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

Today is June 3 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often do you allow adversity to strengthen you?” American poet, singer, memoirist, and civil rights activist Maya Angelou wrote “You may encounter many defeats, but you must not be defeated. In fact, it may be necessary to encounter the defeats, so you can know who you are, what you can rise from, how you can still come out of it.” As you travel your path of navigating the chaos sometimes adversity is the result of someone else. Perhaps a manager, colleague, or business partner intentionally throws a roadblock along your path. You then need to figure out a way over, through or around such a hurdle. Other times, however, life situations happen unexpectedly, and adversity comes out of nowhere through no one’s fault. Today’s Navigate the Chaos entry includes examples from both scenarios. Professional baseball player Rick Ankiel used his adversity to help him navigate the chaos. Ankiel, was named High School Player of the Year and Minor League Player of the Year and was called, "the most promising young left-handed pitcher in a generation," by The New York Times Magazine. St. Louis Cardinals head coach Tony La Russa picked him to play in the first game of the National League division series against the Atlanta Braves at 21 years of age. But in that series Ankiel threw nine wild pitches and walked 11 batters in just four innings. Ankiel had lost his pitching skills. Unbeknownst to him at the time, Ankiel was suffering from yips. Yips is the loss of fine motor skills in athletes. It is poorly understood and has no known treatment or therapy. Athletes affected by the yips sometimes recover their ability, but many are forced to abandon their sport at the highest level. The year after pitching in the National League division series he was sent down to the minors but still struggled with yips. After trying to regain his pitching form in the minor leagues and briefly returning to the majors in 2004, he switched to the outfield in early 2005. For two and a half years, he honed his skills as a hitter and fielder in the Cardinals' minor-league system. He returned to the Cardinals on August 9, 2007. As a Cardinal until 2009, Ankiel hit 47 home runs as an outfielder and two as a pitcher. After the 2009 season, Ankiel became a free agent. Subsequently, he was signed by the Royals and later was traded to the Braves. In his April 2017 book, The Phenomenon: Pressure, the Yips, and the Pitch that Changed My Life, Ankiel describes how the true test of his character came not on the mound, but in the long days and nights that followed as he searched for a way to get back in the game. For four and a half years, he fought the yips and, after reconsidering his whole life at the age of twenty-five, Ankiel made an amazing turnaround: returning to the Major Leagues as a hitter and playing seven successful seasons. While Ankiel had to deal with adversity on the professional level, Aron Lee Ralston had to deal with it as a life and death situation. Ralston is an American outdoorsman, mechanical engineer and motivational speaker known for surviving a canyoneering accident by cutting off his own arm. During a solo descent of Bluejohn Canyon in southeastern Utah he dislodged a boulder, pinning his right wrist to the side of the canyon wall. After five days he was able to amputate his arm with a dull pocketknife, make his way through the rest of the canyon, rappel down a 65-foot (20 m) drop, and hike 7 miles (11 km) to safety. The incident is documented in Ralston's autobiography Between a Rock and a Hard Place and is the subject of the 2010 film 127 Hours where he is portrayed by James Franco. Reflecting upon adversity and the options available to people, Ralston wrote on his book: “So many people live within unhappy circumstances and yet will not take the initiative to change their situation because they are conditioned to a life of security, conformity, and conservatism, all of which may appear to give one peace of mind, but in reality nothing is more damaging to the adventurous spirit within a man than a secure future. The core of a man's living spirit is his passion for adventure. The joy of life comes from our new experiences, and hence there is no greater joy than to have an endlessly changing horizon, for each day to have a new and different sun.” As you go about your day reflect upon the role of adversity and understand people seldom make progress without it. Those who have navigated the chaos have learned to use their adversity as the catalyst they were looking for in order to move forward. How often have you taken the initiative to change your life situation when you know it was the necessary thing to do? Can you reflect on your life and find times when you choose security, conformity, or conservatism over adversity? How often have you convinced yourself that your future is secure? If so, what allows you to believe so? Have you seen others in your life who thought their future was secure only to have it disrupted by someone, a health issue, or an external factor? How often are you seeking new experiences to help you find the joy in life? How often do you remind yourself that life offers an endlessly changing horizon? Who or what is preventing you from believing that you can leverage your mind, body, and spirit to overcome any adversity in your life?

Today is June 2 and the Navigate the Chaos question of the day to consider is “how often do you reflect upon utopia?” Before you answer spend time understanding the etymology of utopia. Do not assume you know the definition of this word as it is often misunderstood. Most people will define utopia as “the perfect place,” “where everyone is happy,” or “where no one has any worries.” Variations on those themes are common when discussing utopia. For thousands of years human beings have dreamt of perfect worlds free of conflict, hunger, and unhappiness. Unfortunately, such conversations are based upon a false understanding of the word utopia. In 1516 the English statesman Sir Thomas More published a book that compared the condition of his England to that of a perfect and imaginary country, Utopia. Everything that was wrong in England was perfect in Utopia. More was trying to show how people could live together in peace and happiness if they only did what he thought was right. But the name More gave his imaginary country showed that he did not really believe perfection could ever be reached. He coined the word 'utopia' from the Greek ou-topos meaning 'no place' or 'nowhere'. But this was a pun - the almost identical Greek word eu-topos means a good place. Some scholars would suggest the More implied the perfectly "good place" is really "no place." Lyman Tower Sargent, one of the foremost scholars in utopian studies, was the founding editor of Utopian Studies, serving in that post for the journal's first fifteen years, and recipient of the Distinguished Scholar Award from the Society for Utopian Studies. According to Sargent: “there are socialist, capitalist, monarchical, democratic, anarchist, ecological, feminist, patriarchal, egalitarian, hierarchical, racist, left-wing, right-wing, reformist, Naturism / Nude Christians, free love, nuclear family, extended family, gay, lesbian and many more utopias [...] Utopianism, some argue, is essential for the improvement of the human condition. But if used wrongly, it becomes dangerous. Utopia has an inherent contradictory nature here.” Sargent argues that utopia's nature is inherently contradictory because societies are not homogenous and have desires which conflict and therefore cannot simultaneously be satisfied. Such an interpretation realistically suggests advancements in human behavior are a necessity, but the perfection of such pursuits may be unrealistic. The concept of utopia has been examined, considered, and debated on for over 500 years. More than 400 utopian works were published prior to the year 1900 in the English language alone, with more than a thousand others appearing during the 20th century. Utopia has also found its way into popular culture. For example, in the sixth episode of the first season of the critically acclaimed television series Mad Men entitled “Babylon” that aired August 23, 2007, Jewish store heiress Rachel Menken, played by Maggie Siff, is having lunch with Don Draper, played by Jon Hamm. The conversation turns away from advertising and to Menken’s Jewish background. Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic called this scene "the most intelligent discussion of Zionism I have ever seen on cable, basic, or premium television." At the end of the conversation Draper referred to utopia. In her response Menken said, “They taught us at Barnard about that word, 'utopia'. The Greeks had two meanings for it: 'eu-topos', meaning the good place, and 'u-topos' meaning the place that cannot be.” As you travel your path and navigate the chaos, are you searching for the ‘good place’ or do you accept that utopia is the ‘place that cannot be.’ If you are searching for the good place are you contributing to its creation or are you a bystander? Or do you accept utopia as the place that cannot be and do your best to make the world, or at least your corner of it, as good of a place as possible? Czech-born British playwright and screenwriter Sir Tom Stoppard published The Coast of Utopia in 2007 and wrote: “Because children grow up, we think a child's purpose is to grow up. But a child's purpose is to be a child. Nature does not disdain what lives only for a day. It pours the whole of itself into each moment. We do not value the lily less for not being made of flint and built to last. Life's bounty is in its flow, later is too late. Where is the song when it has been sung? The dance when it has been danced? It is only we humans who want to own the future, too. We persuade ourselves that the universe is modestly employed in unfolding our destination. We note the haphazard chaos of history by the day, by the hour, but there is something wrong with the picture. Where is the unity, the meaning, of nature's highest creation? Surely those millions of little streams of accident and willfulness have their correction in the vast underground river which, without a doubt, is carrying us to the place where we are expected! But there is no such place, that's why it's called utopia.” As you go about your day, reflect upon how often do think about utopia and its two opposite definitions of the perfectly "good place" or "no place." How often do you reflect upon the word utopia? If you are clinging to the “good place” why do you think that is? If you understand and accept the “no place” definition of utopia, what are you doing today to make the world a better pace knowing full well the world will never be perfect? Does even thinking about the definition of utopia as “the place that cannot be” make you feel uncomfortable, frustrated, or sad?

Today is June 1 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often do you fail to see someone?” American civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. noted “People fail to get along because they fear each other; they fear each other because they don’t know each other; they don’t know each other because they have not communicated with each other.” As an extension we can add “and because they fail to see each other.” People who navigate the chaos understand the necessity of seeing others as they are critically important in relationships. While you may look at crowds of people in a day how many do you see? The definition of seeing people here refers to their authentic self. But seeing someone is complex and involves several factors to understand. Perhaps one of the most important elements involved with seeing someone is their inability to show the world their authentic self. In some respects, the world has grown more welcoming for people in terms of their sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. For example, 29 countries and territories have enacted national laws allowing gays and lesbians to marry, mostly in Europe and the Americas. There is no doubt much work remains to create a global environment allowing people to show their authentic self more freely. Until that time arrives, however, many people will not let you see their authentic self and use this as an act of self-preservation. Decades ago, American singer Billy Joel wrote about this in his 1977 song The Stranger: Well, we all have a face That we hide away forever And we take them out And show ourselves when everyone has gone Some are satin, some are steel Some are silk and some are leather They're the faces of a stranger If you remind yourself that many people are hesitant to unveil their authentic self, then today’s Navigate the Chaos question serves as a good reminder to pause as you travel your path and take time to see people for who they truly are. This requires a good deal of dedication, time, and work. Somewhere along your travels there will be people who come across your path who might like to be seen by you. For whatever reason they feel a connection but are unsure as to how to get your attention. It will be up to you to see them. To do that you will need to understand what influences your vision in the first place. Your vision of others is often influenced by your environment and social orientation. If you want to see people better, and if you want to be seen more clearly, social psychologist and best-selling author Heidi Grant Halvorson, explains why we are often misunderstood and how we can fix that. In her book No One Understands You: And What To Do About It, she writes that most of us assume that other people see us as we see ourselves and that they see us as we truly are. But neither is true. Our everyday interactions are colored by subtle biases that distort how others see us—and shape our perceptions of them. For Halvorson people can improve how they see others, and how they in turn are seen by understanding the three critical lenses that shape perception: 1. Trust: Are you friend or foe? 2. Power: How much influence do you have over me? And 3. Ego: Do you make me feel insecure? Thus, when a stranger, or someone you know, comes across your path as you navigate the chaos, they may see you as a foe, they may believe you have some degree of influence over them and they may feel insecure around you. The point is for you to be aware of these possible perceptions. Doing so will help you see people and their authentic self. Based on decades of research in psychology and social science, Halvorson explains how these lenses affect our interactions—and how to manage them. Once you understand the science of perception, you will communicate more clearly, send the messages you intend to send, and improve your personal relationships. You will also become a fairer and more accurate judge of others. American author John Steinbeck noted “I wonder how many people I’ve looked at all my life and never seen.” As you go about navigating the chaos and practicing the art of living well today, try to remember how many people you see but fail to understand. How often do you think you fail to see someone? Do you even possess the self-awareness to realize you are failing to see people? What is the cause of your blindness and what can you do to improve your vision? How do you think your inability to see others is hindering your ability to navigate the chaos? Have you ever stopped and wondered how many people you have looked at during your life yet never really saw them?

