Type in a word in the box below or use the site index to search Navigate the Chaos

Today is June 27 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often do you allow yourself to be vulnerable?” Best-selling author and expert on vulnerability Brené Brown wrote Daring Greatly: How the Courage to Be Vulnerable Transforms the Way We Live, Love, Parent, and Lead. In the book Brown discusses the critical role vulnerability has for everyone and wrote “Vulnerability is the birthplace of love, belonging, joy, courage, empathy, and creativity. It is the source of hope, empathy, accountability, and authenticity. If we want greater clarity in our purpose or deeper and more meaningful spiritual lives, vulnerability is the path. Embracing our vulnerabilities is risky but not nearly as dangerous as giving up on love and belonging and joy—the experiences that make us the most vulnerable. Only when we are brave enough to explore the darkness will we discover the infinite power of our light.” While being vulnerable may seem like an unlikely strategy to navigate the chaos, today’s reflection reminds us that it is indeed something to consider as you go about translating one dream after another into reality. Translating dreams into reality usually requires one to be vulnerable at some point along their path. One such person was George Washington. On March 15, 1783, George Washington's Continental Army officers gathered in Newburgh, New York. This was a perilous moment for the fledgling American republic as the officers met to discuss grievances and consider a possible insurrection against Congress. They were angry over the failure of Congress to honor its promises regarding salary, bounties, and life pensions. The officers had heard from Philadelphia that the American government was going broke and that they might not be compensated at all. To help quell the potential rebellion Washington showed up unannounced. In the middle of reading his speech Washington reached into his coat pocket and took out a pair of reading glasses and said: "Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray but almost blind in the service of my country." In that single moment of sheer vulnerability, Washington's men were deeply moved, even shamed, and many were quickly in tears, now looking with great affection at this aging man who had led them through so much. Washington read the remainder of the letter, then left without saying another word, realizing their sentiments. His officers then cast a unanimous vote, essentially agreeing to the rule of Congress. Thus, the civilian government was preserved and the experiment of democracy in America continued. Author C.S. Lewis wrote “To love at all is to be vulnerable. Love anything and your heart will be wrung and possibly broken. If you want to make sure of keeping it intact you must give it to no one, not even an animal. Wrap it carefully round with hobbies and little luxuries; avoid all entanglements. Lock it up safe in the casket or coffin of your selfishness. But in that casket, safe, dark, motionless, airless, it will change. It will not be broken; it will become unbreakable, impenetrable, and irredeemable. To love is to be vulnerable.” Vulnerability as defined by Lewis was on full display in the 2021 American crime drama limited series Mare of Easttown, created by Brad Ingelsby starring Kate Winslet as a detective investigating a murder in a small town near Philadelphia. The ensemble cast also included Jean Smart, Guy Pearce, and Julianne Nicholson. Winslet plays Mare Sheehan, a police detective, in the words of Maureen Dowd, “who exists in a cloud of vape smoke, trysts, flannel, Rolling Rock and Jameson shots – ‘a very hot grandma,’ as Guy Pearce’s character calls her, sparring with a mother (Jean Smart) who loves drinking Manhattans,” and a best-friend and fellow mother in Nicholson who share the struggles of raising children. In an interview with Dowd for The New York Times, Winslet summarized her character’s relationship with vulnerability and said “Underneath Mare’s façade is a woman who is so entrenched in grief for her son (Mare’s son, Kevin, had struggled with depression and addiction before taking his own life) that she has not processed, and as she shares it, as she talks about it with a therapist, she will crack. She doesn’t want affection. She doesn’t want to be loved. And she doesn’t want to be cared for because if she has to experience those things, it makes her feel vulnerable, and if she feels vulnerable, then she can’t be strong anymore, and she can’t carry on.” The brilliance of the limited series, however, is that it allows Mare’s vulnerability to connect with the audience as someone they can relate to, it provides her with the self-love needed to process her grief and support those closest to her. In short, the show illustrates Brown’s belief “only when we are brave enough to explore the darkness will we discover the infinite power of our light.” How often are you brave enough to explore the darkness so that you may discover the infinite power of your light? Do you find yourself ‘not wanting to be cared for or loved’ because if you felt those emotions you would feel vulnerable and unable to carry on? If you are preventing yourself from being vulnerable, why do you think that is? What small steps might you be able to take to explore being vulnerable? Do you have any people in your life who model being vulnerable?

Today is June 26 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often are you looking for, and providing, encouragement?” Navigating the chaos might involve the two-sided strategy associated with both providing and receiving encouragement. Translating one dream after another into reality is often too difficult to do without encouragement. Do realize, however, that encouragement alone is not enough to translate one dream after another into reality. The words motivation and inspiration are synonymous with encouragement. For those who navigate the chaos they often implement the strategy of searching for and providing encouragement, motivation, or inspiration to others as they work towards translating their dreams into reality. The etymology of the word encouragement stems from the Old French encoragier meaning "make strong, hearten," from en- "make, put in" and corage "courage, heart.” Paul McCartney of The Beatles provides an example of one who both received and provided encouragement throughout this career. In the spring of 2018 James Corden and The Late Late Show spent the week in London and invited music icon Paul McCartney to join him for an epic new installment of Corden’s "Carpool Karaoke." During the interview McCartney told the story behind the hit song "Let it Be," off the Beatles’ final studio album in 1970. According to McCartney: "I had a dream in the '60s where my mom (Mary Patricia McCartney who died of cancer in 1956, when he was 14), came to me in the dream and was reassuring me, saying, 'it's gonna be OK. Just let it be.' She gave me the positive word. So, I woke up and I went 'What was that? What'd she say? Let it be? I've never heard that. That's kinda good. So, I wrote the song 'Let it Be,' [and it was] about positivity.” "That's the most beautiful story I've ever heard," Corden said before the two broke out in an emotional duet of "Let it Be" that brought tears to talk show host's eyes as he drove. McCartney was looking for inspiration and found it in the spirit of his mother who came to him in a dream. Like so many others who navigated the chaos he was open to receiving inspiration and turned that into a beautiful song. But McCartney would also encourage others through his music. One such example was the song “Blackbird.” The Beatles released “Blackbird” on November 22, 1968. McCartney was first inspired to write the lyrics after hearing the call of a blackbird while he was in Rishikesh, India. Ultimately, the song developed into a powerful message about the unfortunate state of race relations in the United States in the 1960s. According to McCartney: "Way back in the Sixties, there was a lot of trouble going on over civil rights, particularly in Little Rock. We would notice this on the news back in England, so it is a really important place for us, because to me, this is where civil rights started. We would see what was going on and sympathize with the people going through those troubles, and it made me want to write a song that, if it ever got back to the people going through those troubles, it might just help them a little bit, and that's this next one." He explained that when he started writing the song, he had in mind a black woman, but in England, "girls" were referred to as "birds." And so the song started with the line “Blackbird singing in the dead of night.” McCartney added that he and the Beatles cared passionately about the Civil Rights movement, "so this was really a song from me to a black woman, experiencing these problems in the States: ‘Let me encourage you to keep trying, to keep your faith, there is hope.’" Blackbird singing in the dead of night Take these broken wings and learn to fly All your life You were only waiting for this moment to arise Blackbird singing in the dead of night Take these sunken eyes and learn to see All your life You were only waiting for this moment to be free Blackbird fly, blackbird fly Into the light of a dark black night Blackbird fly, blackbird fly Into the light of a dark black night Blackbird singing in the dead of night Take these broken wings and learn to fly All your life You were only waiting for this moment to arise Receiving encouragement along the path of navigating the chaos can help us move forward while providing encouragement can help others along their path. How often are you looking for encouragement? Who or what provides encouragement to you? How often are you providing encouragement to others? Have you ever thought of providing encouragement to others but hesitated? If so, why is that?

