also know from experience that no amount of military power will shape a society; it is only in the collaborative undertaking of the political process that societies will rise, and eventually, powers will be shaped. And then the cycle starts again.

In my beloved Australia, we just held a general election where the long-standing Primer Minister for the last ten years, the Hon. John W Howard, was defeated, giving rise to the labour movement into the prime power position in our political landscape. I am excited by the volley of changes that will result from this election, starting with the first one of which was long overdue: Australia’s ratification of the Kyoto protocol. But I am no dreamer (ok, I am a bit: I always hope for the best; want to change the world; try to make someone else’s day every day – but I digress). I am realistic enough to know if Kevin Rudd stays in power for long enough, that power will corrupt and lead him to re-make some major mistakes of the past. I have been thinking for long enough in my life to be aware that the new powers at the helm will also struggle with the complexity of achieving a balance, and will most likely have a negative impact on our economy, in the long term. In short, our dear country will most likely repeat many of its’ mistake of the past. And to some extent, that is a good thing. Because it is in those mistakes that worrisome linear trends will be broken. New ones will emerge, and we will have a different set of concerns to deal with. But that’s ok. At the point, we will change powers, allow others to undo some of the new mistakes, and make some old ones of their own volition.

Does the human record serve any purpose? I invite you, my dear readers, to post your opinion in the comments section. Let’s see what healthy debate we can create in this space.

Can we fall out of love?

Image by Ester G

When I started this blog, I wrote for myself. The blog started as a collection of random thoughts I was having, primarily during boring business meetings (What? I thought this was about love!” You’re right, dear reader. Hang on there and we’ll get to it in a second)

However, as time has passed, these reflections have been evolving. My blog has become an interactive channel of reflection. Huh? Let me explain what I mena by that.

When I was a teenager, I had a lot of trouble finding a girlfriend. It was VERY easy for me to become friends with girls, but I continuously fond myself at the pointy end of a conversation that started with “I-don’t-want-to-ruin-a-wonderful-friendship-by-becoming-involved’; or had to listen (again!) to my crush of the moment start telling that “It’s-not-you-It’s-me-I-only-see-you-as-a-friend”. Despite an enormous amount of energy going into the pursuit of romantic fulfillment (Hollywood style, nothing less!), it wasn’t until I started University that I had my first real girlfriend. During all those teenage years I also spent a lot of time ruminating on a variety of topics. This habit of thinking and using my brain for other pursuits led me to an engaging and regular social setting. With my five best friends, we established the routine of getting together (at one of our places) every Friday or Saturday night; open a bottle of Rum, ‘Aguardiente‘, or the alcoholic beverage of our choice at the time; and have ‘deep and meaningful’ discussions on any topic. We talked about religion, art, politics, university, love, and comic books. We called these meetings our ‘Tertulias de los viernes’. (Friday’s Tertulias)
As I left Colombia and my group of friends behind, I stopped participating in these regular intellectual debates. I also found my other half; married her; and have spent the last 12 years of my life with her.

Then I started this blog. I reflected on my own. And then the most marvelous thing started happening: I found some bloggers who shared some of my interests. I started perusing their writing. Regularly. And since a few weeks ago, I started having my own virtual version of ‘Friday’s Tertulias‘ by responding to their posts in my blog.

There it is. That’s the intro to my article on whether we can fall out of love or not. What started me thinking about this topic was (you guessed it) another blogger. Moriah posted an article entitled Ramblings on internet dating/long-distance relationships , in which she explains why internet dating just does not appeal to her; and why on the other hand long-distance relationships hold a certain level of appeal (I know it sounds weird, butwhen you read her post, it actually makes a lot of sense. I suggest you head over and read her post; you will probably agree with my comments). Through the comments section of that post we engaged on a dialog. On my first response to the article, I discussed how the ‘getting to love’ someone happened along slightly different paths in today’s world than in olden times (think ‘arranged marriages’ vs ‘falling in love’)
Then Moriah asked Can one fall out of love permanently or does it take one moment, built upon another, until one’s heart becomes hard toward another? My immediate reaction to her question was that one can (and one does) “fall out of love” permanently; but that it is not something that happens instantaneously. Let me rephrase it. Love is like a viscous liquid: It takes a while for your glass to fill, but it also takes a while for your glass to empty.

