What makes you think that doing more is better? Is it an intuitive knowing that more is better or rather the bigger the better?
In some ways, the less is more narrative is just another perspective that challenges our default settings. We're culturally programmed to equate quantity with quality, which means believing that more effort inevitably yields better results.
Underdogs are hailed for their tenacity and grit, for achieving against the odds with limited resources and time.
Meanwhile, the top dog is often scrutinized for having too many advantages, making their success seem inevitable rather than earned.
I think the former—the underdog mentality—carries a wisdom we often overlook, and a sense of urgency or a lack thereof is one of the defining factors that separates those who accomplish their goals from those who merely dream about them.
Nowadays, there are many supportive causes to operate from a sense of urgency, in that our world seems to demand immediate action on multiple fronts simultaneously.
Some of them are:
I wonder what would run through the mind of Gandhi if he happened to spend a whole day watching news just from a TV without logging in to social media.
How would his philosophy of patient resistance stand against our culture of immediacy?
From that angle, the state of the world is both better and worse than ever before, even when we acknowledged that what's on the news doesn't necessarily represent the whole picture and mostly amplifies the extremes and emergencies that generate viewership.
The good part on living in a fast-paced world is you at least have the option to fail fast, and perhaps also, shrink the number of attempts it'll take to achieve a realistic desired outcome.
Potentially allowing for greater growth in less time through learning into shorter timeframes and accelerated compressed experiences. Doesn't one year in crypto(digital space) feel like seven years in the real world?
In practice however, the reality is a bit different. At least for me, I still have this firmly rooted idea at the back of my mind that I ought to be moving in the opposite direction the world is heading. Don't know why. Remnant of early childhood rebellion, perhaps.
But there's something to be said for deliberate slowness in an age of haste.
The wisdom I imagine in pausing to question whether the destination is worth reaching in the first place when everyone rushes forward is basic contrarian thinking coupled with a deeper reclamation of personal agency.
The skewed numbers we're fed about success rates often create an illusion of winning the game as the only focus point, when in reality, what matters more is playing the game and becoming better at it.
This brings me to a fundamental truth: inputs are controllable, outputs are not. We can control our efforts, our focus, our dedication, and a lot of other variables but results often depend on factors beyond our reach.
This truth gives birth to the realization that urgency could be directed not toward outcomes but toward mastery of the process.
Also, the irony doesn't escape me that I'm writing this reflection on urgency while taking my time to develop these thoughts.
Maybe that's a point, in that urgency could be selective, applied intentionally and not habitually.
Subjectively, matters of circumstances that are within our control deserve our immediate attention, while those that aren't could benefit from the slow marination of experience over time.
Thanks for reading!! Share your thoughts below on the comments.