Today is June 25 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often can you help yourself get out of the depths?” Life is difficult and often overwhelming while you are navigating the chaos. Financial concerns, health problems, and family issues occupy our thoughts and can, if we allow them to, bring us to depths so far down it is difficult to see the light. Author Elisabeth Kübler-Ross noted “The most beautiful people we have known are those who have known defeat, known suffering, known struggle, known loss, and have found their way out of the depths. These persons have an appreciation, a sensitivity, and an understanding of life that fills them with compassion, gentleness, and a deep loving concern. Beautiful people do not just happen.” You may feel alone in the depths, but rest assured you have company. You may feel like no one understands you, but some people do. You may think it is impossible to find a way forward but know there is a way. Gabriele Anderson Grunewald is one such example. Grunewald was one beautiful person. Grunewald was an American professional middle-distance runner who competes in distances from 800 meters to 5000 meters. She represented the United States at the 2014 IAAF World Indoor Championships and finished in tenth place. She was the national champion in the 3000 meters at the 2014 USA Indoor Track and Field Championships. Grunewald suffered from a rare metastatic cancer. In 2016, surgeons cut a large tumor out of her liver, which left a purple half-moon scar that stretches across her abdomen. In the spring of 2017, physicians found two new tumors there. This is her fourth bout with cancer, and she is just 30 years of age. As Michael Powell said in his New York Times story on Grunewald “To receive a serious cancer diagnosis is to feel an overpowering desire to retreat within and to try to block out the chirpings of your mind. Grunewald made the decision to crawl out.” She crawled out of the depths and began running again. The easier thing to do was to quit and stay in bed waiting to die. But Grunewald understood she had the strength to crawl out of the depths and live another day. In so doing so inspired others to get out of their depths. “Brave Like Gabe” became her motto, and the name of a foundation she started for cancer research. Grunewald considered her scars a sign of her ability to handle adversity and encouraged others on social media to do the same. “My scars represent survival. My scars teach me to embrace my body and honor its strength. My scars are a physical manifestation of what often feels like an invisible disease. My scars tell my life’s story, and I’m pretty glad it’s not over yet.” At the time of Powell’s article Grunewald was uncertain how long her body would accommodate a battle with an aggressive cancer and professional running. As she continued battling cancer and running at the professional level, Grunewald said she is either “relentless or insane. I can’t pretend that I’m fine because I’m not fine, ya know? This is the hardest thing I’ve ever done.” In June 2019 Grunewald lost her final battle with cancer. For a while though, she found a way out of the depths and demonstrated what Kübler-Ross observed in that “beautiful people do not just happen.” Dozens of people commented on the Powell article. One such person wrote “I am crying. Having been a pediatric oncology clinical nurse specialist for many years, I know just how hard this is and what a monumental effort it is to keep going on and trying to succeed in your life. Beautiful article and my prayers are with her and her husband.” In a May 27, 2021, editorial, New York Times columnist David Brooks discussed the unmasking involved with COVID-19. As more people receive their vaccinations the mandates to wear masks were lifted. Brooks suggested the physical masks people wore during the global pandemic “were layered on top of all the psychological masks we had put on, out of fear, in the years before Covid.” Prior to Covid people were a variety of masks. For example, “Productivity is a mask. I’m too busy to see you. Essentialism is a mask. I can make all sorts of assumptions about you based on what racial or ethnic group you are in. Self-doubt is a mask. I don’t show you myself because I’m afraid you won’t like me. Distrust is a mask. I wall myself in because I’m suspicious you’ll hurt me.” Brooks challenged readers to take off their psychological masks while they were removing their physical masks. “If there is one thing I’ve learned in life, it is that we have more to fear from our inhibitions than from our vulnerabilities. More lives are wrecked by the slow and frigid death of emotional closedness than by the short and hot risks of emotional openness.” How often do your self-imposed restrictions (inhibitions) prevent you from moving forward? How often do you limit the opportunities to be emotionally involved (vulnerabilities)? Upon reflection, which of the two has held you back more in life: inhibitions or vulnerabilities? How often can you help yourself get out of the depths? How often do you think about your emotional closedness? How often do you remind yourself that ‘beautiful people do not just happen?’ Have you ‘known defeat, known suffering, known struggle, known loss, and found your way out of the depths?’ How often do you have ‘an appreciation, a sensitivity, and an understanding of life that fills you with compassion, gentleness, and a deep loving concern?’

