pull down to refresh
150 sats \ 4 replies \ @Naja 30 Apr \ parent \ on: Everyone I’ve met would be well-served thinking more about what to focus on culture
I agree, that mastering them all at once can be borderline impossible. Although, as you mention, we actually achieve it in many areas of our life: relationships, family, work, etc. probably on a daily basis.
Maybe the difference is that rather than "no", I chose "not now". I don't close the door, just use a "do not disturb" sign temporarly. Then come back to it. Like you say "when I'm ready" for it.
Now here's a question: what if the problem is not in teh archetype itself (because I believe we need masters as much as generalists) but the mastery's locus? is it like beauty, in teh eyes of teh beholder? What if "master of x" should just be defined by our internal locus, independant of external opinions, academia's structures and constrictions?
I agree, that mastering them all at once can be borderline impossible. Although, as you mention, we actually achieve it in many areas of our life: relationships, family, work, etc. probably on a daily basis.
I see what you are saying, however, personally each thing that I do on a daily basis that I am a master in, I have mastered individually and now am able to keep them all spinning nicely at the same time, whilst also improving and expanding my knowledge in order to stay a master.
My question to you would be... why would you want to try and become a master in lots of things all at once? What's the purpose of this?
Maybe the difference is that rather than "no", I chose "not now". I don't close the door, just use a "do not disturb" sign temporarly. Then come back to it. Like you say "when I'm ready" for it.
I agree, to a point. Wording is very important and there are some ideas/dreams that I have that I say "not now" too rather than "no". There are however, plenty of things that I say "no" to, in order to protect myself. I parent myself. An idea will form, and then I sit myself down and ask myself one question..."Does this align with what I am trying to create?"
For example: Twice now, I have had the idea of becoming a birth doula. I really love the idea. It checks all the boxes for me and would definitely suit who I am. I love to help people, I have experience, I am very in tune with peoples energy and emotion and would, if I went ahead become a master in it.
However, even though I LOVE the idea and it would be suited to me, when I sat down and asked myself, "Does this align with what I am trying to create?" the answer was no.
It would upset the dynamics I have with my family and take me away from them unexpectedly. It would restrict me as I would need to be in the area when it was within a month of their due date. It would affect my sleep pattern which is important for my health.
So, this isn't a "not now", this is a firm "no".
We don't have to say "yes" or "later" to everything in the quest for growth and mastery. We can choose to focus our efforts on what aligns with us fully.
Now here's a question: what if the problem is not in teh archetype itself (because I believe we need masters as much as generalists) but the mastery's locus? is it like beauty, in teh eyes of teh beholder? What if "master of x" should just be defined by our internal locus, independant of external opinions, academia's structures and constrictions?
Mastery is always in the eyes of the beholder.
- I call myself a master at parenting, plenty would disagree.
- At coaching, I have had clients who loved me and ones who thought my approach was awful. Etc, etc.
I would ask though... would you accept a surgeon operating on you because 'they' decided that they were a master, or would you want to know that they have been through the academic structures put in place?
There is room for both internal and external locus. Especially when you think about the fact that when you are mastering something, you are always begin learning from an 'external' source.
reply
My question to you would be... why would you want to try and become a master in lots of things all at once? What's the purpose of this?
to break the cycle of the stories we've been told. To start a new story, full of potential and possibilities. To empower future generations to question, challlenge and write their own stories.
We don't have to say "yes" or "later" to everything in the quest for growth and mastery. We can choose to focus our efforts on what aligns with us fully.
I agree in priciple. But, if we're constantly evolving (or we should anyway!), won't the alignments move as well? now, antecipating what I think your response could be: regardless of how much you evolve, your core values should fairly remain teh same. Yes, but I'm talking about alignments, not core values. (apologies in advance if my assumption was off!)
I would ask though... would you accept a surgeon operating on you because 'they' decided that they were a master, or would you want to know that they have been through the academic structures put in place?
love que question! I would want them both in teh same doctor: the one that went through the validation of peers AND has teh confidence to consider itself a master (confidence, not hubris!).. If you manage to add there a good amount of curiosity (to keep the knowlegde and confidence up to date), tehn you have teh perfect doctor.
But to realistically answer your question: it depends on the circunstance. If it's a planned surgery, I'd go for the peer-validated-paper-on-the-wall-there-are-other-doctors-in-the-hospital-if-your-hands-shake doctor. If i'm in a war zone, I'd probably place my life in the crazy-confident-even-if-bottom-of-his-class-balls-and-hand-of-iron one.
There is room for both internal and external locus. Especially when you think about the fact that when you are mastering something, you are always begin learning from an 'external' source.
