"If I 'think' about a problem but limit my thoughts to certain dimensions - then i am not thinking at all, because thinking implies that one at least tries to take all relevant factors into consideration, and as there's usually no way to tell which factors are and which are not relevant restricted thought is not 'thinking' and so 'thinking outside the box' is simply a euphemism for 'let's start to think', but the metaphor implies a hidden desire to return to conformity immediately."
-- Martinus Hendrikus Benders
We spend so much of our lives looking for the right fit or trying to fit in. Think about those words, "trying to fit in." It's like trying to put the square peg in the round hole. I keep going back to Master Yoda:
"Do or do not. There is no try."
But, you might rightly state, we all know that a square peg does not fit in the round hole, so trying is not an option; it is what it is, right?. Really? And what of Star Trek's "Kobayashi Maru" scenario?
Kirk: I reprogrammed the simulation so it was possible to rescue the ship.
Saavik: What?
David Marcus: He cheated.
Kirk: I changed the conditions of the test; got a commendation for original thinking. I don't like to lose.
Saavik: Then you never faced that situation... faced death.
Kirk: I don't believe in the no-win scenario.
-- Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
A square peg in a round hole? Trying is always an option. Make the hole bigger, and use a lot of putty to fill in around the peg. Make the round hole square or make the square peg round. Carpenters do it all the time. Learn to adapt and overcome in the face of, seemingly, insurmountable odds. try to think of your life as a stonemason building a wall. The mason places all the stones on the grass so he can pick an approximate fit for each spot as he constructs the wall. Is each stone perfect? No, and he gets around that problem with the mortar he uses to hold each stone in place; he fills in the gaps.
Do you need to be the perfect fit for a group you'd like to join? Why? Maybe your differences are exactly what that group has been missing. You could provide the mortar that brings it all together. Sometimes the perfect fit isn't right in front of you; not inside your box, so to speak. Sometimes you have to go into your mind and convince yourself to look outside of the box for a better solution.
Is it cheating? If you cheat on a test and the answer is wrong, it isn't cheating unless somebody catches you being a dumbass using bad answers, in which case you should be reprimanded for being stupid, not for cheating. But, the answer doesn't always have to be the accepted answer. Personally, I think Kirk cheated by changing the conditions of the test, but his point was that there is no such thing for him as a no-win scenario. He rightly got a commendation for original thinking. Is enlarging the round hole to fit the peg cheating? Yes, but it shows the ability for original thought, and a never-say-die mentality. Cheating should never be a "go to" solution for every problem but when it comes to life or death, is it really wrong to consider?
We all remember the scientific community's refrain, "There is no other intelligent life in the universe." It would certainly seem to evidence no intelligence from any scientific mind making any definitive statement. Science is all about repetitive outcomes to prove a hypothesis, yet the fact that definitive statements seem to always get proven wrong seems to escape them as a repetitive outcome. "As of this moment we have no proof of any other intelligent life in the universe," would be a more acceptable and intelligent statement as it leaves the door open to possibilities, and there are always possibilities.
My favorite discussion is the "I've quit smoking," statement. If you have stopped smoking, you have not yet quit. The only time anyone will be able to definitively say you quit smoking, is after they die having never smoked again. Until that time, there is always a possibility you will smoke again.
Very little is definitive in God's marvelous universe where change is the only constant.
Never be definitive; leave your life open to possibilities. I challenge you to go into the world wanting everyone to see you not as the round peg in the round hole. Instead of being a peg trying to fit into a particular shape, how about we be content simply being the peg we are. Go out there and let people see your differences and, in those differences, see you for all the possibilities you bring to the table. In this, then, there is no "try" involved. Do it, or do not, the choice is always yours.
Dare to be the square peg; to hell with the hole.
Before you go getting your panties in a bunch, it is essential to understand that this is just an opinion site and, as such, can be subjected to scrutiny by anyone with a differing opinion. It doesn't make either opinion any more right or wrong than the other. An opinion, presented in this context, is a way of inciting others to think and, hopefully, to form opinions of their own, if they haven't already done so. This is also why, occasionally, I will present an "opinion" just to stir an emotional pot. Where it may sound like I agree with the statements made, I'm more interested in getting others to consider an alternate viewpoint.
