The difference between intentions and goals is similar to the difference between process and product. Intentions are process, they emphasize the journey more than the destination, while goals are products, more concerned with bottom line results than how those results are achieved. Means/ends is a similar distinction. Both are important; obviously one can’t have a journey without a destination or ends without means. They must be congruent; one can’t actually achieve ‘good’ ends by ‘evil’ means, tho it often appears as if the world works this way.
Yet, the difference between intentions and goals is less clear and more subtle than the difference between process and product. I perceive intentions as goals more broadly conceived and held in an inclusive, holistic, metaphysical context, with preferences for process, means and journey included. Means and ends, journey and destination, product and process are not artificially separated with intentions. With these aspects more or less aligned in intentions, one experiences less conflict. In fact setting intentions involves taking means and ends, journey and destination, product and process into consideration, integrating them and making them congruent.
This is the both/and approach I’ve posted about before. It’s not either profit or the environment, but both profit and the environment. They need not be traded off against one another, need not be mutually exclusionary. That they so often are, points to areas of opportunity. Mutually beneficial outcomes, a world that works for everyone and everything, is possible. Either/or thinking is of the ego, the thinking of a lonely frightened entity, cut off from Source. Both/and thinking embodies connectedness and the possibility of mutually beneficial outcomes. Setting intentions embodies that kind of thinking and connectedness.
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Monday, November 8, 2010
Back to Intentions
Now there’s an if/then aspect to this shadow work and indeed to setting intentions in general that I’ll call the shadow of the shadow. In earlier posts, I said that the if/then proposition was a set-up for failure and unhappiness; that it sets up an equation that says, if I get what I want, then I’ll be happy, or successful, or whatever. In the case of intentions, the if/then proposition says I can only be happy if my intentions are achieved. It’s important to be aware of the if/then proposition shadowing intentions.
Happiness comes from the inside out, it might be greater or lesser if my intentions are achieved, but it is not dependent on achieving them. Happiness arises from a choice to live from the place of connection with Source, not from accomplishing things.
Besides, intentions are not goals with a fixed, measurable aspect. Intentions can make me happy, are alive and well, as long as I’m alive and well. Intentions emanate from Source, not ego. As long as I stay centered in Source and open to It and build intentions from Source like - living in such a way that builds a world that works for everyone and everything, including myself - then my intentions are intentions, not addictions, they are alive and well and I can be happy. But if I say I must build a world that works for everyone before I die, that I’ll go to hell if I don’t, then not only will I not be happy, I’m addicted, deep in pain, fearful, frustrated and constantly angry.
Happiness comes from the inside out, it might be greater or lesser if my intentions are achieved, but it is not dependent on achieving them. Happiness arises from a choice to live from the place of connection with Source, not from accomplishing things.
Besides, intentions are not goals with a fixed, measurable aspect. Intentions can make me happy, are alive and well, as long as I’m alive and well. Intentions emanate from Source, not ego. As long as I stay centered in Source and open to It and build intentions from Source like - living in such a way that builds a world that works for everyone and everything, including myself - then my intentions are intentions, not addictions, they are alive and well and I can be happy. But if I say I must build a world that works for everyone before I die, that I’ll go to hell if I don’t, then not only will I not be happy, I’m addicted, deep in pain, fearful, frustrated and constantly angry.
Friday, November 5, 2010
American Elections
I know in my head, that if I feel I ‘have to’ do something or ‘must do’ something I’m with ego and addicted. After all, this is what I’ve been blogging about recently. Well, I’m with ego and addicted ‘cause I feel like I ‘must’ talk about the recent elections. I’m trying to stay centered in Source and have faith that all of what seems so ‘evil’ and ‘wrong’ to me is going someplace ‘good;’ and I’m having a lot of success with that. I’m not as mad as often. But when I read the paper, watch or listen to the so-called ‘news,’ I let myself rush into anger, fear and victim-hood.
So part of my healing and moving on is writing this. One of the things that I allow to get me most is this talk, mostly from the Republicans about ‘the American people.’ This bothers me on two levels: the factual and the process. Factual first [the following numbers are approximations, not meant to be exact or precise, but rather to give a ‘feel’ for the actual numbers]. The facts are that of those eligible to vote, perhaps 200 million in a population of 330 million, only approximately 100 million registered to vote. Of those, only 40 odd percent actually voted, say 40 million people, and of those, slightly more than half, say 20 million people, in only slightly more than half of the Congressional districts, 220 to 193, contributed to the so-called Republican ‘tsunami’ and ‘landslide,’ and ‘mandate.’