Today is May 31 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often do you allow others to limit your potential?” Like so many other Navigate the Chaos posts, this one focuses on the role others play in our ability to leverage our mind, body, and spirit in order to navigate the chaos and translate one dream after another into reality. The framework for this reflection today focuses on our relationships and, more specifically, why people stay in bad relationships. The people in your life, those you live with, your friends, and anyone else in your sphere, often have a direct impact on your ability to navigate the chaos. To assess if you are in a relationship that may limit your potential, today’s reflection will use Randi Gunther's March 31, 2022, Psychology Today article "7 Reasons People Stay in Unhappy Relationships," as a reference point for the following series of questions. How often do you find yourself in a relationship that contains moments of pain and joy but tell yourself experiencing both is the price you have to pay for being with that person? How often do you find yourself believing that your current unhappy relationship situation is that best you can hope for since you firmly believe no one better will ever come along? How often do you hold on to relationships that mimic the characteristics of those who raised you; often at the expense of not pursuing relationships with others who possess healthy traits unfamiliar to you? How often do you stay in a relationship because you are afraid of the pain your leaving might cause others? How often do you remain in a relationship that limits your potential because you are afraid of being alone? How often does your attachment to someone who has a drug problem or some other health issue prohibit you from developing your potential? How often does a lack of resources, especially money, limit your ability to leave a relationship that is limiting your potential? One woman who never let others limit her potential was Mae Carol Jemison. As the first African American woman to travel in space, Mae Carol Jemison believed that she would “never be limited by other people’s limited imaginations.” Jemison was born in Decatur, Alabama, on October 17, 1956, and the family moved to Chicago, Illinois, when Jemison was three years old, to take advantage of the better educational and employment opportunities there. As a young girl growing up in Chicago, she always assumed she would get into space. Jemison's parents were supportive of her interest in science, while her teachers were not. According to Jamison "In kindergarten, my teacher asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up, and I told her a scientist…she said, 'Don't you mean a nurse?' Now, there's nothing wrong with being a nurse, but that's not what I wanted to be….I always knew I wanted to explore. At the time of the Apollo airing, everybody was thrilled about space, but I remember being irritated that there were no women astronauts. People tried to explain that to me, and I did not buy it." After she obtained her M.D. in 1981, Jemison interned at Los Angeles County/University of Southern California Medical Center and later worked as a general practitioner. For the next two and a half years, she was the area Peace Corps medical officer for Sierra Leone and Liberia. In October 1985 Jemison made a career change and decided to follow a dream she had nurtured for a long time and applied for admission to NASA's astronaut training program. The Challenger disaster of January 1986 delayed the selection process, but when she reapplied a year later, Jemison was one of the 15 candidates chosen from a field of about 2,000. She would eventually become the first African American woman to travel in space when she went into orbit aboard the Space Shuttle Endeavour on September 12, 1992. Jamison did not allow herself to be limited by other people’s imaginations. Do you? Author Roy T. Bennett noted “Believe in your infinite potential. Your only limitations are those you set upon yourself. Believe in yourself, your abilities, and your own potential. Never let self-doubt hold you captive. You are worthy of all that you dream of and hope for. Do not let others tell you what you cannot do. Do not let the limitations of others limit your vision. If you can remove your self-doubt and believe in yourself, you can achieve what you never thought possible.” Surround yourself with people you support your vision, who challenge you to think beyond your current vision, and who believe you can do what was once thought impossible. How often do you believe in your infinite potential? How often do you even remind yourself you have potential? Is there someone in your life who is reminding you of your potential? Do you remind others of their potential? How often do you remind yourself that your limitations are those you set upon yourself? How often do you let self-doubt hold you captive? How often do you let others tell you what you can and cannot do? How often do you let the limitations of others limit your vision?

Today is May 30 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often do you rely on your willpower?” Those who navigate the chaos understand the difference between relying on their will power and the false premise of willing something to happen. You cannot will something to happen. You have to leverage your willpower to help you through the years of hard work required to translate one dream after another into reality. Czechoslovakian long-distance runner Emil Zátopek and African-American mathematician Gladys West relied on their willpower. Zátopek noted “If one can stick to the training throughout the many long years, then willpower is no longer a problem. It's raining? That doesn't matter. I am tired? That's beside the point. It's simply that I just have to.” Zátopek was best known for winning three gold medals at the 1952 Summer Olympics in Helsinki. To set world records and test the limits of human endurance he would run in heavy boots, hold his breath until he passed out, and wear three tracksuits at once while running through deep snow. For Zátopek “Pain is a merciful thing – if it lasts without interruption, it dulls itself.” That was the secret of his success as a runner: he trained himself to be tough in mind as well as body. “When a person trains once, nothing happens,” he said. “When a person forces himself to do a thing a hundred or a thousand times, he develops in ways more than physical.” As his biographer Richard Askwith noted “There really was a poor carpenter’s son from Moravia, with no special athletic talent, who built himself up through sheer hard work and inventiveness to be the most famous athlete the world had seen.” In February 2013, Runner's World Magazine selected him as the Greatest Runner of All Time. He redefined the boundaries of human endurance. His training sessions defied belief as he performed many in Army boots, in snow, in sand, in darkness – even, some said, with his wife on his back. His toughness was matched by a spirit of generous friendship that transcended nationality and politics in the darkest days of the Cold War. His warm heart and eccentric joie de vivre charmed the world. He dropped one of his gold medals in a swimming pool; another, famously, he gave away. A hero in his native country, Zátopek was an influential figure in the Communist Party. However, he supported the party's democratic wing, and after the 1968 Prague Spring, he was stripped of his rank and expelled from the army and the party, removed from all important positions, and forced to work in a string of inferior and dangerous positions. The Communist Party drove him into lonely obscurity after he stood up for “socialism with a human face.” On 9 March 1990, Zátopek was rehabilitated by Václav Havel, President of Czechoslovakia. Through willpower Zátopek won five Olympic medals, set 18 world records, redefined the limits of human endurance and became a global byword for sportsmanship and generosity. Gladys West is another example of someone who leveraged will power to navigate the chaos and in so doing made a lasting contribution to our world with the development of the Global Positioning System (GPS). West was born as Gladys Mae Brown in Sutherland, Virginia, in Dinwiddie County, a rural county south of Richmond. Her family was an African American farming family in a community of sharecroppers. Her mother worked at a tobacco factory, and her father was a farmer who also worked for the railroad. West realized early on that she did not want to work in the tobacco fields or factories like the rest of her family and decided that education would be her way out. At West's high school, the top two students of each graduating class received full-ride scholarships to Virginia State College (now formally University), a historically black public university. West worked hard and graduated in 1948 with the title of valedictorian. After graduating West taught science and math in Waverly, VA for two years before returning to VSU for her Master’s degree in Mathematics, which she received in 1955. The following year, West was hired as a mathematician at the Naval Proving Ground where she analyzed satellite data. She was one of only four African American employees at the time. During her four-decade long career at the Naval Proving Ground, West used information from satellites to refine an increasingly detailed and accurate mathematical model of the actual shape of the earth – called a “geoid”. This computational modeling would prove essential to modern GPS, as the technology relies on this mathematical model to determine the position of a receiver. West retired in 1998, after 42 years at Dahlgren, but refused to slow down – despite suffering a stroke five months after retiring. She used her willpower to regain her strength and mobility by taking classes at a local YMCA with her husband, motivated by a big goal: to finish the PhD program in Public Administration, which she received from Virginia Tech in 2018. Reflecting upon her career West noted "I strived hard to be tough and hang in there the best I could." How often do you strive to be tough and hand in there the best you can? How often do you remind yourself to leverage your mind, body, and spirit? How often do you rely on your willpower? How often do you push through being tired in order to translate one dream after another into reality? How often do you ‘stick to the training throughout the many long years?’ How often do you remind yourself that to translate one dream after another into reality you must will yourself to do that which is required?