As soon as I wrote this, I realised that part of the problem we’re having is one of semantics. Falling “in love” and falling “out of love” are reasonably immediate actions. Getting to love someone, on the other hand, takes a bit more time and energy; and I don’t think you ever stop loving someone you once loved deeply.

People that go from relationship to relationship without giving themselves (or their partners) an opportunity to experience a deep sense love are usually following the fickleness of their hearts; moving with the wind as they fall in and out of love with others. This notion plays very nicely to Hollywood’s romantic view. You must feel butterflies in yout stomach when you see him; want to spend every single second in his presence; laugh at his every joke, love his every hobby, and think he is the most handsome man in the world. But as reality sets in, and you realise that his passion for collecting stamps is rather boring; that he has this funny lock of hair that gets into funny places and makes him look more comical than handsome; and that his sense of humour is not as sharp as you once thought; well, when you realise all these things, you start feeling like you fell out of love with the guy. And temptation sets into your heart to look for ‘the one’ – you know, the one who is perfect. The one with whom there are no compromise for you to decide on.

But life is *full* of compromises!! As we mature, we develop the ability to recognise this fact, and to act in ways that help us be better off. With maturity, we are able to start making the right calls: We stay with a partner despite the fact that she drives us crazy with her inability to close the proverbial tube of toothpaste the right way; we stay with her because, as we look at all the positive and all the negative aspects; as we explore all the frustrations we have whilst with her, and compare them to the joy we get from simply being around her, we come out ahead. In a way, maturity gives us a process for assessing and constructing an ‘emotional balance sheet’ with withdrawals and deposits, and to use it in our decision-making through life.

So to answer the original question: Can we fall out of love? Sure we can: “What goes up, must also come down”. But we never really stop loving those with whom we established a deep emotional connection. This is true for most romantic and platonic forms of love. And in this sense, we can never truly ‘fall our of love’.

Stumble It!

Do you believe in Karma?

Yesterday I came across a blog post that related the sad story of a 76 year-old Trishaw driver in Singapore who was taunted and abused by 3 young and (obviously) immature men. (link to Youtube video)

In the last sentence of the post, the author extols us to “take a good look at those bastards and remember their faces. Ever see them around when you travel, don’t hesitate to give them good punches in their faces and kick their crotches between their legs.“It was interesting to see that he post was entitled “I believe inKarma; Do you?”, because with this closing paragraph, the author revealed a very shallow understanding of the law of cause and effect, or ‘Karma’.

Just as fascinating as the post itself was the litany of comments that followed. A few went along the lines of “I am Catholic, so I’m not supposed to believe in Karma… “. There were also references to the Bible’s reference to “What a man sows, this he will reap” (St Paul’s letter to the Calatians 6:7). And another one said “These two should get the karma they deserve.”

I must admit it was disturbing to see 3 young and fit men riding in the back of a trishaw that was pulled by someone twice their age. To see the lack of respect shown to this man trying to earn a decent living was heart breaking. And I do believe that sooner or later, what you do catches up with you. I have no doubt these 3 will suffer the consequences of their actions.

But the original post reminded me just how misunderstood is the concept of karma. ‘Buddhism for busy people’, by David Michie is one of the best and easiest to understand books I have read about Buddhism; and has a great explanation of Karma and its more interesting details:

You see, it’s not only the big things we do that matter. We don’t have to do anything as dramatic as defraud our employers, or write a large cheque to charity, to create negative or positive karma. Both of those actions, like all others, began as ideas in our minds, so that it is here, in our mind, that karma arises.

We all tend to have habitual thoughts, or attitudes, and we need to be very careful about these. Often they build up, and have a cumulative effect which is immense. As Buddha said in the Dharmapadda:

The word manifests as the word;
The word manifests as the deed;
The deed develops into a habit;
And habit hardens into character;
So watch the thought and its ways with care,
and let it spring from love borne out of concern for all beings…
As the shadow follows the body,
as we think so we become.

We can see then how these young men’s actions are already part of their karma. And how they will also continue to shape their future and destinies. What is worth highlighting is that according to the passage above the mere thought of violence is something we must carefully watch and guard against just as much as we guard against violence itself. It is in thoughts that our Karma is born, Buddha argued.