Do those numbers warrant being called, the ‘American people?’ The fact seems to be that the ‘American people’ sat out this election and want nothing to do with voting or our so-called ‘democracy’ as presently constituted. We have 20 million people that voted Republican, winning slightly more than half of the Congressional districts they voted in.
Hardly the American people, a mandate, tsunami [don’t you love how that word is so pop now?] or landslide. Yet, inaccurate as those words are, that’s all we hear in the ‘lame street media.’
Which brings me to the second source of the aggravation I allow myself to feel: the media. It feels very hypocritical to find myself criticizing the media and the Supreme Court, as I’m old enough to remember that it was the Goldwater Conservatives and the western/southern branch of the Republican Party during the sixties and early seventies that specialized in this lament, tho Sarah Palin and her friends also use it when it suits them. Its kind of ironic and humorous, but I guess turn around is fair play.
Why do the ‘facts’ that I sited above, go unreported? Worse, why, not only are the facts not reported, but deliberately ignored and misrepresented? There’s always been a tendency to do this. Think about how the media led us frothing at the mouth for victory and righteous, truth, justice and the American way into the disaster of Iraq. But it seems much worse and much grosser, with much more serious consequences, now. Who decides what constitutes the so-called ‘news?’ And who decides what language to use to describe it? I blogged about this awhile back, but I guess I didn’t get it out of my system yet.
So, when I hear from the media that the ‘American people’ have spoken and the Republicans have a clear mandate, I allow myself to get very pissed. I know I’m with ego and addicted, but in spite of that, I really don’t see why we can’t get the facts more often, and less of whatever it is we get that passes for facts and news. Clearly, we do get some facts, otherwise where would I have gotten the numbers I used, but more facts and less spin would be healthier and contribute more to a world that works for everyone and everything.
So part of my healing and moving on is writing this. One of the things that I allow to get me most is this talk, mostly from the Republicans about ‘the American people.’ This bothers me on two levels: the factual and the process. Factual first [the following numbers are approximations, not meant to be exact or precise, but rather to give a ‘feel’ for the actual numbers]. The facts are that of those eligible to vote, perhaps 200 million in a population of 330 million, only approximately 100 million registered to vote. Of those, only 40 odd percent actually voted, say 40 million people, and of those, slightly more than half, say 20 million people, in only slightly more than half of the Congressional districts, 220 to 193, contributed to the so-called Republican ‘tsunami’ and ‘landslide,’ and ‘mandate.’
Do those numbers warrant being called, the ‘American people?’ The fact seems to be that the ‘American people’ sat out this election and want nothing to do with voting or our so-called ‘democracy’ as presently constituted. We have 20 million people that voted Republican, winning slightly more than half of the Congressional districts they voted in.
Hardly the American people, a mandate, tsunami [don’t you love how that word is so pop now?] or landslide. Yet, inaccurate as those words are, that’s all we hear in the ‘lame street media.’
Which brings me to the second source of the aggravation I allow myself to feel: the media. It feels very hypocritical to find myself criticizing the media and the Supreme Court, as I’m old enough to remember that it was the Goldwater Conservatives and the western/southern branch of the Republican Party during the sixties and early seventies that specialized in this lament, tho Sarah Palin and her friends also use it when it suits them. Its kind of ironic and humorous, but I guess turn around is fair play.
Why do the ‘facts’ that I sited above, go unreported? Worse, why, not only are the facts not reported, but deliberately ignored and misrepresented? There’s always been a tendency to do this. Think about how the media led us frothing at the mouth for victory and righteous, truth, justice and the American way into the disaster of Iraq. But it seems much worse and much grosser, with much more serious consequences, now. Who decides what constitutes the so-called ‘news?’ And who decides what language to use to describe it? I blogged about this awhile back, but I guess I didn’t get it out of my system yet.
