Phil Garland

I took some time off blogging. There were quite a few reasons I did this, mostly centered around the reason why I started blogging in the first place. My goal was to blog in order to get better at blogging. I think I achieved that. What I didn’t realize were all the hidden benefits that come from creating new content daily. From the beauty of creating something from thin air to the always questioning mindset to the random phrase, or thought, that I decide to turn into a blog post.

Another benefit of blogging is the power of creation. My hiatus from the blogosphere was supposed to give me time to focus on other projects. Books I wanted to write, websites I wanted to develop, sales funnels I was going to implement and a whole bunch of other ideas. Guess what! None of those were achieved. None were even really started.

Creation is very hard to cultivate when you’re not creating on a daily basis. For me, blogging was the little snowball that let my other plans grow into a bigger snowball. When I stopped a month and a half ago I thought it would make me more productive, not make me less productive.

So, I’m going to start blogging daily again. I can’t promise miracles, but I can promise posts everyday. And I have a new sense of direction this time around. There are a ton of ideas that have been waiting for my fingers to hit the keyboard and I’m opening the creative juices to unleash them here.

Phil’s back, tell a friend.

I started this blog with one goal: To become a better blogger. I feel like I have accomplished that. But now it’s time to take a new direction.

I have spent hundreds of hours toiling with the question “How to live free.” The past month or so I have come to a lot of realizations, one of them being; I don’t need to jam on this topic much more. I have said what I wanted to say, and feel like I have explored the topic living free enough. My latest interest is in futurism, tech, blockchain, AI/robots, where the world’s going, and how I can be apart of it.

So, I’m going to take everything I’ve learned from seven plus months of blogging, and the lessons I’ve taught myself throughout the journey, and start applying those principles to another topic of writing. For now, I won’t be blogging on here. I will either start publishing my posts on Medium or start blogging for another website, but that remains to be seen.

Farewell for now. I will be back.

Life hacks are all over the place. From productivity posts to biohacking, you can find thousands of posts on the internet telling you how to improve your life. On top of that, how many “10 Things Successful People…” posts have you seen on your newsfeed, on Medium or in everyday life. They are all around us, but life hacks aren’t better than living life.

Off Days Are Necessary

Maybe I’m just incapable of life hacking, but I find my greatest productivity comes after a couple of off days. Maybe it’s days off of blogging or maybe it’s letting my habit slide for a day or two. When I break my routine, I feel like I’m living, and when I get back into my routine, I feel rejuvenated.

I watch a lot of NBA. A couple of weeks ago, at the tail-end of an eight-game road trip, playing on a back-to-back, after losing a superstar (Kevin Durant), Steve Kerr decided to bench his four best remaining players (Green, Curry, Thompson, and Iguodala). Although the Warriors were going up against the San Antonio Spurs (probably the only team that’ll beat the Warriors in a best-of-seven this year) they still got their rest. After that game? The Warriors are on an eight-game winning streak.

Off days break you out of funks, but they also give you time to refocus your mind. The top players on the Warriors were carrying the weight of losing Durant all during the hardest stretch of their season. By shaking up their routine, and getting a game off, they came back with a new bounce in their step and a fresh mind.

For me, I don’t believe in “life hacking” all the time. Yes, I try to be as productive as possible and yes, I have a perfect day routine, but not every day has to be a perfect day. Sometimes the perfect days are the ones where you remember you’re living life, not racing in some productivity hacking marathon.

I was reminded of a really awesome quote today by James Altucher:

OVER PROMISE AND OVER DELIVER

Over-promise sets you apart from the people who under-promise. Over-deliver sets you apart from people who just delivered.

It’s not that hard to do both. (It’s easy to slightly over promise and slightly over deliver because nobody else is doing it).

Try it and you will see the results. it’s amazing.

I believe the over promise, over deliver mentality is the only thing you need to be successful. Too many people are taught the adage “Under promise, over deliver,” but that teaches you the wrong mentality. Under promising is similar to not taking risks (see yesterday’s post on risk-taking). If you don’t over promise then you’re not expanding your mindset, you’re merely locking yourself into something you know you’re capable of doing.

What I find exceptionally interesting about Altucher’s phrase to OVER PROMISE AND OVER DELIVER are the results that follow. So many people in the world take the “under promise” approach, that the few people who over promise actually make a profound impact.

Whether you’re trying to impress your boss, improve client relations, or help an employee get out of a jam, over promising and over delivering is the quickest way to create a connection. It immediately shows you’re a) willing to take go the extra step b) you’re committed to the person’s problems and c) you’re interested in a genuine/authentic relationship. All of those are fundamental to being successful at your job, and all of those are on full display when you have an over promise, over deliver mentality.

Pushback. When I receive pushback, I know I’m doing my job.

Pushback is a Sign of Risk-Taking

If I make a statement that a client doesn’t agree with or that ruffles feathers among my co-workers, that is when I know I’m going in the right direction. I’m not talking about making vulgar statements. Instead, I am talking about offering solutions that may not be the standard response. Usually, I will get pushback, but I know my capabilities in delivering. Every time I try to provide the best product or solution means I am stepping out of the known and into the unknown. But taking that risk means improving the quality of service provided to customers.

