I want to change the world. I do. I want to be a lot active in the way I live out my life so I crystalised my current mental state as the following...


Books and changing oneself or the world
(this might be a little messy - I may have suffered a paradigm shift between the beginning and end of writing)

I have probably read more recently than any other time in the last 5 years. That being said, I have often had a rather negative view of books (for various reasons).

Right now, I just have negative thoughts about books that try to change your life or change the world. Books could outline how to do something, but in the end I think that it usually just results in a lot of head-nodding and no action. Reading is usually too passive for me. I think that knowledge comes from books, but wisdom (I think there is a distinction) comes from learning as you act in every action of your life (this has become a tenet of my recent life).

It is fine to read "Dance like no-one is watching" but to do this is actually a process that is done in action and developed, not just read and done. To dance like no-one is watching, you would need to address your self-confidence, your self-image, your self-consciousness, your dancing self-efficacy (a term from a social cognitive theory, meaning confidence in a particular skill, "Can I pull it off?" feeling), and find the real purpose for why you dance (perhaps one of the most important). These are not resolved by reading. By actively widening each of these aspects in every action you do is what is most important. Only then can you "Dance like no-one is watching".

There are many self-help/new-age save the world books out there. Some have a vital heart but malformed limbs. The intention is there but they do nothing, change nothing. I am starting to have the perhaps not completely unfounded opinion that self-help books are literary drugs, making those who read feel good. Chicken Soup for the Soul is typical. Empty platitudes that inspire good feelings.

Probably my perception of all art affects my view of books and writing. I see the process as more beneficial to the writer than the reader. I love writing, and sometimes entertain ideas of publishing, but it would probably be more as a personal attempt to develop my ideas. So reading someone else's enlightenment should be secondary to breaking down your barriers to greater wisdom.

There have been some books in history that have changed the world. Right now I can only think of one person who by writing a book changed anything (for good or bad):

Karl Marx's "Das Kapital". His ideas changed the world (better or worse). But in his life he was an activist too and he did have a good advocate in Engels. He was attempting some sort of leadership too. Hitler wrote a book too "Mein Kampf", but he backed that with very firm leadership (probably the greatest mover in his success). Most strong leaders don't necessarily leave books. I think most religions were only sustained by the actions of their figureheads and not the actual texts themselves.

A Chinese philosopher, Zhuang-zi, wrote a story to say how reading other people's thoughts might not get the "real message".

(http://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~phalsall/texts/chuangtz.html)
Translated by Patricia Ebrey:
-------------
Duke Huan was reading a book in the hall. Wheelwright Pian, who had been chiseling a wheel in the courtyard below, set down his tools and climbed the stairs to ask Duke Huan, "may I ask what words are in the book Your Grace is reading?"

"The words of sages." the Duke responded.
"Are these sages alive?"
"They are already dead."
"That means you are reading the dregs of long gone men, doesn't it?"
Duke Huan said "How does a wheelwright get to have opinions on the books I read? If you can explain yourself I'll let it pass otherwise, it's death!"

Wheelwright Pian said ''In my case I see things in terms of my own work. When I chisel at a wheel, if I go slow the chisel slides and does not stay put; if I hurry, it jams and doesn't move properly. When it is neither too slow nor too fast I can feel it in my hand and respond to it from my heart. My mouth cannot describe it in words but there is something there 1 cannot teach it to my son and my son cannot learn it from me So I have gone on for seventy years, growing old chiseling wheels The men of old died in possession of what could not transmit. So it follows that what you are reading is their dregs."
------------

I agree with this. Except a writer whom you have no contact with is as good as dead. Guidance from someone is essential. Zhuang-zi is dead so I guess these are the dregs of dead men. Zhuang-zi didn't write it, his followers did.

To make people move, you don't need a book passively giving them the ideas.

So if books don't change the world, what does the world need? You need a person to lead.
So if books don't change people, what do people need? You need a person to guide and aid reflection.

These of course are more difficult but rather more profound for me.

Leadership is a way to change the world. History proves it. Napoleon and Gandhi didn't write books. The former just needed to be in power and that seemed to make armies strong. The latter was too busy doing things like fasting and leading. I have been inspired by recent observations and an event (NZWA) for what I personally think leadership requires but that is another message. That still needs a bit more time for me to ruminate on the verbal cellulose in the paddocks of my brain.

Mentorship seems logical for a person to develop. It seems that in the rather individualistic society in which I live that deaing with our personal life planning our by ourselves to be foolish. Planning could always benefit from a different perspective. Would your physical training do better with a personal trainer / running buddy or by your own solitary efforts? Are you more likely to adhere to your plan and goals if you have had a witness who will remind you of those promises, or those made to yourself? It seems obvious. Why am I only discovering this now...?

Wouldn't the real benefit of a book come from reflection with someone, some planning and goal setting based on your conclusions? If you did read "Dance like no-one was watching" and were inspired and thought that that was what you wanted to do, wouldn't it be better to think about it concretely and objectively?

The concept of being interactive with a book's text is mindblowing. Maybe the problem lies in my own mind that takes reading books was the purpose in itself.

Writing also suffers in that it is distant from those you are trying to move. Compare an e-mail, to a letter, a letter to a person encounter. What would move you heart, mind and body to act in a new way that someone advocated, would save the world? E-mail has words but sometimes seems to lack soul. Letters have soul but sometimes lack the face. In AIESEC, we were often told that when cold-calling we should not discuss things on the phone or elaborate too much. If we give them information on the phone, they could easily just say no and hang up. If there is a meeting, then it is harder to hang-up, and also you have a bond created in meeting the person.

To have a leader is to have someone with the message burst from their every word and action. You can see their vitality and passion and it brought people along. See old clips of Hitler, Martin Luther King Jr. and Churchill. Their demonstration and words changed history and changed people. Come to think of it, have all the compelling, strong orators gone, never to be seen again?

If a person has written a book that inspired you, and they are not leading a movement to actively go out and change anything, nothing may happen of it.

So, I think I need to re-evaluate my mode of constructing the process that define the course of my life and actions. I will do that this week.

Okay, that's all. Anyone who wants to offer any thoughts of what I am trying to express, tell me and we can have tea (on me). Later.