So, when I hear from the media that the ‘American people’ have spoken and the Republicans have a clear mandate, I allow myself to get very pissed. I know I’m with ego and addicted, but in spite of that, I really don’t see why we can’t get the facts more often, and less of whatever it is we get that passes for facts and news. Clearly, we do get some facts, otherwise where would I have gotten the numbers I used, but more facts and less spin would be healthier and contribute more to a world that works for everyone and everything.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Intentions 4
I’m not saying all the intentions we are in conflict with come from outside influences and authority figures. Most do, but a large number have been developed on our own and codified in the form of rules, ethical codes, standards and the like. Once appropriate and useful, conflict arises as we begin to see that these no longer serve. Looking at them is just as painful and time consuming as looking at the ‘outside’ influences. Tho claiming our loyalty and allegiance and are often what we think is best, most vital and worthwhile about us, the things we ‘stand for’ and are proudest of, these intentions can create our greatest problems and cause us to sacrifice parts of ourselves, relationships, compassion and love in the name of ‘principle.’
Such strongly held intentions are not really intentions, but addictions. If you would step over your grandmother for the President, as Charles Colson said and did, tho he is now born again, if you must do it because it’s the right thing to do and Jesus wants you to do it, its an addiction, not an intention. You’re being arrogant and putting words in God’s mouth. Source doesn’t work that way, ego does.
Addictions of heart and mind and soul, tho seemingly right and the best and brightest can have their roots deep in pain, suffering, anger and fear. Look at these and see if you can’t hold them more lightly and convert them to intentions. A lot of the pain, suffering, anger and fear that anchor addictions, keep us addicted and in denial that we are in fact addicted, come from things that once were intentions and are now frequently dark and in the dark, seemingly with ‘personalities’ of their own that don’t want to be disturbed or looked at. Carl Jung called these the “shadow,” the parts of ourselves – intentions, concepts, feelings, attitudes, beliefs and behaviors, we have suppressed, cut off and rejected.
Bringing this shadow into the light – thinking about it, clearly, without guilt or judgment, and reintegrating it – accepting it with compassion and gratitude, is how to best work with it and reclaim the energy that is both used to suppress it and inherent within it. This is work, but its spiritual work worth doing, with a big pay-off. So here’s another intention I’m setting: I bring my shadow into the light and reintegrate it on an ongoing basis as opportunities arise to do so.
Such strongly held intentions are not really intentions, but addictions. If you would step over your grandmother for the President, as Charles Colson said and did, tho he is now born again, if you must do it because it’s the right thing to do and Jesus wants you to do it, its an addiction, not an intention. You’re being arrogant and putting words in God’s mouth. Source doesn’t work that way, ego does.
Addictions of heart and mind and soul, tho seemingly right and the best and brightest can have their roots deep in pain, suffering, anger and fear. Look at these and see if you can’t hold them more lightly and convert them to intentions. A lot of the pain, suffering, anger and fear that anchor addictions, keep us addicted and in denial that we are in fact addicted, come from things that once were intentions and are now frequently dark and in the dark, seemingly with ‘personalities’ of their own that don’t want to be disturbed or looked at. Carl Jung called these the “shadow,” the parts of ourselves – intentions, concepts, feelings, attitudes, beliefs and behaviors, we have suppressed, cut off and rejected.
Bringing this shadow into the light – thinking about it, clearly, without guilt or judgment, and reintegrating it – accepting it with compassion and gratitude, is how to best work with it and reclaim the energy that is both used to suppress it and inherent within it. This is work, but its spiritual work worth doing, with a big pay-off. So here’s another intention I’m setting: I bring my shadow into the light and reintegrate it on an ongoing basis as opportunities arise to do so.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Intentions 3
Even if there is something that has to be done right now, this minute, or in a very short time, it’s still possible to pause a second, take a very deep breath and reconnect with Source and know we are one with It, It is one with us, and It is also one with whatever we must do. The Source is in all, thru all, and one with all, so taking a second to reconnect with It allows us and what we ‘must’ do to reflect that oneness.
As Joseph Campbell said, there may still be pain, but “pain is part of there being a world at all.” Feeling the pain and knowing where it fits, knowing it is not a punishment, judgment or indication of failure, but a natural, inescapable part of living, allows me to choose to still go forward and do the best I can.
That’s an intention, too – doing the best I can, no matter what, and so is getting my bloated nothingness out of the way of the divine circuits, and so is knowing I’m a spiritual being having an earthly experience, as well as living my life in such a way so as to contribute to a world that works for everyone and everything. I think these are God’s intentions, too, not only for me, but for all life forms and the planet as well.