Within this context, the original writer’s desire to have other people seek these men and punch them in the face or groin is just as heinous as the act that these 3 committed when taunting the old man. I know it sounds extreme, but let’s explore how that could be true. The thought gave rise to the words on the blog. The words on the blog may plant a seed on some Singaporean visitors’ minds. And these seeds may germinate and develop into actions. And who is to say these actions may not target some innocent bystander that ‘looked like’ one of them?

Both Buddha and Jesus spoke of love and compassion. Jesus himself loved those that were considered ‘unlovable’ by most of his contemporaries: Prostitutes; Thieves; Criminals. Buddha teaches us to have compassion for those that are confused and do not yet understand the nature of Samsara. Jesus teaches us to offer the other cheek. It all comes down to Karma, in a way. Read the words above. Think of the consequences that your thoughts can have. Watch carefully, and sow the habit (and the character) of love and compassion in your everyday life.

There is one more misconception that is evident in the original post and the comments that followed. Karma, as a Buddhist concept, is closely related to the idea that our current life is one of many that we have lived, one of many that will be lived. Reincarnation is a key tenet of the Buddhist philosophy, as it means that ‘getting it wrong’ will simply mean a longer path to Nirvana (salvation, in Christian terms). Unlike the Christian view that we have ‘just one chance’ and will then be judged, with the result of going either to heaven or to hell; Buddhists explain that we have an infinite number of lives to learn from our mistakes (Although some would say that getting ’stuck’ in this crazy world for a long number of lives would be the same as being in hell, and that the two views are thus in fact one and the same). Within this context, the comments made by others to the original post miss the point: Karma does not dictate that these 3 men will be ‘punished’ for their actions. Rather, Karma articulates that their actions will have a consequence. That is why Karma is also called ” The Law of Cause and Effect”. It does not establish a punishment; simply that whatever thoughts and actions we have and live will have a reaction (consequence), and we will have to live with them.

Meditation through prayer?

As some of my readers will know, I have been increasingly interested in the Buddhist traditions. Over the last 18 months, I have read a lot about this philosophy; learned about meditation; and increased my meditation practice from about 15 mins every few months, to about 1 hour every day.

Last Sunday, I was listening to Radio National’s “The Spirit of Things” podcast while gardening. The podcast I listened to was an old one, from the 3rd of June, 2007. Halfway through the program, the presenter discussed a mediaeval mystical text called “The Cloud of Unknowing”. This book has been used by the World community of Christian meditation, an organisation I did not know anything about until last week. Rather than re-write about the central message of this book, let me quote from the Podcast:

“You have first a Cloud of Forgetting, which means forget all the thoughts that have to do with your own personal life, in fact do what Jesus said, leave self behind. That’s the Cloud of Forgetting, because all our personal thoughts are ego thoughts, are in a way a veil, a cloud between us in God. We’re so caught up in our own thoughts that we cannot see beyond the reality of God that completely envelops and penetrates us, we can’t see that.

But then when you go on, you then come to the Cloud of Unknowing, and the whole idea is that God cannot be known rationally. Our brains are much too limited. We are very proud, quite rightly, of our achievements of the mind, but they are nothing compared to God, and we cannot conceive of God. So it is the cloud of Unknowing is coming to that acceptance that God is more than we think, that God is limitless, cannot be caught, hence the Cloud of Unknowing. And it’s also to go back to what I said to Jung, it’s going from the rational knowledge of the mind, into the intuitive knowledge of the heart where you actually know intuitively. So it is a way of letting go. Of one way of knowing and entering another way of knowing. In my book, I explain that very much in brain terms. But it is the early desert fathers, very much talked about moving from the mind to the heart, which is exactly what The Cloud of Unknowing is saying again.”

Having just read a number of books on Buddhism , I was flabbergasted to find so many similarities between the messages in ‘The Cloud of Unknowing’ and some of my recent reads (such as ‘Buddhism for busy people’). In both cases, there is an argument that we must let go of our ‘mind’ / ego in order to reach spiritual realisation. In both cases we are told to stop the incessant chatter of our brains, and to move our attention to our centre: our heart.

At the end of the podcast, I was left wondering: Is there really that much difference between a buddhist monk and a christian monk in a monastery? Are they not using similar techniques (mantras and meditation for the buddhist; prayer and reflection for the christian) to achieve a state of high consciousness and spiritual enligthenment?

