The whole and its parts

The whole & its parts

The myth of consistency

Inquiring into consistency one may interpret it as the ability to always achieve the desired or the same result. Another interpretation can be to always stay attuned to one’s objective and thus to always be focused on performing as planned.

The first implies having nothing to learn anymore. The second implies being in the same form or position allowing the same performance.

Such an approach to consistency resembles denying change. It’s a hope that the existing dynamic can be mastered or even controlled.

Using the lens of what is within one’s control a different perspective appears. What is within one’s control is the acceptance that there is change and that it requires the ability to come back to one’s intention.

Humans have the innate necessity to pay attention to danger. It results in a constant stream of evaluations serving one’s desire to be safe and to belong. It naturally distracts from a set objective or intention.

It leads to dealing with the need to attend to one’s sense of comfort and safety while regularly noticing when the received stimulations are distractions one can let go of.

Paradoxically it is the regularity of coming back to one’s intention that establishes consistency.







Share this post:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *