Amongst other things, Nic is a writer and director for theatre and film...
... so doesn't have a lot of time to update this site.
Abraham Maslow decided to study psychology the other way around.
He concerned himself with forming theories derived from the observation of 'exemplary people', rather than that of neurotic psyches, positing that study of 'a crippled .. specimen can yield only a cripple[d] psychology and a cripple[d] philosophy'.
Instead of trying to determine the pathology of people who had gone wrong, he studied the behaviours of people who had gone right. He called these people 'self-actualisers' and he outlined the traits that he noticed they shared.
Three of the most interesting, or at least the most memorable, were:
Which is to say they did not concern themselves overmuch with seeking approval from or avoiding the distain of others. That's not to say they didn't consider concrete, constructive criticism from respected peers but rather that they didn't modify or censor their behaviour based upon the opinion, real or imagined, of people in general. They weren't looking for acceptance or praise; they were motivated by something deeper.
These people seemed to lose themselves in the process of activity, rather than focusing upon its eventual outcome; be that outcome the completion of a task, or the reward that might result thereof.
Dan Pink has an interesting TED talk about motivation [18mins] which suggests that, for creative or cognitive problems, distracting people from the process by weighting their outcome with a reward is detrimental to their performance.
Alexander Technique offers a similar concept, that of 'end-gaining' which is to focus upon a goal to the extent that one loses sight of the means to achieve it more efficiently.
A simple idea. And more slippery than an otter with a baby oil fetish.
Wayne Dyer, a student of Maslow's, after studying similar figures added another trait which pertained to these people: 'They're pretty weird.'
Be weird. Do obscure things, seek occluded knowledge, try odd experiments in strange ways. No-one ever became interesting by travelling well-trodden paths. People redefine boundaries by testing them, poking holes in them and wandering around in the void just beyond the edge.
While you do this, though, people will call you weird, or crazy. This is probably an excellent indication that you are on the right path. If they're your peers, they'll mean it as a complement. If they're not, well, you have no need to concern yourself with their good opinion. It will just distract you from your process. Lose yourself in your process. Don't lose your bearing; even a ship in the middle of the Atlantic relies upon a compass; but remember that good things come from flow.
And talking of a compass, remember to invest nothing in power or control. Find a better compass.
But that's a discussion for another day.