Pushback is Uncomfortable

Risk-taking is uncomfortable. It is doing something you don’t know what the outcome will be. Getting pushback for your decisions is also uncomfortable, nobody likes to be wrong. Feeling this will make you question if it is the best decision. A lot of times you can’t really know. Yes, it’s uncomfortable, but is it because of pushback or is it because I came up with a really bad solution. If it’s the latter then maybe I should go back to the drawing board.

But if it’s the former, I should probably move forward with the idea. Yes, pushback is hard. Pushback is uncomfortable. But not trying to improve somebody’s life because of a feeling things might go wrong isn’t worth it.

Not Stepping Out of Your Comfort Zone is Lazy

If you have a job where you can be lazy and/or cowardly without risk of losing your income, you should quit. It’s bad for you. – Isaac Morehouse

The Stoics like to do something called “negative visualization.” The idea is that you think of a perceived future where you lose everything, in this situation your job, over a decision and you find some form of solace if the potential outcome were to happen. For me, whenever I make a decision within my job, I also have to imagine the worst possible outcome. My question is “If I promise something to the client, what might happen to me?” Rarely, if ever, do I think it’ll end in me being fired, so I go on with my plan and take action. Maybe one day I’ll make a decision that means losing my job, but that means I’m not being lazy. Stepping out of your comfort zone, and taking risks, requires there to be at least some element of unknown.

Making these decisions, even if it were to mean losing my job, is required to offer a better product. I will continue to step out of my comfort zone and I will continue to experience pushback. Otherwise, I’m not doing my best.

This is a question I’ve had for a while. Refrigerators really haven’t changed much in decades. They might be able to do cool stuff, like shoot out ice cubes (usually onto the floor), but that’s not innovative. The coolant’s probably been innovated a little for health purposes. But a working refrigerator from the 1990’s is probably just as good as a working one today.

So, why haven’t refrigerators been innovated?

…I don’t know. Maybe one day I’ll have an answer. It’s definitely a question that pops into my head constantly.

The classic Stoics – Epictetus, Seneca, and Marcus Aurelius – established the Dichotomy of Control as a central pillar of Stoicism. Basically, they stated there are things within our power to control, and things we have no power to control. For example, we can control our self-beliefs and goals, and we have no control of if the sun rises. A lot of today’s Stoic followers break the dichotomy into a trichotomy. Instead of things we control and don’t control, there are things we control, there are things we don’t control, and there are things we somewhat control. Since I just gave examples of the Dichotomy of Control, I’m not going to go into any more detail on things we control and things we don’t. I’m going to focus on things we somewhat control.

Tennis as an Example

I’m currently reading A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy by William B Irvine. In his breakdown of the Trichotomy of Control, he uses tennis as an example and I think it’s fitting. In this sport, we don’t have control over winning or losing. According to our definition of the Dichotomy of Control, no Stoic would take on an activity outside of their control. But, by defining control with a trichotomy we can see why a Stoic would play tennis.

Although winning a tennis match is beyond a Stoic’s control, practice and excellence at tennis are within a person’s control. The thing we’re able to control is our goals for ourselves in how excellent we get at tennis, not the result.

If we set realistic expectations for ourselves, then winning or losing a tennis match doesn’t matter. What matters is reflecting on our ability to achieve our goal. If we determine we reached our goal then we have succeeded in controlling something within our control. If we did not reach our tennis goal then we did not achieve in controlling something within our control.

As you can see, the important part of doing stuff somewhat in our control is working towards things within our control and not worrying about external outcomes (like achieving our personal goals in tennis without being upset we lost to someone better).

Applying the Trichotomy to Success

Kylon Geinger, the renowned host of The Successful Dropout podcast, posted on Facebook “First, realize that ‘success’ is relative. It means different things to different people. But it almost always means you are building, creating, and working towards something that will make your life and the lives of others better.” I think this is extremely important when defining any word. We all have different meanings of what “success” is, but we can almost universally agree it means “building, creating, and working towards something.” With that definition in mind, we can break down what “success” means from a Stoic point of view.

Let’s say “success” to an individual means having a million dollars in her bank account. Now, netting a million dollars isn’t in her control nor is it out of her control. It falls into the somewhat in her control category. If she sets out to have a net profit of a million dollars and fails to achieve it she might consider herself a failure. However, if she sets goals for herself, like starting a new business venture every year, she’ll have complete control over that.

In 10 years, if she continues to pour hard work and determination into her business ventures, she’ll be achieving her goal. She can claim herself as successful. Starting 10 businesses in 10 years will probably result in becoming a millionaire, which would mean she’s achieved her “dream” of success, but that’s not the outcome she succeeded at achieving, nor the outcome she has complete control over.

Success is Excelling at What’s Controllable

Stoicism is about cutting out negative emotions. If we set goals for things outside of our control then there is always a chance for failure. If, however, we set goals within our control that we foresee will lead to the uncontrollable goal then we are putting ourselves in a situation to succeed. Even if we don’t reach the out-of-our-control goal we still will have achieved our controllable goal, and thus can consider ourselves successful.