Today is May 29 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often do you focus on what you can do?” Leveraging your mind, body, and spirit to navigate the chaos of life and translate one dream after another into reality often requires you to realize you need to focus on what you can do as opposed to what you cannot do in any life situation. Focusing on what you can do during difficult times has been a theme by authors since the Roman philosopher Seneca wrote On the Tranquility of the Mind: “No condition can be so wretched that an impartial mind can find no compensations in it. Small sites, if ingeniously divided, may be made use of for many different purposes, and arrangement will render ever so narrow a room habitable. Call good sense to your aid against difficulties: it is possible to soften what is harsh, to widen what is too narrow, and to make heavy burdens press less severely upon one who bears them skillfully.” Today’s reflection involves dissecting Seneca’s quote for a better understanding of how to use this strategy of focusing on what you can do instead of what you cannot do. No condition can be so wretched that an impartial mind can find no compensations in it. Ever life situation, regardless of how terrible, offers an opportunity to do something if one maintains an open mind during the chaos. Small sites, if ingeniously divided, may be made use of for many different purposes, and arrangement will render ever so narrow a room habitable. Consider each life situation like a mosaic made up of hundreds of small pieces. Focus on the smallness within the life situation so that you can make room to breathe. In this breathe is your ability to create a much-needed space between the stimulus of the life situation and your response. Call good sense to your aid against difficulties No matter how difficult the life situation, maintain your focus on what is right, fair, and proper. Rely on your sense of goodness to prevent you from responding in an inappropriate manner. It is possible to soften what is harsh, widen what is too narrow, and to make heavy burdens press less severely upon one who bears them skillfully. Know that any life situation offers one an opportunity to navigate the chaos by holding firm to a belief that each burden can be lifted ever so lightly if you approach it with skill, patience, and kindness. Major League Baseball player Kyle Schwarber of the Chicago Cubs ‘found compensations in his harsh’ life situation. Schwarber refused to let his inability to swing the bat during a rehab assignment stop him from doing what he could do to get ready to play for the Cubs in the 2016 World Series. On April 7, 2016, Schwarber and teammate Dexter Fowler collided in the outfield. Schwarber was removed from the game with a torn anterior cruciate ligament and lateral collateral ligament in his left knee, and would miss the rest of the 2016 season, just his second year in the major leagues. As the Cubs advanced further into the postseason, an unexpectedly fast recovery made the return of Schwarber increasingly more of a possibility. His doctors told him that he could not swing a bat more than 60 times a day. Professional baseball players need to swing a bat a few hundred times to get their batting eye finely tuned. Schwarber decided to just stand at home plate and train his eye on the pitching machine as it sent fastballs, sliders, and curveballs his way. He did not know if watching hundreds of pitches for two hours at a time would work but it was all he could do to help train his eyes without swinging a bat. It most certainly worked. The Cubs added Schwarber to their roster for the 2016 World Series and started him in Game 1 as their designated hitter. Schwarber's addition to the Cubs' starting line-up was surprising given he had not played since his injury in April. He was not medically cleared to play on defense, and only made appearances as a pinch or designated hitter. Schwarber had a batting average over .400 and the Cubs defeated the Indians in seven games to claim the Cubs' first World Series championship in 108 years. Schwarber did not let what he couldn’t do get in the way of what he could do. As Robert Puff wrote in his October 3, 2020, Psychology Today article "Focusing on What We Have," one strategy to use while navigating the chaos of life is to remind yourself you have the ability to focus. “We don’t always have total control over the situations we face in life,” Puff wrote “but we can control where we place our focus and our attention.” How often do you let what you cannot do get in the way of what you can do? If you find yourself stuck just how open are you to suggestions? Are you allowing yourself to focus on what you can do? Or are you so upset that you are unable to do A, B, or C you are blinded by what D, E, and F might offer? At this point of navigation some people might say something like “Well what is the point, if I can’t do A, B, or C doing D, E, and F is just stupid. D, E, and F won’t really help me.” So, the alternative is what? For those who fail to succeed they engage in predictive thinking, overlook the value of D, E, and F, and remain stuck blaming others for their inability to achieve their goal.

