Depression, Purpose & Anxiety – Almost a year ago the perceived lack of a purpose made me notably depressed. I tackled the situation by relentlessly reading and annotating the content I had consumed.

Until I put everything together for a talk about Meaning, Suffering, Time & Imperfection which I gave to the Opal Book Club. The audience was visibly confounded.

Then, a few weeks later, almost out of nowhere, meaning, a purpose found me. And with it came: anxiety.

It felt weird – why, all of a sudden, did I not feel contentment, but anxiety, the little sister of fear? Because I cared about what was put into my lap. Because emotion was involved.

In my business and private life I have had arrived at a stage where I thought it best to quell all emotions. Be cool, be equanimous. I was still functioning – but, as if I were on remote, far, far from my A-game.

My newly-found purpose on the other hand had me emotionally involved. It confronts me with all kinds of constraints – something I had not anticipated and that I felt needed to be resolved.

I started with a book: ‘A Beautiful Constraint‘ by Barden & Morgan – which Seth Godin had listed among the suggested reading on the topic of ‘constraints’ in the altMBA that I had completed a year ago.

And there, in the book, I found it: Anxiety is essential when dealing with constraints and change. From the book: “If you can remain insecure, yet optimistic, you’ve got a pretty good chance of changing the world.” (Dan Wieden)

Alright, then. Anxiety is my new friend and I’ll team her up with Optimism, my old friend, and bring in the support team: intellectual impetus, capability, creative tenacity.

Seth Godin’s narrative of constraints and boundaries never made sense to me and I have been mulling over their difference at times, until today I think I found a way to tease apart the concept of a boundary and a constraint.

Both are arbitrary or real. Both can be external or internal. Both are used kind of interchangeably.

Yet, here is my take on their distinction:

Boundaries are like borders (tangible or intangible) – one bumps up against them (or not).
Constraints are like chains (tangible or intangible) – one tugs at them (or not).

Example: A dog can be chained (an external, tangible constraint) or fenced in (an external, tangible boundary). If both apply, the question is such: Is the chain long enough, so that the dog can bump up against a boundary? What good does it do if said dog breaks the boundary? – It’ll still be held back by a constraining chain …

So, to expand, or break through, boundaries one needs to first and foremost make sure that there is no limiting tangible or intangible constraint.

What if there is no tangible chain, and no tangible boundary?

I’ve seen that in dogs that are kept by farmers. They set tangible boundaries (a kennel) when the dogs are puppies, to train them for an intangible constraint (which is: to not leave the farm’s premises).

So, the question can be reframed: What boundaries were set for one that successfully turned into constraints (and are anchored in a narrative)?

My take: A narrative can only change an arbitrary boundary or constraint. The very real boundaries and constraints have to be changed differently, through change management (i.e., ‘nudging/selling/campaigning’) and negotiation (which applies even to changing the asset that is oneself).

Would you agree, or are there flaws in my reasoning? If yes, what are they? Will you generously expose them by providing generous feedback?

Final question: How are you going to expand the boundary and leverage the constraint? Or, is it that the boundary is a self-imposed ‘Beautiful Constraint (Barden & Morgan)’?

And a final note, prompted by a comment:

How the terms ‘boundaries’ and ‘constraints’ are used – I quote David Ogilvy: “Give me a tight brief!” – In your opinion is this a self-imposed boundary or a self-imposed constraint?

In their book “A Beautiful Constraint” Morgan & Barden – you guessed right – describe it as a self-imposed constraint … although, a tight brief sounds more like a boundary within which a result shall be obtained.

Hence: Ogilvy consciously constrains himself with a tight boundary (to unleash maximum creativity)? — 

Philosophers have the bird’s eye view

Fine – as long as they also have the worm’s eye view –

Says the crow –

As she feeds

On a worm

WOW, I would love to be on that boat!

(She meant: skiff)

When she yelled out these words, she was standing on a bridge over the Charles River, watching the annual regatta.

Yeah, but you’d have to get up every morning at 6 am for training, replied her friend.

Silence.

You.Are.Significant.

The question is: Where? And how? And why? – Significance has many layers. You might be most significant in a layer that offers little praise and perceived sense of accomplishment.

Are you willing, prepared, and ready to acknowledge, accept, your significance anyway? To show up, even if it doesn’t correspond to where you’d like to be significant? How? And why?

When you travel, who do you bring? Related question: Does a great life companion have to be a great travel companion? If yes, how? If no, why? Does it hinge on what he/she has to bring?

Composing = Coding / Coding = Composing? – Coding, Hold The Tension?

Probably this coded me into Minimal Music AND Early Music. In either I’m a listener, not a creator. – 🙂

Vacations are supposed to be lavish, splendid, luxurious, entertaining. They are meant to give us a break from our daily routines. How about subtraction tourism (I just made this up)?

We get so used to our daily amenities, gadgetry, entertainment options, comfort that it becomes sort of ‘blah’ over time, prompting us for ‘more’. More gadgets, more entertainment, more comfort and amenities. Until ‘more’ puts us in peril. We either can’t attain more or afford more. We accept a cost that has no relation to the benefit. In a way this principle promotes behaviors that border on the insane, and are fueled by people, companies and organizations peddling ‘stuff’, including immaterial things for the ones who are saturated by material ownership – ‘enlightenment’, ‘growth’, etc. – the culture industry is huge and growing.

There are the ones who understand that a vacation could be a ‘minus’ version of our daily lives – a multi-day hike – the Appalachian Trail, Pacific Crest Trail, the Camino, etc.  (In German, there are not one, but two words for trails like those: Fernwanderweg, Weitwanderweg. They don’t have a corresponding word in English.)

Hiking hundreds of miles with just the bare minimum of stuff on you can give you time to reflect, to focus, to take in new views, literal and figurative.

Camping is another version of subtraction tourism, depending on what camping style you prefer. Obviously, the one I am thinking about is neither ‘glamping‘, nor ‘luxury caravaning‘ (a mini-version of your complete, sophisticated household), but rather backpacking with a mini tent. (The mere experience of forgoing practically all artificial light resets the circadian clock, a practice recommended to certain people with sleep disorders.)

Traveling light necessitates inventiveness, multi-purposing, deciding what is important. TOC applied, sort of. Which might be a great practice for our everyday lives. It doesn’t need to be camping, though.

The Grand Tour: No, not the classical one. I’m thinking EuRail, Tibet, Nepal, India, South-East Asia, hostels, huts, and modest places. This concept doesn’t necessarily have to be restricted to a ‘Grand Tour’ of Less (comfort) and More (experience). Go to a B place, a C place. Discover what is there, observe, reflect on what resources you have at your disposal every day, how your life is OK and doesn’t need ‘more’, with maybe one exception: grate- and mindfulness.

(One example.)

Try a subtraction vacation: The next vacation, instead of  going to a luxury resort with all the amenities, try going to a place that does not have grand vistas or fancy accommodation. Opt for a modest B&B (rated 2 stars or below – although I was shocked to see the high quality of those on booking.com). See what you can get out of the experience. Maybe try one of these travel experiments.

Deep thought
does not happen

in passing

But who
has the time?

Astronautennahrung

becomes our brain food