My grandmother used to say call a spade a spade a lot. And she did. By the time I knew her, she was not afraid to speak her mind. She probably always was that way, only getting ornery as she got older.
One of our themes around here is to talk about the thing we want to talk about. Like Wharton professor Cade Massey interjects in his podcast, “let’s be precise“.
Another one of our themes is to think of things conditionally. Is something good or bad? It depends. Weaknesses are strengths and strengths are weaknesses (WAS A SAW).
Those ideas meet in Andrew Huberman’s podcast with Kelly Starrett, who (speaking about the human body) said:
“And I wouldn’t even say that weakness isn’t even the right idea. Just like here is a pattern that I’m not as effective at, as efficient at. So when we go into the gym sort of with this great curiosity, then it’s a really rich place and a really, frankly, the only safe place because there isn’t contact and sport and we’re not fighting and dancing and moving and we can really do this controlled formal movement where we can really see inputs and outputs.”
He’s talking about physical training but what a great idea!
- It’s not that I lose my temper, but my impatience is a pattern that I’m not as effective at.
- It’s not that I’m bad at math, but it’s a pattern that I’m not as effective at.
- It’s not that my relationships at work are bad, but it’s a pattern that I’m not as effective at.
This framing also applies some ownership (another form of being precise). To take things back to Starrett’s conversation: our tight hamstrings are not a genetic pattern but something we can control.
For a science podcast, this episode (implicitly) covers a lot of spiritual ground as well as systems theory.
The Waiter's Pad 