myth's Belated DMSI 3.1 Journal

[myth]

It's all good man. I appreciate you taking the time to make sure you're understood. Forum communication is difficult in the best of times, so thanks.

Clear communication occasionally takes a little effort, and you're welcome. I'm not above confusing myself, sometimes.

True, however, I'm talking about addressing undermining behaviours or thoughts/beliefs.

For example, I have a tendency to be idealistic. It doesn't matter how much I learn, if there's a tiny chance I can believe in the disney fairytale (or, [insert belief here]) and it can work, I'll JUMP in, abandoning all reason and evidence to the contrary.

Not to sound insulting, but I'd agree that you seem to let unproven theory overwhelm reason, and I'd also say that you do seem to misread certain cause-and-effect relationships from time to time. I wouldn't necessarily call that "idealistic." Hasty, maybe.

Simply resetting that and giving me more proof idealism doesn't work won't fix it (I don't think it will at least), I believe I need to stop wanting it somehow. I don't know why I want it to work, but I do.

So I guess I'm saying we need to trace all our faulty beliefs, behaviors, etc to the root, and fix them by not just replacing them with works, but something that's more powerful in some way. I honestly don't know how, but I think that;s what needed.

I could be wrong, though.

Well, first of all, I wouldn't presume to have your answers. I barely know you.

Second, you don't seem to have your answers, so I get that you don't want to throw anything out that you think might help. But your aim sometimes seems like you're playing pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey with a hot stove in the room. I'm simply suggesting that it may be more important how and why you do things than who put them there.

Third, you can still succeed without ever having met your great-grandfather. Archaeology isn't always required.

Fourth, analysis/debugging of a faulty process is entirely different than taking a history class to find out how it evolved from primordial ooze into today's mess. Upgrading a good process definitely benefits from understanding how the original process worked... but a faulty process that doesn't work sometimes benefits more from a fresh set of eyes and a blank page than anything else.

And, in all cases, I'm not saying to ignore history completely -- just to avoid hopping in your time machine to see a historic ballgame and then deciding to stay there, trying to fight the entirety of WWII while you're there. That's just losing sight of your goal.

Lol, I think it's a good analogy. I agree with you tho. I think things may go deeper, but going deep may be the wrong choice too (for example: an elevator may work just fine, but because we are now focusing on each molecule in the elevator, inspecting them, and trying to fix them, we're "out of service" even though it would work just fine)

Who knows tho.

Yeah, well, for once, I agree with an adage -- if it ain't broke, don't fix it.