Yesterday, I wrote a follow-up to my Monday post titled Why Are We Slow to Change When Better Options Exist? After going through examples of the English longbow, Netflix vs Blockbuster, and remote work, I came to the conclusion that we are slow to change because of fear. We’re fearful that validating change will lead to a future, not to our liking. But by not validating the better option, eventually, the inevitable becomes the future.

A major reason fear keeps us from changing is because our society wasn’t built on freedom. Yes, the United States may be “The land of the free,” but the U.S. has always been ruled by someone. Call it a democracy, but today’s government does not let “freedom ring.” Society makes fear-induced decisions because society isn’t free or freeing.

The Toltecs on Freedom and Fear

“When we talk about the Toltec path to freedom, we find that they have an entire map for breaking free of domestication. They compare the Judge, the Victim, and the belief system to a parasite that invades the human mind. From the Toltec point of view, all humans who are domesticated are sick. They are sick because there is a parasite that controls the mind and controls the brain. The food for the parasite is the negative emotions that come from fear.” – Don Miguel Ruiz, The Four Agreements

The Toltecs touch upon a few things that lead to a lack of freedom. Instead of calling it society, they call it domestication, and within domestication, there’s “the Judge, the Victim, and the belief system.” I equate these three categories as a superior figure (boss, employer), yourself, and society’s norms. By giving power to others, or not believing in your own power, you are giving into fear, thus giving up freedom.

Freedom for a Better Tomorrow

Changing the world for the better requires us to not make fear-induced decisions. In order to defeat fear, we must defend ourselves from society, our superiors, and self-doubt. Awareness to our fears leads to an ability to defeat domestication. And, as the Toltecs believe, freedom will result.

Yesterday I wrote a post titled Society Shapes Our Lives Even If There’s a Better Option. My post concluded with “It’ll be interesting to see if society implements better options or we stick to our norms.”

This post is dedicated to specific examples where society is slow to change even when better (and cheaper) options exist. From longbowmen in the 14th and 15th centuries to movie rental companies and remote workers, society is generally slow to change and a lot of it is fear-driven.

English Longbowmen – Why Not the Scots or French?

Yesterday, I read a scholarly article by Douglas W. Allen and Peter Leeson (the author of one of my favorite books The Invisible Hook: The Hidden Economics of Pirates) titled Resolving the Longbow Puzzle. In it, the authors explored why the Scots and French didn’t adopt the longbow that the English had been dominating wars with. To summarize, the kingdom using such a dominate, cheap weapon had to be governed by a strong ruler (like King Edward) for the adoption of the longbow to succeed.

The French and the Scots wouldn’t use longbows because giving their civilians cheap, superior weaponry might’ve turned into a revolt, ending the king’s power. Out of fear, these rulers continued attacking a superior foe with inferior weaponry. Change, in this case, was the better option, but fear kept them from making that decision. Eventually, the English took control over much of France and used their longbows to do what the French ruler was afraid would happen if his own citizens were given the “technology.”

Where’s Blockbuster Now?

In 2000, the founder of Netflix approached Blockbuster’s CEO with an offer of $50 million dollars to buy Netflix. Obviously, that didn’t happen, and the rest is history. But why didn’t Blockbuster jump at this opportunity?

For one, Blockbuster was built from having physical locations while Netflix was virtual (at that point in time shipping DVDs in the mail). To take on a company like Netflix, Blockbuster would’ve had to change their core competencies and cannibalize a piece of their industry. I believe that led them to fear of making the decision.

Much like the ruler of France, by giving this idea a chance, Blockbuster would see it’s customers revolt, putting Blockbuster’s brick-and-mortar business under. The fear-induced decision eventually led to Netflix becoming the behemoth of the movie rental industry, but Blockbuster had a chance first. A change could’ve been better, but fear kept it from happening.

Why Aren’t More Jobs Remote?

Another great article I read yesterday was The Real Reason You’re Not Allowed To Work From Home by Liz Ryan. The most staggering statistic was a prediction in 1984 “that most white-collar employees would be working from home and/or making their own schedule” by now. That definitely hasn’t come true, but why?

As Ryan states, “The real reason you’re not allowed to work from home is that managers at all levels are fearful of change and especially fearful of change that requires them to step out of their comfort zone.” Again, fear of change is the reason remote work hasn’t caught on. Managers don’t want to worry about trusting you, but they also don’t know how to trust you if they can’t look over your shoulder at all times.

This one isn’t history yet, but if we’ve learned anything from 15th Century France or Blockbuster, big companies should be looking over their shoulders. The gig economy, freelancers, and work-from-homers may lead a revolt on big business. Fear of change eventually leads to the better option.

Why Are We Slow to Change When Better Options Exist?

From these examples, the reason we’re slow to change is fear. We’re either afraid our power isn’t sufficient enough to rule, that giving life to a company will cannibalize ourselves, or we’re fearful of trusting others.

Changing, even when better options exist, isn’t easy. It’s also apparent that resisting change will eventually lead to defeat. We are slow to change because we are afraid of the inevitable, however, the inevitable is going to happen. In order to proactively make the better option, we must first let go of our fear of change.