Yet God works in mysterious ways, at least to me, and on a scale that includes life on earth, but way beyond our abilities to understand. Life and God are the great Mysteries. I believe the intentions I listed are manifesting, but at a pace and in ways, I can’t fully comprehend. That’s what faith is about.
Remember that old story about a five year old talking with God. The kid says, “What’s time like for you, God?” God says, “A second to me is like a ten thousand years for you.” The kid says, “What’s money like for you, God?” God says, “A penny to me is like a million dollars for you.” The kid smiles and says, “Can I have a penny, God?” God says, “In a second.”
Joseph Campbell quotes Heraclitus, the great Greek philosopher, as saying that for God all things are good and right and just, but for humanity some things are right and others are not. In God’s view, good and evil are simply temporal aberrations without differences. God is the transcendent in all of Life, always present, always available, always blessing. When we pause to connect we partake of It, experience communion with It.
One of the most transcendent things we can do and an excellent way to connect and what Campbell calls “one of the greatest challenges of life is to say ‘yea’ to that person or act or that condition which in your mind is most abominable.” Something to shoot for, a new intention to set – I am willing to say ‘yea’ to that person, act or condition I find most abominable. Yech! Talk about approach/avoidance and being careful what you ask for.
As Joseph Campbell said, there may still be pain, but “pain is part of there being a world at all.” Feeling the pain and knowing where it fits, knowing it is not a punishment, judgment or indication of failure, but a natural, inescapable part of living, allows me to choose to still go forward and do the best I can.
That’s an intention, too – doing the best I can, no matter what, and so is getting my bloated nothingness out of the way of the divine circuits, and so is knowing I’m a spiritual being having an earthly experience, as well as living my life in such a way so as to contribute to a world that works for everyone and everything. I think these are God’s intentions, too, not only for me, but for all life forms and the planet as well.
Yet God works in mysterious ways, at least to me, and on a scale that includes life on earth, but way beyond our abilities to understand. Life and God are the great Mysteries. I believe the intentions I listed are manifesting, but at a pace and in ways, I can’t fully comprehend. That’s what faith is about.
Remember that old story about a five year old talking with God. The kid says, “What’s time like for you, God?” God says, “A second to me is like a ten thousand years for you.” The kid says, “What’s money like for you, God?” God says, “A penny to me is like a million dollars for you.” The kid smiles and says, “Can I have a penny, God?” God says, “In a second.”
Joseph Campbell quotes Heraclitus, the great Greek philosopher, as saying that for God all things are good and right and just, but for humanity some things are right and others are not. In God’s view, good and evil are simply temporal aberrations without differences. God is the transcendent in all of Life, always present, always available, always blessing. When we pause to connect we partake of It, experience communion with It.
One of the most transcendent things we can do and an excellent way to connect and what Campbell calls “one of the greatest challenges of life is to say ‘yea’ to that person or act or that condition which in your mind is most abominable.” Something to shoot for, a new intention to set – I am willing to say ‘yea’ to that person, act or condition I find most abominable. Yech! Talk about approach/avoidance and being careful what you ask for.
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Intentions 2
Having an intention is a way to combine having a goal and not having a goal. An intention is more open, wider and spacious, less narrow and specific and time-bound, more preferential. My intention is to live in a such a way that my life contributes to a world that works for everyone.
We hear two things about intentions: the road to hell is paved with good intentions and, your good intentions are not enough. The second idea antidotes the first. If I have only good intentions and do not act in accord with them, I’m on the road to hell. The intention is merely a framework that I honor with my thoughts, feelings and behavior. Intentions allow me to be gentle with myself and others, more forgiving. If whatever I intended doesn’t get done this minute, no sweat. There will be another minute, and another after that. With intentions I can come from a centered, spiritually connected place, realizing my identity doesn’t depend on what I accomplish, when.
Intentions create less stress and encourage a longer time frame, a greater more compassionate and inclusive vision allowing me and others to bring their full attributes, skills and talents to bear. With preferences, perfection is a process, not a result, and failure is not an option because failure only happens when I say I’ve failed and give up. Preferences enable me to see that there are more ways to skin a cat than I may be aware of in a given moment, and that if I stop, take a break or pause, without judging myself and others a ‘failure,’ new and better ways to proceed will be revealed.