Today is May 28 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often do you realize you are both artist and picture?” Leveraging your mind, body, and spirit to navigate the chaos of life and translate one dream after another into reality often requires you to realize you are both the artist and picture simultaneously. This may seem difficult to grasp at first since the artist paints or draws the picture but those who navigate the chaos reflect upon this duality and come to the realization that they do indeed possess the ability to be both artist and picture. Today’s reflection includes the work of Austrian medical doctor Alfred Adler who established the school of individual psychology. Often viewed by many as the first community psychologist, Adler emphasized the role community played in human development. He preferred the use of two chairs in talk therapy, as opposed to the reliance on a couch, and educated people on his developmental theory involving the intermingling of three life tasks – occupation, society, and love. For Adler, navigating the chaos of life involved one successfully recognizing, balancing, and leveraging, each of the three life tasks. According to Adler “We are not determined by our experiences but are self-determined by the meaning we give to them; and when we take particular experiences as the basis for our future life, we are almost certain to be misguided to some degree. Meanings are not determined by situations. We determine ourselves by the meanings we ascribe to situations.” This meaning, however, involves what Dr. Shahram Heshmat labeled as psychological distance - mentally separating oneself from the immediate situation and taking a broader perspective or seeing the big picture. In a Psychology Today article Heshmat explains how “Psychological distancing allows greater flexibility and control in our thinking and behavior and is central to self-control. Self-control requires people to make decisions consistent with distal goals when tempted by more immediate rewards. Exercising self-control requires ignoring the attraction of short-term temptations in order to pursue other long-term goals. Resolving goal conflicts through self-control is an important component in achieving and maintaining a healthy life.” This observation is most certainly helpful as you look to navigate the chaos and practice the art of living well. While you may think the experience impacts you, and it very well may, but what meaning did you affix to the life situation? Did you create any psychological distancing? Perhaps you gave an event too much meaning and another too little? Only you have the power to prescribe a level of meaning to a situation. This is critical when it comes to one of the three life tasks of occupation, society, and love. What one person may interpret as a significant experience you might view as a minor one. Adler continued and noted: “Every individual represents a unity of personality and the individual then fashions that unity. The individual is thus both the picture and the artist. Therefore, if one can change one’s concept of self, they can change the picture being painted. He is the artist of his own personality, but as an artist he is neither an infallible worker nor a person with a complete understanding of mind and body; he is rather a weak, extremely fallible, and imperfect human being.” As you put in the daily grind today, remember your imperfection is a human characteristic. So, be imperfect and be both artist and picture as you leverage your mind, body, and spirit to navigate the chaos and translate one dream after another into reality. As with all artists and their work, it is important to recall the words of Salvador Dali who observed "no masterpiece was ever created by a lazy artist." You can be a masterpiece. You can navigate the chaos. You can translate one dream after another into reality. To do all of that and more, you will have to make a commitment to leverage your mind, body, and soul each day of the year. You cannot be lazy. You are both the artist and the picture. Just how much of a masterpiece you want to create is up to you. How often do you allow your experiences to determine who you are? How often do you remind yourself that your self-determination is what gives experiences meaning? What role does self-awareness play as you determine the meaning found in life situations, experiences, and moments? How often are you exercising psychological distancing in order to give yourself a moment to leverage your self-control? Are you so caught up in a certain type of life moment that you simply fail to create the much-needed psychological distancing? Do you remind yourself the critical role self-control plays as you navigate the chaos of life? How much time each day do you spend resolving goal conflicts through self-control? Another way of asking this question is – how often do you allow the life situations of the day to side track you from making forward progress on your goal? How often do you remind yourself you are both the artist and the picture? When is the last time you changed your concept of your self? Does your current life situation require you to change your concept of your self? Who or what is holding you back from allowing yourself to be both artist and picture?

Today is May 27 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often is your thinking intuitive compared to rational?” Thinking about thinking is hard work. Getting through the day can be challenging enough for most people. Yet successful people who navigate the chaos and practice the art of living well spend time thinking about their cognitive process. In addition to assessing what they think, they also evaluate how they think. In a Psychology Today article Dr. David Ludden explained economists have traditionally assumed that humans are rational decision makers. In recent decades, however, psychologists working in the field of behavioral economics have come to recognize that people are limited in their ability to make rational decisions. “In some cases, such as when we have the time and the cognitive resources to think things through, we can be quite rational in our decision making. But when we’re constrained by time we tend to make quick, gut-feeling decisions.” In his 2011 book Thinking, Fast and Slow, psychologist and Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman explains the so-called dual-process theory of decision making for lay audiences. According to dual-process theory, intuitive thinking is fast, while rational thinking is slow. And so, psychologists often use reaction time to determine whether a participant in their experiment is using an intuitive or rational approach to solving the problem at hand. Going with your gut isn’t necessarily bad. We humans have evolved some effective intuitions that usually lead us to very quick—and reasonably accurate—judgments, at least in the social realm. Likewise, taking the time to make a rational decision can lead us to what psychologists call “paralysis by analysis.” That is, we’re unable to decide in real time because we’re bogged down by slow reasoning processes. For example, there’s no rational process for deciding what to order for lunch, and so we just have to go with whatever feels right. Austrian-British philosopher Karl Popper noted “Serious rational criticism is so rare that it should be encouraged. Being too ready to defend oneself is more dangerous that being too ready to admit a mistake.” Over the years researchers have created a variety of tests to help people better understand the level of their intuitive thinking compared to rational decision making. Back in 1998, researchers Anthony Greenwald, Debbie McGhee, and Jordan Schwartz introduced something called the Implicit Association Test (IAT). The IAT measures the milliseconds that it takes to connect pairs of ideas. The test is based on the concept that you will be faster putting together ideas you already associate with one another. For example, if you automatically associate female with family and male with career, then you will be fast placing nouns that relate to female/family or male/career in the columns. But if the columns are titled male/family and female/career and those are not the associations of your unconscious mind, it will take an extra millisecond or two to sort the nouns properly. Malcolm Gladwell wrote about IAT in his book Blink. He took one on race and was mortified to find out that his unconscious association with Caucasian-European was “good” and his association with African American was “bad”—even though Gladwell himself half-black! In an interview later he said experience taught him to disregard his first impressions of people and to take time to know them before passing any judgement. In other words, to improve his ability to think Gladwell started to emphasize rational over intuitive. But those associations Gladwell had, many of them were unconscious and we all have them to some degree. Navigating the chaos with a deep understanding of your intuitive decision-making process compared to your rational thinking can be a useful strategy. For example, you can work with the unconscious to unearth these associations and align them more closely to your values and goals. When you do, you start to tap into the power of your unconscious and increase your self-awareness. But even before you engage the unconscious as a productive partner, you can start living a life that is more responsive and less reactive simply by paying attention and noticing when what you do or say feels off-center. Take whatever additional time you need to think in a rational format instead of an intuitive one. American philosopher and psychologist William James noted “A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices.” While intuitive and rational modes of thinking are both useful, be sure to understand when to leverage each one appropriately. Otherwise, you may wind up rearranging your prejudices. Doing so would be a disservice to yourself as you navigate the chaos. How often is your thinking intuitive compared to rational? How often do you reflect upon how you think? Are you defending your thinking more so than admitting you made a mistake? Has your inability to decide hindered your success in navigating the chaos and translating one dream after another into reality? Have you witnessed the decision-making process of others in your life? If so, what are your thoughts on their ability to decide? Why do you think it is difficult for so many people to understand how they think? How often do you count to 10 in order to give yourself time to think through a decision? Are you thinking or merely rearranging your prejudices?

