The lack of Order is not chaos

Ben Franklin was the original Tim Ferrriss when it came to optimizing his life; however, he wasn't always successful at it. One such attempt at his self-defined Order was to set a regimented daily schedule that went something like this:

5 - 8 am: Wake up, Plan the day's work, Breakfast

8 - 12 pm: Work

12 - 2 pm: Look over accounts, Lunch

2 - 5 pm: Work

5 - 10 pm: Tidy up, Diversions, Dinner

10 - 5 am: Sleep

He admits that of his habits he tried to change, this was the most difficult and he never was able to do it. Traveling, running his own business, attending social affairs made his schedule unpredictable and made his attempt at Order nearly impossible. He did have a good learning from it though. It's good to set your goals high and to strive to achieve them, but ultimately just fine if you don't - it was the journey that made him a better person.

I've always enjoyed working in a more difficult environment and being around smarter people. The pressure is definitely there to be the best of yourself and your colleagues push you to be so. It may be challenging while you're there, but you come out of it a much more accomplished person at the end. Your work and impact are meaningful and I hope it leaves some sort of lasting impact on the people around me.

Humility

I've been reading the autobiography for Benjamin Franklin the past few months and it's been enlightening to learn about the details of his life. What stands out is that he is aware of his own flaws. He lists out 12 virtues that people should live by:

1. Humility
2. Silence
3. Order
4. Resolution
5. Frugality
6. Industry
7. Sincerity
8. Justice
9. Moderation
10. Cleanliness
11. Tranquility
12. Chastity

Upon sharing this with a friend, he suggested that he add "humility" to the list to make the total 13. What surprised me to hear is that BF knew he was more opinionated and decided he would stop using words like "certainly" and "undoubtedly" and replace them with "I conceive" or "I apprehend" to be more humble. In doing so, this strikes a personal chord for me. Since starting my job, I found that I had to strike "I think" or "I believe" from my normal speech in order to sound more authoritative and sure about the statements I make. In truth, I use these devices to do exactly what BF was referring to - provide respect for other peoples' thoughts (to show that these are my own opinion) - and be humble to something I may not completely understand. I don't know why we live in a time where this is understood. Regardless, I believe that we walk a fine line depending on who we communicate with and we need to be cognizant about it.

A fist-sized tumor

I went to church today and what struck me was a father's plea for prayer. His 10-month old son was diagnosed with a fist-sized brain tumor and is about to go into his second round of surgery. The whole situation was tragic and I do not wish any parent this type of agony for their child. What actually struck me was how exploitative it seemed when this man and his wife were vowing piety to God in their moment of extreme vulnerability. They are looking for answers when no one can provide them with a solution and so they turn to faith. The 400+ audience is witness to his devotion and hold him to that promise no matter what the outcome. It is fair to believe that he is sharing his story to provide perspective to us, but the system is set up to make followers more pious regardless of the outcome. The church is absolved from any negative consequences - "It was God's will to take my son" - yet is credited to all the positive outcomes - "God has created a miracle and saved my son." It is the lack of accountability that really puzzles me in religion. I do wish all the best for this child, I really do. But he is signing up for something he really has no control over.

I do believe that humankind is predisposed to believe in some sort of religion. However, we have to be comfortable with not having answers to everything in the universe. God is not compassionate or calculating towards life, it is a set of probabilities that we choose to ignore because we cannot comprehend the complexity of such a system.

History as a wheel

I've been watching the Youtube channel, Crash Course World History, the last few days and what it reminds me is how cyclical history can be. The specific video was about the Mughal Empire and how we, as a liberal democracy, view success and failure of a emperor through our own biased lens and how if we don't learn from history, we are doomed to repeat it.

The first point is fascinating because of how your worldview can blind you to the bigger question at hand. The rhetorical question is: Who am I, as a western-educated person, to pass judgement on whether what you are doing is right or wrong? We are so quick to judge success and failure in terms encouraged by the institutions we have set up here in western democracies - how much our salary is, what school I went to, how many companies did I start - that we fail to find meaning from it all. The questions we should be asking should first impact those closest to us and then the global citizen. How can I improve the lives of those around me and the rest of the world? How does my work provide meaning to myself and others? How can I seek to understand those people that do not think the same way I do? These questions are lens agnostic because the core is to understand the global citizens around you.

One reason the Mughal Empire fell is the idea of factionalism and we are currently seeing that in the United States. The lack of awareness of one another in the US and our inability to listen is repeating what has been going on in civilizations. Our antipathy toward action to rectify the solution could be our undoing.

One of the best things that came out of WW2 is that people from different parts of the country came together and fought for a common goal. It created a national identity not tied to populism but to shared values of what the United States represent. A successful leader should be able to share that vision for 325 million of us.