For the first time in my life, I looked at some of the traditional practices of life in a monastery with a very different eye. It no longer seems like the practices of individuals that are trying to punish themselves. Instead, I started to understand that the practices of some of these priests are designed to achieve the same level of detachment and acceptance sought after by meditating Buddhists.

Am I going too far? I am a total amateur at comparative religion, so this post will look positively childish to anyone who is well versed in these topics. But as a child that wonders in amazement at the simplest discoveries, I have enjoyed the experience of discovering new interpretations to some simplistic ideas I have held on to for a long time.

, of christian origins.

Are you a specialist or a generalist?

The UnAwakened always rewards Specificity.Only the Masters enjoy Balanced Versatility.

Image by Argenberg

Specialisation is highly regarded in this modern world.I have discussed career goals with many professionals, and I am yet to find someone who tells me “I want to develop a broad range of skills – I want to be a generalist“. But as the quote above (from an article by Steve Ilg) says, only the true masters enjoy balanced versatility.

There is that pesky word again: Balance. I don’t remember ever using it as often as I have over the last 18 months of my life.So why is ‘balanced versatility’ so important?

Because its alternative – excessive specificity , or ultra-specialisation – comes with a price tag that we should all realise is just too high for most of us. Truth is, no one has noticed.

Let’s talk about careers. Developing highly specialised skills is rewarded by higher salaries. As the supply for those rare skills in the market place is smaller, the price for the services increases. This is true in professional sports, in the corporate world, and even in the medical sciences. Professionals seek to gain a deep level of specialist knowledge, so that they will eventually be recognised as ‘experts’ in their field; write insightful articles; and receive awards at international conferences.

You can also look in the direction of social relationships. People advises you to develop your unique personality and flaunt it. Be generic, and no one will notice. Be unique, and people will appreciate you for your individuality. This advice, we are told, has proven to work in today’s world.

What about the scientific domain? Same thing. I challenge you to find a scientist who wants to be a mathematician, chemist, and philosopher, all at the same time. No, the knowledge domains are too vast to have a generalist knowledge base. Scientists accept as proven wisdom that you’re better off choosing a very specific topic and becoming well-recognised for the high quality of your work. I am sure somewhere out there we can find aPhD on the physiology of the left cornea of redheads in rural North Ireland.

Behind all these examples is the insidious influence of the industrial revolution. With the arrival of organised industry in the late 18th / early 19th century, we started accepting that high degrees of specialisation lead to efficiencies of scale, mass-production of items at low cost, and larger economic markets. Along the industrial revolution we then saw a social revolution that applied the same principle to the fabric of our own culture and society.

Unfortunately, this revolution came with some nasty side effects. A high degree of specialisation has a significant and often hidden cost. Over-specialisation stiffles creativity, generates work and social environments lacking on diversity and its benefits, and reduces the level of innovation. In the sports arena, over-specialisation will lead to unhealthy and unbalanced individuals. Don’t believe me? Just look at this picture of an ultra-endurance athlete. Can you guess how old she is?

She is only 45!!

Overspecialisation, like most things taken to an extreme, is not healthy. The question is what are you trying to become: a generalist, or a specialist?

Positive and Negative bias

I just read a ‘Damn Interesting’ article. On it, the author explains how the ‘mentally disordered’ have a much more accurate view of our world than that of ‘normal people’. As he explains in the opening paragraphs, although “realistic perceptions [of our world] have been considered essential to good mental health”, this is far from the truth.

Apparently, in order to survive in this crazy world of ours, we need a constant ‘positive bias’ that tells us our lives and our world are better than they actually are. It is only through this self-delussion, the author suggests, that we are able to cope with the many issues we face every day.

If this is true (and I have no reason to believe it is not), then I need to be careful. I have a very dear friend who has a constant negative bias; I often dismiss a lot of his worries as being unrealistic, clouded by his negative bias. In his world, if there are 2 explanations to why someone behaved badly, the worst one is usually the one he chooses to believe.

I always thought him a bit silly, and certainly not a realistic person. But based on this article, maybe his view is more realistic than mine, at least more often than I’d care to accept.