Today is June 24 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often are you searching for tools to make sense out of life?” In his 2022 autobiography Putting the Rabbit in the Hat: A Memoir, actor Brian Cox wrote “the human experience can be labelled as…disappointing. But as a species, we are, at times, exceedingly vulnerable. Our vulnerability lies in the inability to understand life and its purpose. We hunt for the tools to make sense of it all: religion, science, politics, sport, the theater. We explore and search for meaning by discovering new worlds and climbing mountains, and a great many of us find tremendous solace and comfort in these activities, but the one thing that is absolutely certain is that we are born and that we will die. The rest is propaganda.” Throughout a career spanning six decades in theater, television, and film as an actor, Cox would eventually search for tools to help him navigate the chaos of his moments of crisis surrounding marriage, family, and other personal concerns. One such tool was the work of Russian philosopher George Ivanovich Gurdjieff who “taught that most humans live their lives in a state of hypnotic ‘waking sleep,’ but that it is possible to awaken a high state of consciousness and achieve full human potential. Cox explained that to awaken from this ‘waking sleep’ one needed to “expend considerable effort to effect the transformation that leads to an awakening, attaining that higher level of consciousness.” To help him awaken and achieve a higher level of consciousness, Cox worked with Betty Gloster, a disciple of Guardjieff. Gloster taught Cox a simple exercise that he could use to ‘self-remember’ to awaken. Each time he touched a door handle, she instructed him to tell himself to awaken and that would serve as his reminder. Cox explained in his memoir that such a tool did indeed work. Like most people who navigate the chaos and translate one dream after another into reality, however, he sought additional tools to use. A second tool Cox used was logotherapy. Developed by neurologist and psychiatrist Viktor Frankl, logotherapy is based on the premise that the primary motivational force of an individual is to find a meaning in life. According to Frankl, "We can discover this meaning in life in three different ways: (1) by creating a work or doing a deed; (2) by experiencing something or encountering someone; and (3) by the attitude we take toward unavoidable suffering" and that "everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms – to choose one's attitude in any given set of circumstances" As Cox wrote in his memoir “Our main motivation for living is our will to find meaning in life, and life has meaning even in the most miserable of circumstances. I take some comfort from that, believe it or not, while at the same time feeling a great sense of existential horror at the idea of the world without me. I do believe that we simply flick off, like an appliance. You don’t get a choice how. You can only choose your attitude at the time. That’s how you make it a good death.” Logotherapy is one of three life philosophies explaining the driving force in human behavior. The other two are the will to power and the will to pleasure. The will to power is a concept in the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche and describes what Nietzsche may have believed to be the main driving force in humans. The term can be summarized as self-determination, the concept of actualizing one's will onto one's self or one's surroundings and coincides heavily with egoism. The will to pleasure is a concept in the philosophy of Sigmund Freud and involves the instinctive seeking of pleasure and avoiding of pain to satisfy biological and psychological needs. Obviously, each of these three paradigms suggests a completely different driving force in the behavior of humans. The will to find meaning was introduced by Frankl in his famous book Man's Search for Meaning, in which he outlines how his theories helped him survive his Holocaust experience. In the article "Living with Meaning: Realize Your Will to Meaning," author Alex Pattakos wrote that upon examination both the will to pleasure and the will to power seemed to be missing something for Frankl. Both approaches were merely attempts to cover up, but not necessarily fill, a void of meaning in people's lives. Thus, Frankl believed that because the will to meaning had been a frustrating experience for people, those individuals chose one of the two alternative paths to follow--paths based on the premise that pleasure and/or power would somehow be able to replace what had been missing. “But it is only the search for meaning, Frankl would say, that holds the potential to bring the kind of authentic enrichment and fulfillment that most people desire from their work and in their everyday lives. And it is the ability to realize our will to meaning--our authentic commitment to meaningful values and goals that only we can actualize and fulfill--that guides us in the quest to tap into this distinctly human potential." How often are you searching for tools to make sense out of life? How often do you reflect upon your pursuit of the will to meaning compared to either the will to pleasure and/or the will to power? Have you pursued either the will to pleasure or the will to power because your search for meaning was frustrating and left a void you were unable to fill? How often do you catch yourself sleep walking through life unable to wake yourself up and search for meaning?

Today is June 23 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often are you living an authentic life?” Ralph Waldo Ellison was an American novelist, literary critic, and scholar best known for his novel Invisible Man, which won the National Book Award in 1953. He also wrote Shadow and Act (1964), a collection of political, social, and critical essays, and Going to the Territory (1986). For The New York Times, the best of these essays in addition to the novel put him "among the gods of America's literary Parnassus." A posthumous novel, Juneteenth, was published after being assembled from voluminous notes he left upon his death. Ellison applied twice for admission to Tuskegee Institute, the prestigious all-black university in Alabama founded by Booker T. Washington. He was finally admitted in 1933 for lack of a trumpet player in its orchestra. Ellison hopped freight trains to get to Alabama and was soon to find out that the institution was no less class-conscious than white institutions generally were. The following passage from Invisible Man illustrates Ellison’s commitment to living an authentic life: “All my life I had been looking for something, and everywhere I turned someone tried to tell me what it was. I accepted their answers too, though they were often in contradiction and even self-contradictory. I was naïve. I was looking for myself and asking everyone except myself questions which I, and only I, could answer. It took me a long time and much painful boomeranging of my expectations to achieve a realization everyone else appears to have been born with that I am nobody but myself.” As one reviewer wrote: “The narrator of Invisible Man struggles to arrive at a conception of his own identity and finds his efforts complicated by the fact that he is a black man living in a racist American society. Throughout the novel, the narrator finds himself passing through a series of communities, from the Liberty Paints plant to the Brotherhood, with each microcosm endorsing a different idea of how blacks should behave in society. As the narrator attempts to define himself through the values and expectations imposed on him, he finds that, in each case, the prescribed role limits his complexity as an individual and forces him to play an inauthentic part.” For those who leverage their mind, body, and spirit to navigate the chaos and translate one dream after another into reality, being authentic is a strategy often used. Today’s reflection involves taking a