Totally agree. There should be balance. nature tells us that. And am totally fine with following/continuing someone else's premisse (it's inefficient to reinvent teh weel), so long as you're trully understood it, questioned it, and after questioning still agree to it. My issue is with teh lack of critical thinking.
reply
to break the cycle of the stories we've been told. To start a new story, full of potential and possibilities. To empower future generations to question, challlenge and write their own stories.
I find this interesting! I would ask... Is this a new story? Or is it the story that we have been fed, that if we can't do all the things then we aren't "good" enough.
For years I believed that I was inferior if I couldn't do it all, not because I was incapable, but by overwhelming myself with so many tasks I was unable to focus and create what I truly wanted.
I will take you back to Henry Ford's words about delegation. He knew that if he didn't know how to do something, that he could always call on someone who did. This is efficient. I am not saying that we shouldn't learn how to do things and know the inner workings of our own companies etc. However, being smart enough to learn when to delegate, helps us to be able to focus on what we need to in that moment and then if you really want to learn something you can 'do it later', when you have the physical and mental capacity to do so. Isn't it inefficient to try and do all the things all at once before we know how?
In assumption to what you may respond: "who is to say that we don't have the mental capacity and we aren't utilising it because of the stories that we have been fed" I will take you back to my first comment - is this really what we have been told? Or, is there a sense that we are inferior or unworthy if we do need to focus on one or two tasks at a time so that we can truly learn them and become a master? Is it feeling like a failure because of what we were taught that makes us feel like we shouldn't be asking for help and assistance or just admit that something doesn't 'fit' us and we want someone else to take over that particular part?
In assumption to what you may respond: "who is to say that we don't have the mental capacity and we aren't utilising it because of the stories that we have been fed" I will take you back to my first comment - is this really what we have been told? Or, is there a sense that we are inferior or unworthy if we do need to focus on one or two tasks at a time so that we can truly learn them and become a master? Is it feeling like a failure because of what we were taught that makes us feel like we shouldn't be asking for help and assistance or just admit that something doesn't 'fit' us and we want someone else to take over that particular part?
I agree in priciple. But, if we're constantly evolving (or we should anyway!), won't the alignments move as well? now, antecipating what I think your response could be: regardless of how much you evolve, your core values should fairly remain teh same. Yes, but I'm talking about alignments, not core values. (apologies in advance if my assumption was off!)
**The alignments will move yes. And so will our focuses. But that won't happen all in one go - our focuses will deepen or pivot with what we are trying to create. And, with this, it also illustrates my point that we don't need to focus on everything all at once, because we can't predict the future and where it will take us. It is only by being in the present moment and focusing on what we want right now, in this moment that we can evolve anyway.
I don't quite know what your assumed answer of me was. Was that I was going to speak about core values?**
But to realistically answer your question: it depends on the circunstance. If it's a planned surgery, I'd go for the peer-validated-paper-on-the-wall-there-are-other-doctors-in-the-hospital-if-your-hands-shake doctor. If i'm in a war zone, I'd probably place my life in the crazy-confident-even-if-bottom-of-his-class-balls-and-hand-of-iron one.
Exactly! We need both external and internal locus.
My issue is with teh lack of critical thinking
I understand your frustration with this. However, not everybody wants to be a critical thinker. Not everyone wants to be a master of something, never mind a thousand things!
Each and every one of us are creating our own lives, in our own ways, and we need to have room for everyone's differences.
I am looking forward to watching you becoming the master of lots of things at once and I truly support you with it... its just not for me! I enjoy the focus and the feeling I get when I get a piece of the puzzle solved so that I can move onto the next. I thrive on becoming the master of many things, one or two at a time :)
reply
we can go on and on about each story, but the fact is that there are many, and even if we just focus on one, the way we both interpret it will most likely vary! for example, I was born and raised in Portugal, and currently live in the UK for the last 10 years. The same saying "Jack/Jane of all trades and master of none", is definetely perceived differently between Portuguese and English people. In England there seems to be a negative conotation to it, while in Portugal it seems to refer more to someone's resourcefulness, and seen more positevely.
Even if we were to strip down the stories to their semantic core, we would still have our cultural context, personal experiences, etc, conducting the show of our interpretation. So yes, I agree. No matter how I push torwards critical thinking, it is still based on someone else's thinking (even if it's subconcious stories from cultural context). We need both external and internal locus. Absolutely.
I've received a cowboy hat yesterday! So allow me to use your words with a twist as I tip my hat to you:
I am looking forward to watching you becoming the master of lots of things at a time and I truly support you with it (with confettis!) :)
reply