On the other hand, I like living a happy life. Even if it’s misguided.Bring it on, positive bias – I’d rather be a happy fool than a miserable genius!

Balance or Passion: Have we killed robust discourse in our search for tolerance and diversity?

Over the last 12 months , I have been on a journey of self-exploration and disclosure. Through this journey, I’ve had some difficult times and challenging moments. I also have had people I respect tell me I lost the plot. One thing in common in both instances was that I let my emotions and my passion take control of the situation.

As soon as I realised this, I decided to change. I became more tame. Less emotional. Well, at least I tried. I embraced the word ‘Balance’ with all its meaning, and tried very hard to live it every day.

One day, I came across a realisation: There is a place for extreme and emotional reactions. They can act as catalysts to important and much needed change. At the same time, I noticed a pattern in the comments section of the newspaper. I noticed a very strong trend towards embracing ‘tolerance’, ‘diversity’ and ‘acceptance of others’.

I am not saying there is anything wrong with those things; I believe they are important values that will lead to a more peaceful society. But I noticed that in many cases, the subtext of these letters to the editor was one of ‘blind acceptance’ of other people’s customs, perspectives, and impositions in our lives. In the process of being tolerant, I noticed, we are encouraging a way of life that allows intolerance from others against our own beliefs.

Worst of all, robust discussions (yes, even passionate and animated ones) are frowned upon. They are looked at as ‘aggressive’ and ‘confronting’. They are shunned upon.

Funny thing is, in trying to travel the middle of the road, we fall into the trap of following the lazy path itself. Mediocrity becomes acceptable. Debate gets frowned upon.

As many life paradoxes, the only way to solve this conundrum is by achieving a more balanced view on how often, for how long, and in which ways to apply our values of balance, tolerance, and diversity. Sounds paradoxical, doesn’t it?

Zen poetry: Samsara

Six months
of Change
Six Months
of Suffering
Six Months
of Love
Six months
of happinessThe nature of Samsara:
to realise through daily life
of the emptiness of ‘I’.
To live in all its glory
the teachings of enlightened ones
That nothing lasts,
All changes,
and we just are
ripples on a pond;
ripples that forgot
that we are all just water;
ripples that forgot
that we are all the same.
Just water in an infinite pond,
all the same; united every day.
Feeling the effects
of other pebbles
in other lives.
Not quite getting
how inconsequential they all are.

The nature of Samsara.
The teachings of enlightened ones.
Knowing that the only thing that matters
Is love,
Compassion,
Peace,
Us.

Dreams or wants?

What’s in a dream? For the last several weeks, I have been keeping a diary of my dreams, and there’s some weird stuff on them. But the entries for the last 2 days were amazingly revealing. Night before last, I had a nightmare; It was like I was in the middle of a horror story (think 28 days later, but with me starring on it), and I woke up truly down. It took me half a day to get out of that mood. Then last night, I had a wonderful dream – where I was visiting friends from childhood; succeeding at connecting with people both in my personal life and my professional life; and having a genuinely good time. My mood after I woke up was happy and light, and lasted all day.

The funny thing is that in our every day life, we often confuse our ‘dreams’ with our ‘wants’. We say the house we’d like to have as our “dream house”; The job we want next as our “dream job”; and the holiday we’re planning for as our “dream holiday”. But these are simply wants. What do we truly desire? It’s not a house, a particular holiday, not even a very good or exceptionally well paid job. Our deepest desires are often far more meaningful and simpler than any of our wants.

What do you desire? Have you decided what your dreams are made of? If not, maybe it is time you start keeping a dream’s journal; you might be surprised by what you find there.

"Everything dies and changes, even radiators"

The above is a quote from “The Way of the peaceful warrior”, an insightful tale of self-discovery by Dan Millman. Taken at face value, it makes you reflect on the constant change that represent our lives. ince everything dies and changes, nothing that makes us happy (or sad) will be there forever.

The person that looks at the world through rose colour glasses will know that nothing that makes her sad will last forever, and continuously looks for a reason to change her state of mind into a happier one.

And the person that looks at the world through dark coloured glasses will focus on the fact that nothing that may be making him happy will last forever, creating a state of anxiety in anticipation of the moment when his current happiness will dissappear.

We all alternate the colour of our glasses with some frequency; the important question is how much of a choice do we have in which glasses we wear today?