moment to pause and increase our self-awareness on our level of authenticity. As Jeremy Sutton wrote in a March 10, 2021, article "Authentic Living: How to Be Real According to Psychology,” the existentialist philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre suggested “authenticity was fundamental to the notion of freedom and living a meaningful life. Authentic living requires us to embrace the reality of our freedom and be responsible for how we choose to live.” Obviously, today’s reflection might be a heavy lift for some people. Taking a few moments to examine if you embrace the reality of your freedom and own how you have chosen to live your life stresses even those with a high degree of self-love. Since balancing authenticity and wellbeing is juxtaposed to the multiple roles we play, Sutton emphasized that individuals need to be aware of the challenges involved with doing so. Part of this challenge is to accept the limitations of both yourself and others while realizing everyone will define their own authenticity. To be authentic is to be your true self; or in the pursuit of your true self. In The Art of Being, social psychologist Erich Fromm commented on the need to be authentic and observed: “If other people do not understand our behavior—so what? Their request that we must only do what they understand is an attempt to dictate to us. If this is being asocial or irrational in their eyes, so be it. Mostly they resent our freedom and our courage to be ourselves. We owe nobody an explanation or an accounting, as long as our acts do not hurt or infringe on them. How many lives have been ruined by this need to explain, which usually implies that the explanation be understood, i.e. approved? Let your deeds be judged, and from your deeds, your real intentions, but know that a free person owes an explanation only to himself—to his reason and his conscience—and to the few who may have a justified claim for explanation.” How often are you being authentic? How often have people told you how to be authentic? How often do you remind yourself that ‘you have been born to be nobody but yourself?’ How often do you embrace the reality of your freedom and hold yourself responsible for how you choose to live your life? How often do you allow yourself the freedom to accept that other people may not understand how you live your life? How often do you find yourself criticizing how others live their life? How often do you find yourself explaining how you live your life? Why do you feel such a need to do so? How often do you remind yourself that ‘you owe no one an explanation or an accounting, as long as your acts do not hurt or infringe on the rights and freedoms of others?’ How can you leverage your mind, body, and spirit to increase your self-awareness as well as your authenticity?

Today is June 22 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often do you maintain strong opinions weakly held?” Author Madeleine L'Engle noted “Just because we don't understand doesn't mean that the explanation doesn't exist.” For those navigating the chaos they understand their way is just one of the many paths available. Translating one’s dreams into reality leaves little time to mandate a strict path for others to follow. Instead, navigating the chaos of life requires one to understand before responding, judging, or criticizing. It would be difficult to leverage your mind, body, and spirit if you go around criticizing how people are living their lives. Possessing strong opinions weakly held is a common practice among many who navigate the chaos. As with most human endeavors, many people find it easier to engage in the path of least resistance. They judge the actions of others despite not being active themselves. They criticize the words of others while remaining silent themselves. They mock those trying to find a way while they stand still themselves. This failure to understand others is a typical characteristic of weak individuals unwilling to take the time to understand. Eighteenth century philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote “Every man has the right to risk his own life in order to preserve it. Has it ever been said that a man who throws himself out the window to escape from a fire is guilty of suicide?” How often do you stop to ask yourself why someone does what they do? Does your habit of instant judgment cloud any ability to comprehend why people do what they do? Do you allow yourself to change your opinion once you have considered new information? Successful people who navigate the chaos generally seek to understand the actions of others before commenting, reacting, or judging. Navigating the chaos requires one to have a curious mind. The advent of social media, however, has made it far too easy for people to comment, react, or judge without spending a moment of time to reflect upon what it is they just saw, heard, or read. In short, we often lack curiosity for we are too busy commenting, reacting, or judging. There are countless examples of people commenting, reacting, or judging before understanding the actions of others. One example came on April 1, 2014, when National Public Radio (NPR) pulled an epic April Fool’s joke on its followers. On its social media platforms, NPR produced a phony article with attached picture and published it on their website. The "article" was titled, "Why Doesn't America Read Anymore." When clicking on the link to the article readers were greeted by this message "Congratulations, genuine readers, and happy April Fools' Day! We sometimes get the sense that some people are commenting on NPR stories that they have not actually read. If you are reading this, please like this post and do not comment on it. Then let us see what people have to say about this story." Sure enough, many people jumped straight to the comment section and were firing off ignorant comments. Those who only read the title were quick to defend their reading habits. The irony was brilliant! This was an unfortunate, but all too common illustration of immediate judgement without understanding in the age of social media. Those who commented without clicking on the link, and therefore trying to understand, had strong opinions that were strongly held. Such an approach lacks the level of maturing required to leverage your mind, body, and spirit to navigate the chaos. According to Stanford professor Bob Sutton, the team at Palo Alto’s Institute for the Future describe intelligent people as having “strong opinions, which are weakly held.” As was explained to him, weak opinions are problematic because people don’t support them with strong arguments, or they don’t bother putting these opinions to the test. Opinions that are too strongly held, on the other hand, cause people to become blind to differing and contradictory arguments. When people cling onto their own ideas too tightly, they start skewing everything they see towards their own opinions, otherwise known as confirmation bias. Being smart is not about always being right. It’s about being willing to change your perspective and admit you were wrong. It’s about seeing the same situation from a different angle. That’s how you learn and grow; and doing so is a critical characteristic of having a growth mindset. When you judge someone without first seeking to understand, you limit your intelligence, demonstrate ignorance, and prohibit your ability to navigate the chaos. How often do you remind yourself that ‘just because you do not understand something does not mean that the explanation does not exist?’ As you go about your day how often do you remind yourself to understand the actions of others before you comment, react, or judge? If you catch yourself judging others without first seeking to understand, do you reflect and wonder why that is? How often do you maintain strong opinions weakly held? How often do you maintain weak opinions strongly held? How often are you willing to change your opinion? How often do you help others change their opinions?