Intentions are life scale, about the purpose and meaning of my entire life, not about what I’m going to do this weekend or with this job or relationship. When I look at this weekend, job or relationship in the context of my intentions, my life’s purpose and meaning, deciding and choosing are richer, more enjoyable, and more effective. Intentions put me in charge, make me responsible and enable me to stop being a victim. They are MY intentions, I set them and I can change them.
Trouble with intentions comes when they’re not mine, when they’re somebody else’s; when I’ve adopted them unconsciously and uncritically and my actual life experience conflicts with them. My parents, church, ethnic group, political party, work organization all have intentions for me. If they’re in line with my own, what life has taught me, and what I’ve come to understand of spirit, metaphysics and reality, all well and good. If other people’s intentions that I’ve internalized are out of alignment with my own deepest intentions and preferences, I experience conflict. To the extent that this conflict remains unconscious and I fail to take responsibility for it, I blame, become angry and hurt myself and others. But if I find myself blaming, being angry and hurting myself and others, take responsibility for that and look inward, I may be able to resolve the conflict.
Where are your own intentions and preferences in conflict with those of your parents, church, ethnic group, political party, and work organization? What can you do to resolve the conflict, and if you’re angry, blaming and hurting yourself and others, what would happen if you paused, took a moment and realized how nice it would be to stop doing that and experience that life does not have to be that way?
We hear two things about intentions: the road to hell is paved with good intentions and, your good intentions are not enough. The second idea antidotes the first. If I have only good intentions and do not act in accord with them, I’m on the road to hell. The intention is merely a framework that I honor with my thoughts, feelings and behavior. Intentions allow me to be gentle with myself and others, more forgiving. If whatever I intended doesn’t get done this minute, no sweat. There will be another minute, and another after that. With intentions I can come from a centered, spiritually connected place, realizing my identity doesn’t depend on what I accomplish, when.
Intentions create less stress and encourage a longer time frame, a greater more compassionate and inclusive vision allowing me and others to bring their full attributes, skills and talents to bear. With preferences, perfection is a process, not a result, and failure is not an option because failure only happens when I say I’ve failed and give up. Preferences enable me to see that there are more ways to skin a cat than I may be aware of in a given moment, and that if I stop, take a break or pause, without judging myself and others a ‘failure,’ new and better ways to proceed will be revealed.
Intentions are life scale, about the purpose and meaning of my entire life, not about what I’m going to do this weekend or with this job or relationship. When I look at this weekend, job or relationship in the context of my intentions, my life’s purpose and meaning, deciding and choosing are richer, more enjoyable, and more effective. Intentions put me in charge, make me responsible and enable me to stop being a victim. They are MY intentions, I set them and I can change them.
Trouble with intentions comes when they’re not mine, when they’re somebody else’s; when I’ve adopted them unconsciously and uncritically and my actual life experience conflicts with them. My parents, church, ethnic group, political party, work organization all have intentions for me. If they’re in line with my own, what life has taught me, and what I’ve come to understand of spirit, metaphysics and reality, all well and good. If other people’s intentions that I’ve internalized are out of alignment with my own deepest intentions and preferences, I experience conflict. To the extent that this conflict remains unconscious and I fail to take responsibility for it, I blame, become angry and hurt myself and others. But if I find myself blaming, being angry and hurting myself and others, take responsibility for that and look inward, I may be able to resolve the conflict.
Where are your own intentions and preferences in conflict with those of your parents, church, ethnic group, political party, and work organization? What can you do to resolve the conflict, and if you’re angry, blaming and hurting yourself and others, what would happen if you paused, took a moment and realized how nice it would be to stop doing that and experience that life does not have to be that way?
Monday, November 1, 2010
Intentions
Yesterday, as I have before, I posted about wanting to build a world that works for everyone. I mean this to be understood as a way of being, of living as an individual and member of a society, community, nation and planet, so that I do as little harm or evil as possible and as much good as possible. Living this way is an ideal which I very much want to actualize. It gives me hope and purpose and a sense of optimism. But when it seems things are not changing and we’re not building a world that works for everyone, but are in fact going in the opposite direction and building a world that works for the few and the wealthy, I get very sad, deeply disappointed, depressed and angry.
Joseph Campbell is optimistic about the world. “It’s great just the way it is,” he says. “And you are not gong to fix it up. Nobody has ever made it any better. It is never going to be any better. This is it, so take it or leave it. You are not going to correct and improve it.”
