So about two months ago, on about my two-year anniversary with the company, I switched from "Software Engineer" to "Solution Architect" (aka "Biz Dev Engineer"). It means that I now go to a lot of meetings (frequently with clients), where people draw on my knowledge of how our things work, and build a few things on the side. Mostly marketing material.<p>It's a crazy different experience from actually writing the code, and some of what I've learned and noticed has to do with "just being yourself". Part of that learning process has definitely involved being placed in high-enough stress situations that I was put off internal balance: by gaining familiarity with <i>not</i> being myself, I got a better idea of where myself <i>was</i> and how to stay centered there.<p>The first realization was that I could label my activities as <i>reactive</i> or <i>proactive</i>. As a software engineer, basically all my time was <i>proactive</i>. Now, most of my time is <i>reactive</i>. But... the original phrase I used to describe the <i>reactive</i> activities, and the way I try to approach them, is "to go be myself at things". The desired outcome is secondary to the experimental juxtaposition.<p>Another way to put it is, I think: I (like everybody) am a unique snowflake. The <i>point</i> of including me on anything and of sending me hither and yon is to have <i>that</i> uniqueness present and available. Well, part of the point.<p>It seems to be working. I think (although it's a little early to tell) that I'm more successful at this job than the last. At the least, I'm happier. Your mileage may vary.<p>As a final note, when applied to personal growth, I think this attitude ends up something like this: Don't aim for results, aim for experiences. Your "higher-self" (whatever that means to you) can't just rewrite your "lower-self" (the thing you're being when you're being yourself), but the former can aim the latter at particular experiences. Go find out what it's like to be yourself at that thing, and you learn a little bit about who you are and who you are changes a little bit. It's an explorative act.
Tl;dr There is no try. Only Do.<p>Practical advice from
The way to approach this concept it to first understand your struggle. Beneath the need to struggle is a fear that the world is an unfriendly place and you are not supported. This view arises from the mind rather from the way, which teaches that the flow, the ever present essence of life, is the way. You can trust that the way will lead you. In truth, the mind-made view of the world, where struggle is necessary, is merely illusion. No matter how real it might appear. Wu Wei is the way.<p>To follow Wu Wei you must first let go of struggle. Stop fighting with life and trying to make things happen. You are struggling against the flow. You must first realize that you can give this up. Then it is the case that you act, you are not passive - merely waiting for things to happen, but you are no longer opposing the flow of events. Instead, you act, but let go into the uncertainty of life, and you see how life actually occurs. You become open to the mystery of which you are part. In a sense it is total acceptance of yourself and this moment. Of course, it is necessary to practice this. While the way is not of time, and we can be there in an instant, practice connects us to this place over time. Through practice the way reveals itself. Only through practice can this truth be revealed.<p>e.g.: Water may be directed and controlled by man-made dams, but it will always flow to its destination naturally. To be in accord with that nature, give up making dams for it only delays that flow.<p>Source : <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wu_wei#Practice" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wu_wei#Practice</a>
Don't use conscious effort to do whatever-it-is directly.<p>Instead, use that deliberate-brainpower to create patterns and habits that your <i>un/sub</i>-conscious will continue even when you aren't actively paying attention.
Is this about Analysis paralysis vs. learning by doing?<p>From what I understand of asian philosophy, I think the dichotomy between he Confucean and Taoist value systems is a very good mental tool - the former stresses academic learning and analysis while the latter strives for simplicity and doing what you can, right now, with the knowledge and tools you have.<p>To draw a caricature: The confucean systems hold the bureaucracy that keeps systems going for decades in the highest regard while a taoist would value the spontaneity of an "agile and lean" system the most.<p>I think the "wu wei" concept is linked to a situation where a person has an intutive understanding of a system and it's practical degrees of freedom and constraints, and thus can let his subconscious to perform most of the heavy lifting, versus a situation where for one reason or another the person does not have a lucid mental model of the field where he tries to work and proceeds through constant conscious cognitive evaluation. I might completely off in my understanding, though.
> <i>“I’ve been out in the fields helping the sprouts grow,” he explained, whereupon his worried sons rushed out to see the results. They found a bunch of shriveled sprouts that he’d yanked to death.</i><p>There is a fair amount of sprout yanking going on in my little education world at present. I can use that quote.
I'm sorry, I do catch the idea, but it really sounds like fluff to me. As with many of these type of articles, I see some discussion and history, but no content or true insight whatsoever. Only some anekdotes and religion-style stories.
Socially, many people are trained to react and fill the gaps created by others. We fill awkward pauses in conversations with chatter. We feel compelled to do work that some other leaves unfinished.<p>Wu Wei is a practice designed to short circuit this action through the pursuit of conscious non-action. The main effect on everyone else is to evoke a mild state of panic or at least some uncomfortable fidgeting.<p>You can test this pretty easily the next time you talk to someone by saying nothing. Just leave a gap on purpose. Take no action. The person across from you will feel the pause and will most likely fill it. Sometimes, if the pause is long enough, they will fill it with personal details they would otherwise never share.<p>One feels drawn to a person like this because their inaction creates a gap we feel compelled to fill. This is the "charismatic" effect the author mentions in the article. In reality, it's more or less a passive aggressive technique to get people to do your work for you through willful negligence.
I think we all understand this at a simple, pragmatic level. For example, we all want to become so comfortable with the keyboard that when we think of the variable "bar" our hands automatically type it. I read the point of the article as saying that this applies at higher and higher levels of function as well: if we make things automatic we can spend more time thinking about and accomplishing the higher goals. And as the article mentions flow, again, I think we all know this to some degree.<p>And I was amused, if not surprised, to see that the confucianist writers had twisted this to support obedience to the power structure. We're lucky Plato had never heard of them!
All narratives about enlightenment contain a form of letting go. Zazen, Koan. Siddartha and his quest etc. I read a book years ago from a French guy who suggested that this could be reached by writing meaningless sentences, which he made a long winding point is more difficult than it seems. I guess one can look at Azimov's A guy like that too.
What it says, apparently, is that there is a reality behind all this. The human mind does have the ability to make qualitative jumps.
We just need to get rid of the travail first...
Easy is right.<p>Begin right<p>And you are easy.<p>Continue easy and you are right.<p>The right way to go easy<p>Is to forget the right way<p>And forget that the going is easy.<p>-- Chuang Tzu
This is also known in Italian as sprezzatura: it's the practiced skill of making everything you do appear effortless or natural.<p><a href="http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprezzatura" rel="nofollow">http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprezzatura</a>
I have a great difficulty understanding this article. How can one accomplish anything without trying?<p>Believe me I spent years smoking weed, being myself and trying to build something. It didn't work.<p>Now I am told to not try? Or does this actually mean to just relax but not a be an idiot?<p>Paradoxes infuriate me.