Today is June 21 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often do you take advantage of timing?” In his book The 48 Laws of Power, Robert Greene identified Law 35 as ‘Master the Art of Timing’ and wrote: “Never seem to be in a hurry – hurrying betrays a lack of control over yourself, and over time. Always seem patient, as if you know that everything will come to you eventually. Become a detective of the right moment; sniff out the spirit of the times, the trends that will carry you to power. Learn to stand back when the time is not yet ripe, and to strike fiercely when it has reached fruition.” Michael Jack Schmidt took advantage of timing and understood when ‘to strike fiercely when it has reached fruition.’ During his junior year in college Schmidt helped his Ohio University baseball team win the conference and regional championships and earned a trip to the College World Series. Unfortunately, he was only 20 and did not qualify for the Major League draft that year since the minimum age at that time was 21. At the end of his senior season Tony Lucadello from the Philadelphia Phillies offered Schmidt a signing bonus of $25,000. Schmidt’s father/agent told Lucadello to leave and come back with a more serious offer. The next day Lucadello returned and offered Schmidt $35,000 and a trip to Philadelphia to visit with the Phillies and sign his contract. While in Philadelphia for the weekend, it just happened the club had an exhibition game on Monday in Reading, Pennsylvania against its Double-A affiliate. Schmidt was invited to play shortstop for the Phillies. He played alongside the veteran Phillies and, according to Schmidt, “I hit a home run to win the game. That game and hit possibly saved me two years in the minors. I started my career in Reading as a result.” His opportunity to play alongside the Phillies cemented his position with the club and Schmidt stayed in Reading, spending the rest of the 1971 season at the Double-A level. In 1972, he was promoted to the Triple-A Eugene Emeralds of the Pacific Coast League. He was called up to the Phillies in September and made his major league debut against the New York Mets on September 12, 1972. He would go on to play 18 seasons in Philadelphia. Schmidt was a twelve-time All-Star and a three-time winner of the National League (NL) Most Valuable Player award (MVP), and he was known for his combination of power hitting and strong defense. As a hitter, he compiled 548 home runs and 1,595 runs batted in (RBIs) and led the NL in home runs eight times and in RBIs four times. As a fielder, Schmidt won the National League Gold Glove Award for third basemen ten times. He would help the Phillies win their first World Series championship in 1980 and Schmidt was selected as the series MVP. Schmidt was elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame in 1995 and is widely considered to be the one of the greatest third basemen in baseball history. So, there are a few lessons to learn here. First, timing was not on his side when he was a junior in college as he was not old enough to enter the professional baseball draft. Second, when the time did come for him to enter the draft his family rejected the first offer. That in and of itself was risky since there was no guarantee the Phillies would return with a better offer. When they did, the new offer included an opportunity to take batting practice with the Phillies. Timing proved on Schmidt’s side since the Phillies had an exhibition game during his visit to the major league club. He was then given the opportunity to play and made the best of it. Schmidt’s story offers so many opportunities for reflection. What might have happened if he was 21 during this junior year in college? Would he have still landed with the Phillies? If the Phillies did not have that exhibition game, and Schmidt never had the opportunity to play, would he have stayed in the minor leagues longer, thus delaying this opportunity to play in the major leagues? If the Phillies had passed on Schmidt the Baltimore Orioles were looking to draft him. Luckily for Schmidt that never happened as Brooks Robinson played 23 years at third base for the Orioles (1955-1977) and there most likely would have been no room for Schmidt. In the poem “Days,” the British poet Philip Larkin wrote What are days for? Days are where we live. They come, they wake us Time and time over. They are to be happy in: Where can we live but days? Ah, solving that question Brings the priest and the doctor In their long coats Running over the fields. As the ‘days come and wake you’ how often you take advantage of timing? How often do you ask yourself ‘what are my days for?’ Are you complaining how time is not on your side? Are you waiting for the ‘right’ time to do something? Are you even awake to recognize the time? How often do you take advantage of the timing in your life?

Today is June 20 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often do you do the small tasks?” There is a common unattributed adage that reads “The truth is most of you won't ever start because you don't want to be seen starting at the bottom.” The ironic thing about this statement is that one of the most utilized approaches to navigate the chaos of any business is to start at the bottom and work as many jobs as possible, rising from one level to the next, and perhaps ultimately the top. Unfortunately, many young professionals, with or without a college degree, believe they deserve to start at the middle, or for some, even higher. Can you start at the bottom and work your way up? Not only should you, but it is also a preferred strategy so you can understand all aspects of your business and industry. Howard Putnam, Ronald E. Daly, and Melissa McCarthy understand the value of doing small tasks. Howard Putnam became a baggage handler at Capital Airlines at 17 years of age. According to Putnam "At 19, I decided I wanted to be president of an airline. So, I adopted a 'What do you need me to do?' mentality. Work a double shift. Train someone. Transfer me to another department or city. I will do it. My wife, Krista (a former flight attendant), and I were willing to sacrifice to make it happen. We were, and still are, a team after 60 years of marriage." Putnam’s mentality, approach, and sacrifice allowed him to complete small tasks and move into one responsibility after another. Eventually, he would finish his career as CEO, Southwest Airlines (1978-1981) and then CEO, Braniff International Airways (1981-1983). The goal he set at 19 years of-age became a reality due to his completion of one small task after another. Ronald E. Daly started as a proofreader at RR Donnelley at 17 years of age and finished his career as CEO of Océ-USA Holding (2002-2004). According to Daly "In 38 years at RR Donnelley, I went from apprentice proofreader to president of its largest unit, Print Solutions, a $3.7 billion business. The number-one thing I learned is you have to market yourself like a product and differentiate yourself. I got my education—an associate degree, undergrad degree in business and MBA—as a differentiator. I was a proofreader for four years, starting at $1.92 an hour. It was boring, so I applied for production coordinator and got it—the first African American in that job. Few managers were educated (they were craftsmen), so I saw an opportunity.” A few years later, when he was 32 a management position opened up in a money-losing unit. Not to be deterred, Daly applied for and got the job. Withing two years the unit became profitable by applying a root cause analysis he learned in college. According to Daly “A few years later, I was a long shot to be general manager at a Pennsylvania plant, but I dazzled the senior VP in the interview and got the job. In 20 months, I made radical changes. I always stayed on the cutting edge of management. I'm a risk taker, and I don't mind taking on tough assignments." Like Putnam, Daly did whatever was necessary to go from proofreader to CEO during his career. Actor Melissa McCarthy sat down with talk show host Howard Stern in 2014 to explain how she almost quit pursuing acting roles just days before her big break came as a cast member on the long-running drama Gilmore Girls (2000-2007). She had always planned to quit if she was not a working actor by age 30. "It ran for seven years it was the first time like I could say I was an actress," McCarthy said. Her cousin Jennie McCarthy was already a star and afforded Melissa the opportunity to work on the crew for her TV and film projects before her big break. "That was my first job in the business," Melissa said in the interview. "I actually learned a lot from that... It was incredibly nice because that's what I wanted, I was like, 'I don't know anything about this. I don't know how any of it works.' I'd only been in theater. And that job literally, every single time I do something today, it's made me better." As a production assistant, what some people might consider a low-level job, Melissa found herself multi-tasking each day. According to her she was responsible for, "Everything. You did the garbage, you cleaned up, you did craft service, you'd do every single thing, I dropped the film at night. I was the first one there and the last one to leave and it’s like, I wish everybody that went into the business had to do that." And therein lies the key. If you want to get to the top of whatever business you are in, how do you expect to get there if you have no idea what the foundation looks like? Now some people may think it is best to get to the top as quickly and as young as possible. For those who follow that approach, do realize the faster you move sometimes, the more you miss along the way. All the small things you do as you travel the path of navigating the chaos form the foundation for your later years. How often do you do small tasks? Do you avoid the small tasks because you think you are better than those doing them? If you have more experience have you caught yourself telling someone “Well I don’t do that anymore since I moved up?” How do you treat those who do the small things? Are you embarrassed to be seen working at the bottom? Do you know anyone who started at the bottom and worked their way up to the top? If so, what lessons did they learn along the way?

