Why do I believe that I’m going to and want to do something that’s never been done before in my career?
From a more recent perspective in the last few years, I’m already doing things that I don’t see (many) others doing overall, at my age, or at least not in my circles of influence. So there’s evidence that I already have done some of this stuff. But this is only the last 2-3 years when I’ve started to think and act for myself. I also feel strong about my intuition and conviction of it in pretty much any situation, so I just trust it and myself more. Part of trusting and knowing myself more is knowing that I’m a creator. In many senses of the word. I’m always fulfilled when I go from nothing to something. So maybe my expertise is in getting people, organizations to take that first step. To trust their instincts.
Trying to find the deeper reasons for the belief, I think it’s similar to another one of my beliefs that my ‘childhood’ for this belief starts when I graduated and started working. In my actual childhood, I was told I had lots of potential in whatever I wanted to do. I guess, though, since it was a part of me, I never fully understood it and maybe I still don’t.
Hmm, couple tangential paths here: 1) how do I quantify potential? 2) how does potential get transferred to realized? and 3) Isn’t there always something that we can learn from?
I’ll answer the last one first.
If I believe the macrocosm is the microcosm, and vice versa, then aren’t all the metaphors that we derive value from didactic in some manner? Couldn’t I argue that every single thing not only has a potential lesson in it, but has to have at least one lesson in it? The microcosm of that individual experience with the macrocosm of our life. Some people relate to the universe in different ways. I think some people boil down the macrocosm into the microcosm. Some people boil up the microcosm into the macrocosm. That’s just their ways of relating to the world. The stories and metaphors all symbolize something.
So what are they symbolizing? The bigger picture. Something larger than what that original story or metaphor’s scope was. All I’m doing, with my way of thinking, is observing and examining the world, and relating it as a conduit to understand myself. Some people inspect themselves first as a way to understand the world. And everyone falls somewhere along this spectrum.
Relating it to the point though, in whatever we take a look at, if we believe the smaller picture is a reflection of the larger picture in every instance, then you can look at anything to understanding anything else. With that perspective, there is the potential to learn about anything just by learning about something.
Hmm, relating the 1-to-1 mindset to this, if we believe that we learn one thing and apply it only in that context, then learning is a linear growth rate. It’s fine and forward moving, but it’s no the most that we have the capability of. If we graduate through the levels of 1-many, many-1 to a many-many relationship thinking, then growth can be exponential. Even within exponential growth though, there can be different bases, exponents, and coefficients.
So in this case, what is a quantifiable way to express a fixed mindset?
A fixed mindset is something to the first power. 3^1, 4^1, 5^1, etc. It doesn’t really matter what the base is because it’s always going to be that number. Or I guess as a function of time, it’s going to stay constant. Actually, the extreme end is that the exponent, for example the x in 5^x could be 0. Then it actually doesn’t matter what the base is, because it’ll always be 1 as the answer. 3^0 = 1, 5^0 = 1, 100^0 = 1. We could keep going on this end of the spectrum actually with 5^-1 = 1/5 = .2. 10^-1 = 1/10 = .1 and so on. This could be the inverse of a growth mindset, a decaying mindset.
So here, I think the base is how strongly we believe in our beliefs. Because if we have a very strong belief, let’s quantify that as a 100. But if it’s a decaying mindset, then 100^-1 = .01. Whereas a ‘light’ decaying mindset could be 2^-1 = .5. Which is small but still 50x the 100^-1 person.
So in this case, the base is the strength of our beliefs and the exponent is the mindset that we have. So if (-∞,0) is a decaying mindset, [0,0] is a fixed mindset, then (0,∞) is a growth mindset.
So then the next questions are what determines our base and what determines the exponent?
If it’s the strength / conviction of our beliefs for the base, then it’s the identity - beliefs - thoughts - words - actions continuous circle that impacts the base. Thousands of pieces of material have been created on this so no need to go further there for this scope.
Then the exponent could be our belief on the 1-to-1 relationship. If we think of a 1-to-1 relationship, then the exponent may be 0. I think it could also be 1, hmm. But progressing towards many-many relationship, the exponent gets higher and higher. The more individual relationships we see within that many-to-many relationships, the higher the exponent.
The other thing here is to apply the microcosm of the macrocosm principle mathematically. I was having trouble distinguishing the beliefs generally (base) from the 1-to-1 / many-to-many relationship spectrum (exponent). If there is one law of karma, then everything is the effect of a cause and itself the cause of an effect in the future. So in that case, the exponent is the base for the next term and the base is the exponent for the subsequent term. And so on. So you have an infinity chain of bases and exponents.
Our beliefs are shaped by our decaying-fixed-growth mindset and our decaying-fixed-growth mindset is shaped by our beliefs.
So where does that leave us? What if we try to go all the way to the bottom? Or all the way to the top? I think at the theoretical bottom, the base is 1. That would align with the thinking of God is one, at the beginning there was only one. Well, it doesn’t really matter what’s at the “top” of this infinite chain. Because the base dictates it all. If it’s 0, then the ‘answer’ is 0. If it’s 1, then the ‘answer’ is 1.
I’m inclined to say 1, and that one is the higher power that we all call different names. If it was 0, then there wouldn’t be anything. But there is at least this hologram projection that we call Earth and life, so there must be something greater than 0.
The thing is, in this physical plane of life, we’re so focused on a specific set of bases and exponents that we lose track of the larger picture. That if we boil it down to the beginning or the end, it’s still only 1.
I am missing the element of time though here. How often do the bases and exponents change? Well that’s simple. Just add t for time in the equation. b^xt. The faster you learn (you can learn in many different ways), the higher the rate of growth will be.
Well actually wait, how do we fit in my belief of the balanced growth mindset? Is it the inverse of time? Instead of t, it’s (1/t)? Because if we go at too fast of a rate, then we’re caught up in an unhealthy growth mindset without actually growing from it.
So then I’m thinking it’s actually y = b^(x/t). So is this the equation for our potential?
How does it get realized?
I think by simply moving along time wise, it’ll naturally get realized. T for time will always be going forward, so we don’t have to force anything to realize our potential. Just have the right beliefs and mindset and it’ll happen at the right pace.
Oh, hmm. Everyone’s beliefs and mindsets will be different right, so the rate of realization of potential for each person will be different. There is no right speed or rate. It’s finding the rate that best serves you, instead of you serving it.
So relating this to my career, the career is just the context to learn what we spend a disproportionate amount of our time. It’ll impact our beliefs perhaps the most, at least of our adult lives.
We’ve tried as a society to determine what these ‘correct’ numbers should be with the b,x, and even t. But let’s let go of all that to just have the right mindset and everything will work out just fine over time.
[see pic at end for endless exponential chain]
Comments