Today is May 26 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often do you idolize others?” It would be difficult to find anyone who translated their dreams into reality who idolized someone. While navigating the chaos it may indeed be helpful to have a role model, someone to inspire you, and a mentor. Spending your days, time, and money idolizing someone? That is a likely path to nowhere. The great irony is when you idolize someone you are in fact helping them translate their dreams into reality. Do you realize that? All the athletes, musicians, actors, or social media influencers wants is to translate their dreams into reality. And you are helping them! But at what cost? One common trait among almost everyone who has every translated a dream into action is they never idolized anyone. They had no time! They were too busy working on their own dreams. If you are fully committed to navigating the chaos, you simply do everything you can to prevent yourself from falling prey to idolizing someone, also known as survivorship bias. Survivorship bias is the logical error consisting of two elements: first, concentrating on the people or things that made it past some selection process and, second, overlooking those that did not, typically because of their lack of visibility. This type of thinking can often lead to false conclusions in several different ways. Survivorship bias can lead to overly optimistic beliefs because failures are ignored, such as when companies that no longer exist are excluded from analyses of financial performance or follow up analyses are never conducted to provide much needed additional perspective. Evidence of this decline of relevant organizations once considered great was presented by Chris Bradley in his analysis of organizations listed in Tom Peters’ 1982 book In Search of Excellence, and Jim Collins’ 1994 Built to Last and 2001 Good to Great. Bradley disproved the ‘greatness’ label Peters and Collins affixed to companies and discovered: Two well-performing companies were acquired (Amoco and Gillette, bought by BP and P&G). Four low performers were swallowed up (Amdahl, Data General, DEC, and Raychem), Three went bust (Kmart, Wang, and Circuit City). Another five fell off the list including Kodak’s bankruptcy in 2013. The survivor bias and idolizing of others is often found within the field of entrepreneurs. Businesses built upon the brilliant minds of Bill Gates or Steve Jobs are constantly idolized by many. Emulate what these two did and your business will have a market value of a billion over night. According to the survivor bias you do not even need a college degree to be a billionaire; the statistics would seem to suggest this is true since nearly a third (30%) of today’s billionaires do not have a bachelor’s degree. If Gate, Jobs, and a few others dropped out of college, why not you? But herein lies the question to ask yourself: how many people dropped out of college, started a company in their garage or home, and then never made a dime? The best estimate, according to David Cowan of Bessemer Venture Partners is venture capitalists hear 200 pitches for every one they fund, so perhaps 1 in 13 start-ups get VC, and still, they face long odds from there. According to the National Venture Capital Association approximately 1,300 start-ups get funded each year but only 13% as many achieved an initial public offering (81) or an acquisition large enough to warrant a public disclosure of the price (95). So, for every wealthy start-up founder, there are 100 other entrepreneurs who end up with only a cluttered garage. Does this mean you should not find inspiration from others? Absolutely not. In fact, this entire Navigate the Chaos series involves a variety of backstories of people who navigated the chaos. But falling prey to survivorship bias and finding inspiration from others are two completely different strategies. Former professional basketball player Kobe Bryant provides a good example here. When he was 12 years old, Bryant joined a summer basketball camp and never scored one point. On the verge of quitting the sport, Bryant came across Michael Jordan’s story and how he was cut from his high school basketball team. Bryant learned how Jordan used that as fuel to motivate him to outwork everyone around him and prove them wrong. This inspired Bryant to follow in Jordan’s footsteps. From that moment forward Bryant dedicated himself to hours of practice each day. He would put himself through 4 hours of intense workouts even on game days. He would practice without anyone else - or even a ball - to perfect his footwork. All of this because he had a hero who did the same. Do you have heroes inspiring you or are you idolizing others? How much time are you spending with a mental model that falls prey to the survivorship bias? Are you obsessing over an athlete, musician, actor, or social media influencer to the detriment of your dreams? Are you so focused on the business survivors, the Steve Jobs of the world that you lose sight of who you are and who you want to be? Do you realize that the time you idolize others could be better spent in the pursuit of your own dreams? Why do you think you are so obsessed with following others at the expense of your own dreams?