Today is June 19 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often are you aware of your karma?” This reflection will help you better understand one of the most misused, misunderstood, and misplaced words the West has borrowed from the East – karma. In short, karma is not what you probably think it is. Those who navigate the chaos often remind themselves of the original definition of karma in order to translate their dreams into reality. As Buddha said, “you harm yourself as dust thrown against the wind comes back to the thrower.” This one sentence provides an excellent clue as to the actual meaning of karma. Dating back thousands of years in the East, karma has been bastardized in the West to involve cause and effect. For example, if someone robs a bank and the police fail to catch them that day, the incorrect interpretation of karma as practiced by those in the West, would then apply the “well eventually karma is going to catch up to them and they will get caught.” The slang version is often applied as well and is often said as “karma is a bitch,” or “karma and payback are a bitch, they will get their day.” This is not how karma works. Actually, if you are waiting for karma to ‘get back at someone’ for what they did to you, that could well last a lifetime and it also may distract you from navigating the chaos. The 7th century Brihadaranyaka Upanishad described karma in this manner: Now as a man is like this or like that, according as he acts and according as he behaves, so will he be; a man of good acts will become good, a man of bad acts, bad; he becomes pure by pure deeds, bad by bad deeds; And here they say that a person consists of desires, and as is his desire, so is his will; and as is his will, so is his deed; and whatever deed he does, that he will reap. In short, karma involves action and reaction: if we show goodness, we will reap goodness. Additionally, as Lachlan Brown noted “When we say, ‘that’s karma,’ when a bad thing happens to us, we are giving up our internal power. We are giving up our ability to change things. It’s because of this false view that we desire to transform karma into a sort of cash machine based on our ethical and spiritual behavior. However, if we can let go of this understanding of happiness, we can see that all we need is to live deeply in the present moment with mindfulness and discover our true nature. Karma is simply energy. It’s our intentional thoughts and actions. The energy we generate now and in the future will affect us. It has nothing to do with reward or punishment. Karma is unbiased and it’s ours to control.” Here is one example explaining the Eastern and Western views of karma. In this example there is a vicious woman who was, by most accounts, a very nasty and manipulative person. No one in her neighborhood liked her. When the woman became terminally ill, several neighbors commented that the illness was her karma. That’s the typical Western interpretation and it is wrong. Her karma was that when she became ill because she had offended so many people, she suffered mostly alone and disconnected without the love and support of others to help her transition out of this life. The consequence of her bad behavior wasn’t that she got sick. It was that no one cared when she did. This Eastern interpretation is far more aligned with the traditional meaning of karma in that the woman put out bad energy in the universe and in return, received bad energy. She failed to control her karma. When examined more closely, Karma is generally divided into three categories: sanchita (latent karma), prarabdha (ripened karma), and agami (future karma). Sanchita is the accumulated karma from your past thoughts and actions, the results of which will eventually be experienced in the future. Sanchita is like the seed of a tree you planted in the past. In due time, the tree will grow and produce a particular fruit you’re destined to eat. Prarabdha is what you’re experiencing now. It is the seed of a past action that has grown into a tree, producing the fully ripened fruit you’re eating in the present. Agami is a seed of action you’re planting in the present that will inevitably produce the fruit of the future. The three categories of karma ultimately work in creating a cycle of cause and effect. The fruit you eat now (prarabdha) leaves an impression in your mind — compelling you to plant more of a particular seed (agami), which will cause you to eat similar fruit in the future (sanchita). In other words, karma is habit forming. Repeated actions become like grooves in the mind that get deeper and deeper. You have the free will to change your habits at any time, but the deeper the groove, the harder those habits — whether good or bad — are to change. How often are you aware of your karma? How often do you subscribe to the Western definition of karma? Have you ever hoped karma would “get someone” for what they did to you? How often do you take responsibility for all of your actions and realize karma is within your control? With the knowledge that karma is within your control, what does that do to your interpretation of the concept? Know that you know you can control your future karma, how might you leverage your mind, body, and spirit to create new habits?

