Skip to main content

Thrive

Someone told me last month, thirty-five thousand miles above the ground, that life is about more than survival. We are meant to thrive. He said this, I think, because many of us find it much more comfortable to live life complacently, and even aimlessly. We'd rather be invisible to others and not face the specter of failure because doing so would prove we are a disappointment.

This leads inevitably to a life marked more by survival than passion. We can't think much about living in unreserved boldness as we pursue our dreams-- if we have them-- because we are thinking instead of how to glean what we can from what we feel life has handed to us. It is this attitude, this passiveness about life that leaves us thinking ourselves fortunate that we are not worse off.

Even more, our dreams say something about us. Henry David Thoreau wrote that "dreams are the touchstone of our character." What we hope for most expresses the things we value, and the things we value often guide our behavior. It is easy, then, to question your dreams, and as a result, we pit the acting out of those dreams against remaining true to conventional wisdom.

I do believe it is necessary to consider why you would pursue a dream, and more specifically, if realizing that dream has a cost too high especially for those you love. I am also persuaded, though, that sitting idly out of fear while you allow opportunities to pass leads often to regret. Wisdom should always be the arbiter of dreams, as wisdom is the arbiter of so much else in life; and wisdom, the Scriptures say, is guided by a purity found only through righteousness: "[W]isdom that comes from the Father," says James, "is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere." I want my dreams, like my actions, to say something sweet about my character.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Persuasion

At different points in history, governments have devoted men, women, and resources to try to persuade others to their side. One significant example of this occurred in Germany under Adolf Hitler. Hitler knew how important it was to make sure the German people were on his side as leader of the country. One way he did this was by controlling what people heard. Specifically, near the beginning of World War II, Hitler made it a crime for anyone in Germany to listen to foreign radio broadcasts. These were called the “extraordinary radio measures.” He did this to ensure that Germans weren’t being persuaded by enemy countries to question their loyalty to Hitler. He knew that a German listening to a radio broadcast from Britain might persuade that German to believe that Great Britain was the good guy and Hitler the bad guy. This was so important, in fact, that two people in Germany were actually executed because they had either listened to or planned to listen to a foreign radio broadcast (one...

Comparison

Psychologists and others have studied ways in which we compare ourselves to each other. One man named Leon Festinger argued that we tend to compare ourselves to other people when we don’t know how good or bad we are at something (like football or playing the guitar). One way we do this is when we compare ourselves to those who are not as good as we are, to protect our self-esteem (called “downward social comparison;” example: we’re playing basketball and miss most of our shots, but we feel okay because a teammate wasn’t even given the ball). Another comparison we make is when we compare ourselves to others who are doing much better than we are (called “upward social comparison”). When we see others who appear to be doing better than we are, we can respond by trying to improve ourselves, or by trying to protect ourselves by telling ourselves it’s not that important. There was a study published in 1953 by Solomon Asch, who asked students to take part in a “vision test.” The par...

Learning and Change

In a recent article in National Geographic ( "Why Do Many Reasonable People Doubt Science "), Joel Achenbach attempted to explain why humans have trouble believing the evidence laid out in scientific research. In the article, he cited a phenomenon called confirmation bias , our tendency to adopt the evidence that fits what we already believe. Now, I am a feeling person by nature. Subconsciously, I make choices in my environment based on my emotional reaction to it. Similarly, I have found that the information I remember most is the information I respond to with strong emotion, whether that emotion is humor, anger, shock, or something else. This is why I believe confirmation bias exists: we respond to facts emotionally. However, sometimes we learn information that, instead of confirming what we believe, has the opposite effect. We are introduced to facts that shock us out of our complacency. That shock can jar us into questioning long-held beliefs, and even entire worldviews...