Today is May 25 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often do you recognize the light in others?” "Everybody counts or nobody counts" is the personal credo of the fictitious character of Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) detective Harry Bosch created by author Michael Connelly. After his return from Vietnam and an honorable discharge from the Army, Bosch joined the LAPD and rose to the rank of Detective III, a position which entails both investigative and supervisory duties, and is the LAPD equivalent of Detective Sergeant. Bosch picked up the philosophy in the early-1980s from one of his first partners, detective Ray Vaughn, who told Bosch, “Every investigation counted." When asked to explain his personal mission in April of 1994, Bosch told psychologist Carmen Hinojos: "Everybody counts, or nobody counts. That's it. It means I bust my ass to make a case whether it's a prostitute or the mayor's wife. That's my rule." Today’s reflection involves two words often misunderstood but valuable to anyone using the strategy of recognizing the light in others to navigate the chaos: Namaste and Unbuntu. Namaste stems from the ancient Indian language of Sanskrit that was used to write the ancient collections of hymns, literature, philosophy, and texts known as the Vedas, which much of the modern yoga practice originates. For a word with such ancient heritage, namaste came to English recently. Many Americans first encountered the word namaste when reading about the newly independent India during the mid-20th century. It had been transliterated as na-mas-tay, namasthe, and namaste until the latter became standard in the mid-20th century. Its initial use for a broad American readership, unsurprisingly, was associated with stories about the newly independent India and its leader. As reported in TIME Magazine August 16, 1948 “In response Nehru closed his palms in front of his chest. This traditional Hindu namasthe (greeting) is as much a part of his public manner as was the V sign for Churchill.” Like with so many Sanskrit words, namaste is a phrase having multiple meanings, interpretations, and explanations. Namaste is formed from namaḥ, meaning “bow, obeisance, adoration,” and the enclitic pronoun te, meaning “to you.” The noun namaḥ, in turn, is a derivative of the verb namati, which means “(she or he) bends, bows.” Thus, a one frequent meaning of namaste is “bowing to you” or “I bow to you,” and is used as a greeting. Moreover, namaste is commonly translated as “the light in me bows to the same light within you.” Often, you will hear this in a yoga class. Namaste is typically used at the end of class to seal the practice. Some teachers will also open their class with it. Still another explanation is namaste refers to the divine teacher within ourselves. This is often referred to as the “Guru” within or “the teacher in me honors the teacher in you.” This Sanskrit word has the root Gu means “darkness,” while ru means “light.” Hence, we are bowing to and embracing the light and the darkness that exists within us all. In addition to Namaste, today’s reflection also involves another word with a complicated past, Unbuntu. The philosophy of ubuntu is derived from a Nguni word, meaning “humanity,” or “the quality of being human.” Ubuntu has its roots in humanist African philosophy, where the idea of community is one of the building blocks of society. Ubuntu is that nebulous concept of common humanity, oneness: humanity, you, and me both. For some who navigate the chaos, ubuntu has been a powerful tool to use as they translated their dreams into reality. This African proverb reveals a world view that we owe our selfhood to others, that we are first and foremost social beings, that, if you will, no man/woman is an island, or as the African would have it, “One finger cannot pick up a grain.” Ubuntu is, at the same time, a deeply personal philosophy that calls on us to mirror our humanity for each other. Since the transition to democracy in South Africa with the Nelson Mandela presidency in 1994, the term has become more widely known outside of Southern Africa. At Nelson Mandela's memorial in December 2013, United States President Barack Obama spoke about Ubuntu, saying: “There is a word in South Africa – Ubuntu – a word that captures Mandela’s greatest gift: his recognition that we are all bound together in ways that are invisible to the eye; that there is a oneness to humanity; that we achieve ourselves by sharing ourselves with others, and caring for those around us. We can never know how much of this sense was innate in him, or how much was shaped in a dark and solitary cell. But we remember the gestures, large and small – introducing his jailers as honored guests at his inauguration; taking a pitch in a Springbok uniform; turning his family’s heartbreak into a call to confront HIV/AIDS – that revealed the depth of his empathy and his understanding. He not only embodied Ubuntu, but he also taught millions to find that truth within themselves.” How often do you recognize the light in others? Do you believe ‘everyone counts or no one counts?’ Have you had anyone help you see the light in yourself? How often do you stop to remind yourself that ‘we are all bound together in ways that are invisible to the eye?’ What is preventing you from seeing the light in others or viewing the connectedness among humans? How do you think recognizing the light in others can help you translate one dream after another into reality?

Today is May 24 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “do you use fear to take you to the edge?” Science fiction writer Frank Herbert, author of Dune, the best-selling science fiction novel of all time, wrote “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.” Those who navigate the chaos come to understand how to use fear to take them to the edge, to push them to the edge, and to challenge themselves beyond what they thought possible. Translating dreams into reality will no doubt expose you to fear; but will you give in? Will you let fear scare you away? The 2001 novel Life of Pi, by Yann Martel, tells the story of protagonist Piscine Molitor "Pi" Patel, an Indian Tamil boy from Pondicherry who explores issues of spirituality and metaphysics from an early age. He survives 227 days after a shipwreck while stranded on a lifeboat in the Pacific Ocean with a Bengal tiger which raises questions about the nature of reality and how it is perceived and told. On confronting fear Martel wrote: “I must say a word about fear. It is life's only true opponent. Only fear can defeat life. It is a clever, treacherous adversary, how well I know. It has no decency, respects no law or convention, shows no mercy. It goes for your weakest spot, which it finds with unnerving ease. It begins in your mind, always ... so you must fight hard to express it. You must fight hard to shine the light of words upon it. Because if you don't, if your fear becomes a wordless darkness that you avoid, perhaps even manage to forget, you open yourself to further attacks of fear because you never truly fought the opponent who defeated you.” Author Judy Blume learned a few things about confronting fear while writing young adult novels about topics some consider taboo such as masturbation, menstruation, birth control, and death. She has had to deal with criticism from individuals and groups that wanted her books banned. The American Library Association (ALA) has named Blume as one of the most frequently challenged authors of the 21st century. Despite her critics, Blume's books have sold over 82 million copies and they have been translated into 32 languages. On a personal level Blume has also confronted fear. On August 15, 1959, in the summer of her freshman year of college, she married John M. Blume, who she had met while a student at New York University. He became a lawyer, while she was a homemaker before supporting her family by teaching and writing. They had two children, but the couple divorced in 1976 with Blume later describing the marriage as "suffocating." Shortly after her separation, she met Thomas A. Kitchens, a physicist. The couple married and moved to New Mexico for Kitchens' work. They divorced in 1978. She later spoke about their split: "It was a disaster, a total disaster. After a couple years, I got out. I cried every day. Anyone who thinks my life is cupcakes is all wrong." As Blume wrote “Each of us must confront our own fears, must come face to face with them. How we handle our fears will determine where we go with the rest of our lives. To experience adventure or to be limited by the fear of it.” Steven Spielberg understood all too well what Blume meant. The 1975 American thriller film Jaws directed by Steven Spielberg and based on Peter Benchley's 1974 novel offers just one example of how Spielberg used fear to push him. Despite the movie’s tremendous success, Jaws had to overcome a variety of obstacles that included: a)the original stuntman the studio hired was not suited for the job b)the young director demanded perfection and refused to shoot in a tank c)the movie’s budget more than doubled and went from $3.5 million to $9 million d)the shooting schedule tripled from an original 55 days to 159 e)the mechanical sharks began to deteriorate in salt water and f)the ships started to sink. Jaws producer David Brown said, "There were times early in the picture when we felt we had made a mistake hiring Steven who was maddeningly perfectionistic…and I have to hand it to him for sticking to his guns." In a New York Times interview Spielberg said: “Every movie I make, there’s a hurdle to it. I look for things that will scare me. Fear is my fuel. I get to the brink of not really knowing what to do and that’s when I get my best ideas. Confidence is my enemy, and it always has been…There is a fear of getting lost and then staying lost in a quagmire of having made a bad choice that I am stuck with for the next 60 days of shooting. I felt that way on Jaws only because it was so hard to make, not because I did not know how to make it. I was lost. For a movie that became awesomely successful and gave me complete personal creative freedom, I still look back at it and even now say it was my most unhappy time in my life as a filmmaker because whole days would go by and we wouldn’t get a shot.” How often do you use fear as fuel to take you to the brink of not knowing what to do? How often do you realize fear ‘is the mind killer?’ How often do you remind yourself that ‘only fear can defeat life?’ How often do you allow fear to limit your life adventures?