Today is June 18 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often do you leverage rest?” Leveraging your mind, body, and spirit to navigate the chaos and translate one dream after another into reality is a marathon. You need to prepare yourself mentally, physically, and emotionally to handle the daily grind required over an extended period of time. As other Navigate the Chaos posts have discussed, grit, discipline, and effort are just a few of the necessary ingredients to succeed. So too, however, is rest. Taking it easy might seem contrary to the effort required to translate one dream after another into reality but the research is overwhelmingly clear; rest is indeed a critical component to navigate the chaos. In their 2017 book Peak Performance: Elevate Your Game, Avoid Burnout, and Thrive with the New Science of Success, authors Brad Stulberg and Steve Magness emphasized the need for rest, especially for athletes and devised the equation Stress + Rest = Growth. Stulberg and Magness acknowledged it is “as simple and as hard as that. As an athlete, if you want to improve something—your 100-meter time, say, or your deadlift PR—you’ve got to apply a challenge, some sort of stressor and then follow it with a period of rest and recovery. Too much stress without enough rest and you get injury, illness, and burnout. Not enough stress plus too much rest and you get complacency, boredom, and stagnation.” They based their equation off research conducted by the American College of Sports Medicine, the country’s premier body on the application of fitness science, that officially endorsed training in this manner to increase size and strength. Meanwhile, a 2015 study published in the journal Frontiers in Physiology found that best endurance athletes in the world all have one thing in common: they oscillate between periods of stress and rest. This equation of Stress + Rest = Growth can be found elsewhere and applied to other aspects of life, notably work. Researcher Alex Soojung-Kim Pang published his results in a March 2017 article entitled “Darwin Was a Slacker and You Should Be Too” in which he declares “Many famous scientists have something in common—they didn’t work long hours. In fact, some of the greatest geniuses ‘worked’ only four hours a day.” How is that possible? How can the world’s greatest minds only work a few hours each day? Well, the short answer is they rested. Specifically, the scientists rested in-between bouts of creative transformation, generally operating in bursts of productivity lasting between 90 to 120 minutes. Implicitly they recognized what science now demonstrates—that the body as information system always rebuilds and renews. As you travel down the path of navigating the chaos, remember, human ‘downtime’ is not like the ‘rest’ of a car or a computer. In human downtime, the body is continually learning, especially when asleep. Rest is not only necessary for life and survival, but for the creative capacities that will power knowledge industries of the future. Biological intelligence can do more than make individuals smarter; it can enhance the performance of communities and societies. Here are just a few examples. Charles Darwin split his day into morning and evening work, doing about four hours total. G.H. Hardy, one of the greatest mathematicians of the twentieth century and author of a celebrated autobiography worked in a four-hour stint in the morning, but with breaks. The great novelist Anthony Trollope wrote his 2500 words a day between 5:30 and 8:30 a.m. before rushing off to help run the British Postal Service; to him we also owe a version of the post box. According to Alex Soojung-Kim Pang “scientists who spent 25 hours in the workplace were no more productive than those who spent five. The 60-plus-hour-a-week researchers were the least productive of all. The best students generally followed a pattern of practicing hardest and longest in the morning, taking a nap in the afternoon, and then having a second practice.” In other words, Stress + Rest = Growth. Poet Maya Angelou wrote: “Every person needs to take one day away. A day in which one consciously separates the past from the future. Jobs, family, employers, and friends can exist one day without any one of us, and if our egos permit us to confess, they could exist eternally in our absence. Each person deserves a day away in which no problems are confronted, no solutions searched for. Each of us needs to withdraw from the cares which will not withdraw from us.” How often do you use rest as a catalyst in the pursuit of your dreams? How often do you push yourself even though you know physical or mental rest is exactly what you need? When is last time ‘you took one day away?’ Are you so obsessed with translating your dreams into reality that you never stop to rest? If so, why do you think that is? Do you find it acceptable that those who navigate the chaos actually include rest as part of their routine? Do you feel a need to deny yourself rest because you want to, either consciously, or subconsciously, punish yourself?

Today is June 17 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often do you transcend your fears and follow yourself into the void?" Afghan-born British feminist writer Mohadesa Najumi wrote: “Each day is a miracle, a blessing unexplored and the more you immerse yourself in light, the less you will feel the darkness. There is more to life than nothingness. And cynicism. And nihilism. And selfishness. And glorious isolation. Be selfish with yourself, but live your life through your immortal acts, acts that engrain your legacy onto humanity. Transcend your fears and follow yourself into the void instead of letting yourself get eaten up by entropy and decay. Freedom is being yourself without permission. Be soft and leave a lasting impression on everybody you meet.” Peter Norman left an impression on everyone he met. In the 1968 Olympics Men’s 200M final Tommie “The Jet” Smith (U.S.) 19.83 finish first, Peter Norman, (Australia) 20:06 second, and John Carlos (U.S.) 20:10 ended up third. The medal ceremony following the race is perhaps one of the most memorable events in Olympics history as Smith and Carlos, walked barefoot to the podium, bowed their heads during the playing of the national anthem, and then raised their black-gloved fists in the air. It was a strong symbolic gesture – taking a stand for African American civil rights in a year of tragedies that included the death of Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy. When you look at the picture, however, you see the silver medalist Norman wearing the same button as Smith and Carlos. As writer Riccardo Gazzaniga noted “Norman was a white man from Australia, a country that had strict apartheid laws, almost as strict as South Africa. There was tension and protests in the streets of Australia following heavy restrictions on non-white immigration and discriminatory laws against aboriginal people, some of which consisted of forced adoptions of native children to white families.” Smith and Carlos had asked Norman if he believed in human rights. Norman said he did. They asked him if he believed in God, and he, who had been in the Salvation Army, said he believed strongly in God. “We knew that what we were going to do was far greater than any athletic feat, and he said, “I’ll stand with you” – remembers John Carlos – “I expected to see fear in Norman’s eyes, but instead we saw love.” Since Smith and Carlos only had a pair of gloves between the two of them, Norman suggested they each wear one glove. As a result, Smith raised his right hand and Carlos his left. But then Norman did something else and said to the Americans “I believe in what you believe. Do you have another one of those?” he asked pointing to the Olympic Project for Human Rights badge. “That way I can show my support in your cause.” Smith admitted to being astonished, ruminating: “Who is this white Australian guy? He won