Is it cheating? If you cheat on a test and the answer is wrong, it isn't cheating unless somebody catches you being a dumbass using bad answers, in which case you should be reprimanded for being stupid, not for cheating. But, the answer doesn't always have to be the accepted answer. Personally, I think Kirk cheated by changing the conditions of the test, but his point was that there is no such thing for him as a no-win scenario. He rightly got a commendation for original thinking. Is enlarging the round hole to fit the peg cheating? Yes, but it shows the ability for original thought, and a never-say-die mentality. Cheating should never be a "go to" solution for every problem but when it comes to life or death, is it really wrong to consider?
We all remember the scientific community's refrain, "There is no other intelligent life in the universe." It would certainly seem to evidence no intelligence from any scientific mind making any definitive statement. Science is all about repetitive outcomes to prove a hypothesis, yet the fact that definitive statements seem to always get proven wrong seems to escape them as a repetitive outcome. "As of this moment we have no proof of any other intelligent life in the universe," would be a more acceptable and intelligent statement as it leaves the door open to possibilities, and there are always possibilities.
My favorite discussion is the "I've quit smoking," statement. If you have stopped smoking, you have not yet quit. The only time anyone will be able to definitively say you quit smoking, is after they die having never smoked again. Until that time, there is always a possibility you will smoke again.
Very little is definitive in God's marvelous universe where change is the only constant.
Never be definitive; leave your life open to possibilities. I challenge you to go into the world wanting everyone to see you not as the round peg in the round hole. Instead of being a peg trying to fit into a particular shape, how about we be content simply being the peg we are. Go out there and let people see your differences and, in those differences, see you for all the possibilities you bring to the table. In this, then, there is no "try" involved. Do it, or do not, the choice is always yours.
Dare to be the square peg; to hell with the hole.
Before you go getting your panties in a bunch, it is essential to understand that this is just an opinion site and, as such, can be subjected to scrutiny by anyone with a differing opinion. It doesn't make either opinion any more right or wrong than the other. An opinion, presented in this context, is a way of inciting others to think and, hopefully, to form opinions of their own, if they haven't already done so. This is also why, occasionally, I will present an "opinion" just to stir an emotional pot. Where it may sound like I agree with the statements made, I'm more interested in getting others to consider an alternate viewpoint.
It is my fervent hope that we keep open and active minds when reading opinions and while engaging in peaceful and constructive discussion, in an arena of mutual respect, concerning those opinions put forth. After over twenty years with military intelligence, I have come to believe engaging each other in this manner and in this arena is the way we will learn tolerance and respect for differing beliefs, cultures, and viewpoints.
We all fall from grace, some more often than others; it is part of being human. God's test for us is what we learn from the experience, and what we do afterward.
Pastor Tony spent 22 years with United States Air Force Intelligence as a planner, analyst, briefer, instructor, and senior manager. He spent 17 years, following his service career, working with the premier, world renowned, Institutional Review Board helping to protect the rights of human subjects involved in pharmaceutical research. Ordained 1n 2013 as an "interfaith" minister, he founded the Congregation for Religious Tolerance in response to intolerance shown by Christians toward peaceful Islam. As the weapon for his war on intolerance he chose the pen, and wages his "battle" in the guise of the Congregation's official online blog, The Path, of which he is both author and editor. "The Path" offers a vehicle for commentary and guidance concerning one's own personal, spiritual, path toward peace and the final destination for us all. He currently resides in Pass Christian, Mississippi, where he volunteers as lead Chaplain and Chaplain Program Liaison, at the regional medical center.
No comments:
Post a Comment
You may find it easier to choose "anonymous" when leaving a comment, then adding your contact info or name to the end of the comment.
Thank you for visiting "The Path" and I hope you will consider following the Congregation for Religious Tolerance while on your own path.