Skip to main content

Discomfort/Resistance and the past


Looking back on all that I've done, I realise the amount of things that I didnt do because of fear and discomfort. I have a tendency to stay in my comfort zone because its safe and in this place I would face no humiliation or ‘conflict against my character’. I realized, with opportunities that I’ve been given, how much I have turned it down because ‘it wasn’t me’ or because I had never done it before.

This is a result of me completely relying on my past to decide my present actions. Recently I’ve realized that this is all backwards. Why was me not doing something in the past a legitimate reason for me not trying it now? If I always faced problems in this way I will NEVER grow. Because the only way I will grow is through discomfort. I had been completely relying on my circumstances to dictate how much growth will occur in my life, relying on other people’s opinion or what they think I should for how I should act (ALL THE TIME)

This type of dependency was rooted in my insecurity of not being able to bring enough to the table. Of things not turning out how I imagine it in my head. Of being ridiculed by the people I ‘report’ my progress to or people that had viewed me as a character I felt comfortable displaying to other people. 
It was also rooted in my habit of constantly looking at the past to assess my abilities. In class, I would use my lack of Japanese education in the past as an excuse of not being able to understand a class in Japanese. I would use my past inadequacy as an athlete as an excuse to not start something sports-related. My lack of connection as an excuse to network. This is all so ironic. Why was I using my LACK of ability to do something as an excuse to avoid learning that very skill?

Obviously I was afraid of newness, of creating my own future, constantly blaming my past, excusing myself for my inadequacy.
But I’ve come to realize that making decisions like that has absolutely no benefit. Even if you justify it as a ‘realistic’ assessment, your so called ‘realistic’ insight is limiting the very thing you are trying to do. Because that judgment of ‘realistic’ is based on your past abilities and not your current potential or enthusiasm. 

And ofcourse, I still do say no to things I should be going out there and doing (even using present tense in this case is limiting my capabilities obvs lol). I still have a lot on my bucket list. But I aim to (I WILL) be in a mindset where I choose discomfort as a positive sign of growth, and to let CHANGE and ASPIRATION dictate my actions/ability and not what I characterize myself to be from my past achievements/failures. 

Before I used to be so bothered by somebody telling me 'thats so not you' when I would do something different. It bothered me SO much, because I didnt want their opinion of me to change in to something that I hadn't put out there in the past. But now I DONT WANT TO CARE. I would rather be identified as an adaptive person in constant flux instead of a static person with a definitive character. 

Your ability does not depend on your circumstance. It is indefinitely determined by your vision of your future and how you incorporate that in your present. This is where change begins.  

“Live from your future.”

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

theories on brain localization

There are three major theories on how the brain is organized, in terms of its structure and function. Phrenology was proposed by Gall in the late 18th century who thought it was possible to determine character traits by examining the external bumps on the head. All behavior/mental function was assigned a location in the brain, and using more or less of these regions determined these bumps. The aggregate field view was raised by Flourens (1920s) using experimental evidence that showed that all areas are important for each mental function. So any part can perform all functions and there was no localization. Cellular connectionism (supported by Hughlings Jackson, Wernicke, Sherrington, Ramon y Cajal) states that individual neurons are signalling units that are arranged in groups, each having a particular function. References  E. R. Kandel, J. H. Schwartz, T. Jessell, Principles of Neural Science (McGraw-Hill, New York, ed. 4, 2000).
Post a Comment
Read more

departure

Maybe its meant to be The passing of time Seems to let us free Makes us more carefree Farewell to a friend Hoping for the best That in some other world This journey won't end But long paved roads Take hours to walk down A dragging trip Complacence is found If we can refresh The origin of our motives Healthy company In each other, we'll notice.
Post a Comment
Read more

Is there an emotional brain? (arguments against)

The limbic system has been commonly referred to in scientific literature as the emotional brain. But we know now with more information and advanced technologies that the limbic system is an ambiguous concept, it is what LeDoux says is just a “useful anatomical shorthand”. One evidence that challenges this theory is that areas that are considered unique to mammals (therefore termed the “mammalian brain”) is also present in ‘primitive’ creatures such as reptiles and amphibians. For example, a study conducted by Gilles Laurent and colleagues in 2018 using single cell RNA-sequencing technology showed that the neurons of the pallium of reptiles had similar genetic makeup to that of the hippocampus and amygdala of mouse and humans! These areas are what MacLean included in the limbic system theory, yet they are present in these ‘lower’ animals. Moreover, the same study showed that the anterior dorsal cortex of the pallium in reptiles was similar to the human neocortex, which is a layer ...
Post a Comment
Read more