his silver medal; can’t he just take it and that be enough!” Fortunately for Norman, there happened to be a white American rower with Smith and Carlos named Paul Hoffman, an activist with the Olympic Project for Human Rights. After hearing everything Hoffman thought “if a white Australian is going to ask me for an Olympic Project for Human Rights badge, then by God he would have one!” Hoffman did not hesitate: “I gave him the only one I had: mine.” "Peter didn't have to take that button [badge], Peter wasn't from the United States, Peter was not a black man, Peter didn't have to feel what I felt, but he was a man," says Carlos. "He was that committed, and I didn't know that" adds Smith. Even though it would take many years Smith and Carlos would ultimately be recognized for their actions and support of human rights on the medal stand. Norman, however, was vilified in his home country for the rest of his life. Despite having run qualifying times, he was banned from the 1972 Summer Olympics and left competitive athletics. Australia treated like him like an outsider, his family outcasted, and work impossible to find. As John Carlos said, “If we were getting beat up, Peter was facing an entire country and suffering alone.” Australia gave Norman one chance to save himself and he was invited to condemn Carlos and Smith’s gesture in exchange for a pardon from the system that ostracized him. A pardon that would have allowed him to find a stable job through the Australian Olympic Committee. Norman never gave in and never condemned the choice of the two Americans. Later in life an injury caused Norman to contract gangrene which led to issues with depression and alcoholism. Norman died of a heart attack on 3 October 2006 in Melbourne at the age of 64. Thirty-eight years after the three made history, both Smith and Carlos gave eulogies and were pallbearers at Norman's funeral. In his eulogy John Carlos said “Peter was a lone soldier. He consciously chose to be a sacrificial lamb in the name of human rights. There’s no one more than him that Australia should honor, recognize, and appreciate.” “He paid the price with his choice,” explained Tommie Smith, “It wasn’t just a simple gesture to help us, it was HIS fight. He was a white man, a white Australian man among two men of color, standing up in the moment of victory, all in the name of the same thing.” When San Jose State University decided to build a statue of the three medal winners Norman, in perhaps one of the greatest examples of ingraining a legacy onto humanity, said to leave the silver plinth empty. Doing so would allow anyone who supports human rights, as he did back on October 16, 1968, to join Smith and Carlos on the podium. How often are you ingraining your legacy onto humanity? How often do you stand up for what is right despite the person or professional repercussions you may have to face? How often do you recognize the issues others are facing and place those in front of your own concerns?

Today is June 16 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often do you abandon impatience?” Those who leverage their mind, body, and spirit to navigate the chaos understand the value of abandoning impatience, especially for those things that are completely out of their control. Thubten Chodron, born Cheryl Greene, is an American Tibetan Buddhist nun, author, teacher, and the founder and abbess of Sravasti Abbey, the only Tibetan Buddhist training monastery for Western nuns and monks in the United States. She has published many books on Buddhist philosophy and meditation and is the only nun who has co-authored a book with the Dalai Lama entitled Buddhism: One Teacher, Many Traditions. Chodron emphasizes the practical application of Buddha’s teachings in our daily lives and is especially skilled at explaining them in ways easily understood and practiced by Westerners. Chodron reminds people to abandon impatience when she writes: “When you plant seeds in the garden, you don’t dig them up every day to see if they have sprouted yet. You simply water them and clear away the weeds; you know that the seeds will grow in time. Similarly, just do your daily practice and cultivate a kind heart. Abandon impatience and instead be content creating the causes for goodness.” The U.S. civil rights movement provides four examples of different groups of people who abandoned impatience as they pursued ‘causes of goodness.’ As you read each of the following four, do realize that abandoning impatience does not mean doing nothing, quite the opposite. Abandoning impatience is accompanied by the ‘planting and watering of seeds.’ When you abandon impatience, you make a commitment, and you remain steadfast without an expectation of an end date. The first example for today is the 1955 bus boycott. Approximately 40,000 Black bus riders boycotted the Montgomery, Alabama, bus system in December 1955, a few days after Rosa Parks was arrested for refusing to give up her bus seat to a white rider. The boycott lasted 382 days and took place from December 5, 1955, to December 20, 1956, and is regarded as the first large-scale U.S. demonstration against segregation. The U.S. Supreme Court ultimately ordered Montgomery to integrate its bus system. One of the leaders of the boycott, 26-year-old-pastor of Montgomery’s Dexter Avenue Baptist Church, Martin Luther King, Jr., emerged as a prominent leader of the American civil rights movement. Today’s second example involves the hundreds of students who sat at the Woolworth’s lunch counter in Greensboro, North Carolina every day for six months after four Black students were refused service on February 1, 1960. The Greensboro sit-ins triggered other sit-ins in cities throughout the South, with more than 50,000 students joining in by April 1960. The Greensboro sit-ins ended when the local Woolworth’s lunch counter was desegregated on July 25, 1960. The third example of abandoning impatience stems from 1961 when Freedom Riders headed south from Washington, D.C., on buses, making stops along the way to protest segregated bus terminals. The riders were ultimately met with violence and arson, which drew national attention from the Kennedy administration. The Freedom Rides came to an end after 7 months, with the Interstate Commerce Commission outlawing segregation on interstate buses. ‘Whites only’ signs were taken down in more than 300 Southern stations. The last example here for today’s reflection is when civil rights activist Martin Luther King Jr. joined peaceful demonstrators in Birmingham, Alabama, to protest its Supreme Court-defying segregation. Police met the demonstrators with dogs, Billy clubs, and fire hoses, as Birmingham jails were overflowing with arrests. After 37 days, Birmingham officials agreed to desegregate public establishments, hire Black workers, and release jailed protesters. Those who boycotted the busses, sat at the Woolworth’s counter, joined the Freedom Riders, or peacefully demonstrated in Alabama abandoned impatience. They never set an end date. Progress for each person or group took months, years, and some would even say decades. Given the nation’s recent history, one could easily argue civil rights and equal rights for all has a stronger need to abandon impatience these days more than ever. Much work remains to be done. Navigating the chaos involves identifying the difference between when to abandon impatience, and when not to. Either choice requires a great deal of reflection, self-awareness, and intention. How often do you abandon impatience? How often do you plant seeds then dig them up? How often are you watering the seeds you planted? How often do you grow impatient waiting for the seeds to grow? Have there been times in your life when you were impatient? If so, how did that help you navigate the chaos? Have there been times in your life where you wish you exercised a bit more patience? Why do you think you do not abandon impatience as much as you might want to?