Wow! So doesn’t that lead to a passive attitude in the face of evil?
“You yourself are participating in evil,” he says. “Or you are not alive. Whatever you do is evil for somebody or something. This is one of the ironies of the whole creation.”
And what of the conflict between good and evil, the forces of darkness and of light?
“That is a Zorostrian idea, which has come over into Judaism and Christianity. In other traditions, good and evil are relative to the position in which you are standing. What is good for one, is evil for another. You play your part, not withdrawing from the world when you realize how horrible it is, but seeing that this horror is simply the foreground of a wonder, a mystery. All life is sorrowful is the first Buddhist saying, and so it is. It wouldn’t be life if there were not temporality involved, which is sorrow – loss, loss, loss. You’ve got to say yes to life and see it as magnificent this way.”
Yet it is “joyful just as it is, too. I don’t believe there was anybody such as God who intended it, but this is the way it is. James Joyce has a memorable line: ‘History is a nightmare from which I am trying to awake.’ To awake is not to be afraid, but to recognize that all of this, as it is, is a manifestation of the horrendous [neutral] power [neither good nor evil] that is all creation.”
So, you wouldn’t fight any battles or strive for any ideals? Isn’t that the logical conclusion from accepting everything as it is?
Yes, it’s logical “but not the necessary conclusion. You could say, ‘I will participate in this life, I will join the army” or the peace corps. I will do the best I can. “I will participate in the game. It is a wonderful, wonderful opera – except that it hurts. Affirmation is difficult. We always affirm with conditions. I affirm the world on condition that it gets to be the way my ideals want it to be. But affirming it the way it is – that’s the hard thing.”
Rituals help us with that. “Rituals are group participation in the most hideous act, which is the act of life – namely, killing and eating another living thing. We do it together, and this is the way life is. The hero is the one who comes to participate in life courageously and decently, in the way of nature, not the way of personal rancor, disappointment, or revenge.”
So wanting to build a world that works for everyone is a hero’s journey, fraught with disappointment and joy.
Joseph Campbell is optimistic about the world. “It’s great just the way it is,” he says. “And you are not gong to fix it up. Nobody has ever made it any better. It is never going to be any better. This is it, so take it or leave it. You are not going to correct and improve it.”
Wow! So doesn’t that lead to a passive attitude in the face of evil?
“You yourself are participating in evil,” he says. “Or you are not alive. Whatever you do is evil for somebody or something. This is one of the ironies of the whole creation.”
And what of the conflict between good and evil, the forces of darkness and of light?
“That is a Zorostrian idea, which has come over into Judaism and Christianity. In other traditions, good and evil are relative to the position in which you are standing. What is good for one, is evil for another. You play your part, not withdrawing from the world when you realize how horrible it is, but seeing that this horror is simply the foreground of a wonder, a mystery. All life is sorrowful is the first Buddhist saying, and so it is. It wouldn’t be life if there were not temporality involved, which is sorrow – loss, loss, loss. You’ve got to say yes to life and see it as magnificent this way.”
Yet it is “joyful just as it is, too. I don’t believe there was anybody such as God who intended it, but this is the way it is. James Joyce has a memorable line: ‘History is a nightmare from which I am trying to awake.’ To awake is not to be afraid, but to recognize that all of this, as it is, is a manifestation of the horrendous [neutral] power [neither good nor evil] that is all creation.”
So, you wouldn’t fight any battles or strive for any ideals? Isn’t that the logical conclusion from accepting everything as it is?
Yes, it’s logical “but not the necessary conclusion. You could say, ‘I will participate in this life, I will join the army” or the peace corps. I will do the best I can. “I will participate in the game. It is a wonderful, wonderful opera – except that it hurts. Affirmation is difficult. We always affirm with conditions. I affirm the world on condition that it gets to be the way my ideals want it to be. But affirming it the way it is – that’s the hard thing.”
Rituals help us with that. “Rituals are group participation in the most hideous act, which is the act of life – namely, killing and eating another living thing. We do it together, and this is the way life is. The hero is the one who comes to participate in life courageously and decently, in the way of nature, not the way of personal rancor, disappointment, or revenge.”
So wanting to build a world that works for everyone is a hero’s journey, fraught with disappointment and joy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)