Re: Here's the problem with that Joe...

Gordon --

> that many of the Internet "gurus"
> DON'T have children, don't have to be
> concerned with nothing but their businesses.

Same with the majority of people involved in one of my hobbies. I noticed this early on and purposed not to end up like many of those I had seen.

> Nothing wrong with that, but it is a
> definite advantage time-wise over family
> people.

Agreed. It can also be a situation that prevents them from being as well rounded as they could be. I find this to be a problem with self-employement in general. You can become isolated and get tunnel vision. I didn't realize this till I entered the work force after being self-employed for many years. Now I'm back to self-employed and more aware of the issue.

> I could name 10 guys off the top of my head
> who don't have children or wives. On the
> other hand, some gurus have had 5 or more
> wives...whatever.

Okay here's a thought I've had for a while but it's not really related to what you wrote but it "popped-in" when I read your paragraph. In the work world there is a dearth of people who have any real experience "managing" - people, projects, money, etc. Now this could be related to the lack of responsibility many people take in their own lives. But - I think the dissolving of the family unit (Grandparents - Parents - Children all in close proximity) can be a factor. Children have a way of teaching many of these lessons. Today it seems many people want to succeed first then have the family. I think the other way around might be better "training". Of course I might be biased a bit on that point...

> As you know I've "preached"
> balance within the five areas I identify as
> the paths of life. Your trip to the square

Yes. Gordon - I think SQ1 has a lot of value in actually *showing* the balance. And the simple word -- paths -- was a big leap in thinking. At least for me. To see 5 paths and how they entertwined was useful. And I thank you for sharing the SQ1 with us. As you know I've spent a lot of "thought time" on these topics in many of the same areas. But your diagrams brought many things together.

> Dan I agree with you. There are these inner
> pockets of talent that aren't really
> goals...and some people become so goal
> oriented, they neglect the gardens of their
> lives.

I like that phrase "gardens of their lives" - we spend years cultivating them. They become so complete they spill into every area of your life. But they aren't a "stream of income". Yet without them the "streams" just aren't as enjoyable to travel down.

> With kids, you never know what is going to
> come up and wreck all those neatly written

Wreck -- or make the neatly written plans seem just a whole lot less important for a bit.

> day planners. And that is OK, I prefer it
> too. I like to think in years, building in a
> little "drift" of time.

Interesting - I like "drift of time"...

> "stage" names too, it is a subject
> Dan, is how we respond to the name we have
> given ourselves. As a Gordon, I react

An interesting study on names and how we respond. In the Bible notice the names, their meanings, and how the lives play out. Or how they play out after the name is changed.

But yes the name can have a big influence - both on others and on yourself. Most don't think about how things affect themselves. As I said, in my case putting that stage name on finally allowed me out a "RUT" that I had. This life I had created since I was seven years old. The name allowed me to step into and out of the "character" as needed. Prior to that I couldn't leave it.

> Well, I'm thinking of magic this way: making
> the cosmos bend to your will, to surrender
> control to your positively held
> visions...yes, being tuned is a big part of
> it, ordering God to increase your territory
> through prayer is bit magical.

Okay. That's what I thought you meant. And I would fall away from the magical as well. Parts are there and I believe there can be "illusion" as well. That things are happening your way.

-- Dan Butler


Stocking to stuff? Start here...