Motivations

This morning went rather poorly.  But for however I am here, motivated to share the following thoughts with you, I am grateful for this opportunity.

I do not absolutely believe I can be motivated by my own self, yet I often seem to be.  It is difficult to recognize whether I have purely and solely pushed myself into motion or whether I simply follow the influences and forces acting upon myself.  However, I still do absolutely believe in the potential for any and every human to become what we might call self-reliant, independent - these not meaning total self-reliance, but mentally wired to be so motivating of every stimulus, still depending on necessary external sustenance - and importantly, all-around aware.  But is the credit for motivation to ourselves or to the experiences and ideas with which we are nourished with? I find myself to enjoy friends' company, yet be motivated to enjoy it only to the extent to which I can also enjoy my own - in nature's infinite adversity and blessings.  There is a balance I must strike to be truly getting the most of my learning and the most of my doing.

 We can all realize these truths within ourselves, because they are relational in the same way mathematics -  most clearly, geometry - is.  Any influence from another person can be the same within oneself if put into context: does this external action of another reflected on myself mean that I might use more or less of this in my own actions?

For instance, let's look at a physical relation.  A female training for ninja warrior competitions (involving athletic abilities of immense body-weight strength, grip strength, agility, etc.) sees a male competitor who is excellent on upper body focused obstacles and poorly coordinated on balance obstacles, and can observe what training or even techniques themselves are required or not as important to develop for themselves.  This female has a better sense of balance without much training because she has a lower center of mass (not true to every case, just this one, and this comparison) but she lacks the grip strength, not the upper body strength in comparison to this competitor, because they can do the same number of pullups, but she cannot hang with certain grips, whereas he can.  One might attribute her failure to upper body strength, but this is more complex than that, involving an understanding of not just performance, but of training in every sense.  Therefore, this female competitor should focus on those specific aspects to suit the direct failures - her grip strength and perhaps anything else mentally or physically involved in the obstacles. There is a weakest link(s) in every chain of actions.

In that example, a common misunderstanding of the failure/success can arise, but the solution is specific and measurable, and will show in relation to their competitions on the same course.  The same holds true for relations of people's character, but in those cases, it is not as easily measurable because of very dynamic situations and the impacts are usually not physical, but mental, social, emotional and spiritual.  People can observe their habits in relation to others however, but we must be wary of worthy and unworthy comparisons.  The complexity of a person's character also mustn't be overlooked, and regardless of one decision on someone's character, it could always sway the other way if approached again.  This calls for non-attachment to expecting a certain outcome all the time - fear or disgust - and that no human judgement is ever certain, even within the physical realm.

However, within the physical realm, there is a level of pragmatism we can have, and that is with regards to nature and its universal laws.  What is surprisingly most educating (in terms of awareness) to people is their mental isolation in nature.

Nature gives us a direct sense of necessary and unnecessary.  Read Jean-Jacques Rousseau's "Discourse on the Origin of Inequality" and you will be led through how humans are naturally good but soon establish false needs which separate us from our initial tendency to be compassionate towards one another.  But is virtue to be compassionate, always?  Our world seems to put compassion to great use, with all of our human-caused issues.

Personally, I desire to shape myself into as compassionate a being as I can, because I believe that my only motivation lies without myself.  My motivation is in tending to the world, however it calls.  More often do I find myself an observer than a doer, and more often a lover than a warrior.  But without the use of the destruction, there is no room for more creation. Finding a polar equivalency to both doing and not doing, to extreme maxes and minimums, there is harmony with nature and the social world to be found. The harmony lies in the allowing and flowing of the world around oneself, and doing all one can to change it for whatever outcome is most balanced, but at the same time, to never resist the forces (which are bigger than ourselves) at play.  It is in this way of being observant and patient for the world to shift, that we seem to motivate ourselves best - if we try to resist nature, we are often left battered and less motivated to act as strongly or weakly, if at all, again.  We can reasonably prepare for these things, and the adversity is what motivates us to start with, but I believe we must allow motivation to arise even from our blessings if we are to spread more compassion within a society of false needs.  Motivation to let go of our blessings as everyone's, not with ourselves, but with all, our provider, nature.  I see no property demarcations started by nature, just gill & lungs, water & land, and where we might find our providence, and our fellows.

Stay faithful, stay reasonable,

Grant