Today is May 23 and the Navigate the Chaos question to consider is “how often do you consider your disadvantage an advantage?” W. Clement Stone noted “to every disadvantage there is a corresponding advantage.” Dutch football (soccer) player Hendrik Johannes Cruijff, arguably one of the best to ever play the sport, echoed similar sentiment and said, “Every disadvantage has its advantage.” His 'cup half full' perspective regarding every negative situation reminds us that every disadvantage has an advantage. The key for today’s strategy to navigate the chaos is to focus on the possibilities within the disadvantage and not on the impossibilities. Stone personified this strategy of turning one’s disadvantage into an advantage to navigate the chaos. He was born in Chicago, Illinois on May 4, 1902, and three years later his father died leaving his family in debt. In 1908, at six years of age, he hawked newspapers on the South Side of Chicago while his mother worked as a dressmaker. Much of what is known about Stone comes from his autobiography The Success System That Never Fails. In that book, he tells of his early business life, which started with selling newspapers in restaurants. At the time, this was a novel thing to do, a departure from the typical practice of boys hawking newspapers on street corners. At first, restaurant managers tried to discourage him, but he gradually won them over by his politeness, charm, persistence, and the fact most customers had no objection to selling newspapers. Stone would eventually drop out of high school to build the Combined Insurance Company of America, which provided both accident and health insurance coverage; by 1930, he had over 1000 agents selling insurance for him across the United States. Stone had three disadvantages: his father died leaving the family in debt, he had to convince restaurant owners to let him do something they never did before; and he lacked a high school diploma. He turned his disadvantages of no money, lack of experience, and no formal education into an advantage and navigated the chaos to become a ‘rags to riches’ story. But he is far from the only one. Academic research supports this strategy of turning a disadvantage into an advantage to navigate the chaos. For example, Ivan Arreguin-Toft, an assistant professor of International Relations at Boston University, analyzed every instance of asymmetric conflict between strong actors — the Goliaths — and weak actors — the Davids — within the past two centuries. The Goliaths, he discovered, were the victors in 71.5 percent of conflicts. When the Davids recognized their disadvantages and amended their strategies, however, the percentage of conflicts in which they were victors increased from 28.5 to 63.6 percent. Thus, “weak actors are much more likely to win,” Arreguin-Toft determined, “even when everything we think we know about power says they shouldn’t.” In David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits and the Art of Battling Giants, best-selling author Malcolm Gladwell examines what happens when ordinary people confront giants. Gladwell defines giants as "powerful opponents of all kinds—from armies and mighty warriors to disability, misfortune, and oppression." Through each story Gladwell explores two ideas. "The first is that much of what we consider valuable in our world arises out of these kinds of lopsided conflicts, because the act of facing overwhelming odds produces greatness and beauty. And second, that we consistently get these kinds of conflicts wrong. We misread them. We misinterpret them. Giants are not what we think they are. The same qualities that appear to give them strength are often the sources of great weakness. And the fact of being an underdog can change people in ways that we often fail to appreciate it can open doors and create opportunities and educate and enlighten and make possible what might otherwise have seemed unthinkable." To illustrate his point, Gladwell begins his book with the story of David—the shepherd boy who was summoned by his people to defend King Saul’s kingdom against the Philistines. According to Gladwell, David was not the underdog in his historic battle against the six-foot–nine-inch giant, Goliath. Essentially, Goliath was equipped for direct combat, in which he might have deflected strikes with his shield and delivered a stab with his spear, not an opponent whose chief weaponry consisted of a slingshot and stones. David’s decision to fight with less armor and weaponry, as opposed to Goliath, granted him insurmountable speed and mobility. David had brought a gun to a sword fight. He had recognized his disadvantage of size as an advantage of speed, mobility, and ability. Goliath, as Gladwell summarized, “was blind to his approach—and then he was down, too big, and slow and blurry-eyed to comprehend the way the tables had been turned.” The president of Goldman Sachs, Gary Cohn, understands the value of turning a disadvantage into an advantage. Having been held back in elementary school due to his reading impairment, Cohn became accustomed to failure. He struggled throughout high school but managed to graduate from American University and launch a career on Wall Street because of his ability to persevere. “The one trait in a lot of dyslexic people I know is that by the time we got out of college, our ability to deal with failure was very highly developed,” says Cohn. “I wouldn’t be where I am today without my dyslexia.” Like David, Cohn recognized his disadvantage as an advantage. Such recognition allowed Cohn to practice the critical trait of perseverance and rebounding from failure. Like David, Cohn fared well in his battle against the Goliath that had for years told him he would never succeed. How often do you turn your disadvantage into an advantage? Who or what is holding you back from doing so? How often do you tell yourself you can’t do something because of your disadvantage? Do you have any role models in your life that have a disadvantage but learned to turn it around to their advantage? How often do you rely on your perseverance to find a way to move forward? When working through your disadvantage, how often do you remind yourself to persevere through the process? How often do you get frustrated because of your disadvantage? How often do you remind yourself that others have persevered through their disadvantage and that you can as well?