Ratings of 2/17:
Days Since a Collapse: 1
Transgressions: 9
Effectiveness: Advancing
Saturday, February 18, 2006
Thursday, February 16, 2006
My apologies to Dan and Kyle for not contributing to the conversation over the last few days. My roomate has taken his computer to his girlfriend's apartment, and I'm back in the situation of not having easy access to the internet.
To remedy this situation, I've started the process of getting online. Eva's computer, which is much better than mine, is being fixed at Best Buy right now, and once we get it back, we're going to install some virus protection on it and get it online. In the meantime, I'll try to post when I can.
After my last post, I reflected more on the criteria for performance. I think that the criteria should cover accomplishments from the back-end, somewhat objectively. Here's what I mean by this: I entertained the idea of using "How Well I Stuck to My Schedule", or something like that, as a criterion for perfomance. The problem with that, as I see it, is that it says nothing about whether the schedule was well constructed, or, whether what was accomplished with the schedule is valuable. Rather than using this, I would want to continue using a criterion like "Effectiveness", because it judges what was actually accomplished.
Regarding a tangential issue, I made a point in the fall about not penalizing myself for things beyond my control. I still agree with this principle, in general. However, I still want to focus on the end, rather than the process. In other words, if I have good intentions, set out to do something, and because of something beyond my control, my endeavor is not successful, I won't reward myself for that (I won't penalize myself either). The judgment must be understood as a judgment of the product of action, and somewhat separate from me as the actor. Again, the point of this is to focus on things that are actually accomplished.
I also reconsidered on the issue of the Franklin virtues. Here's why I initially wanted to suspend my use of them: using them among my criteria created too much anxiety for me and thus cost me too much psychic energy to make it worth it. Here's why I think that that's wrong: ethics is fundamental. I still beleive that if you don't have ethics, you don't have sh*t. Basically, my intitial judgment erroneously gave more weight to the cost than the "benefit", but my new view holds the "benefit", or the justification, as being more important than the cost. While I was using the Franklin system, I was definitely more conscious of my behavior, and I acted more virtuously during that time. I think that setting a target maximium for acceptable transgression also helped me.
Concerning the list of virtues itself, I'm not 100% happy with it, but it's a great list, and I can abide by it for now. More discussion of this will follow.
In summary, I will try to post when I can, but I might not be able to post everyday. Furthermore, I will continue using the performance criteria that I was using pre-collapse, with the adjustments that I mentioned in my last post.
In regard to Dan's post: if you can sprint succesfully, without ever resting, more power to you. Definitely keep us posted on how that's going.
To remedy this situation, I've started the process of getting online. Eva's computer, which is much better than mine, is being fixed at Best Buy right now, and once we get it back, we're going to install some virus protection on it and get it online. In the meantime, I'll try to post when I can.
After my last post, I reflected more on the criteria for performance. I think that the criteria should cover accomplishments from the back-end, somewhat objectively. Here's what I mean by this: I entertained the idea of using "How Well I Stuck to My Schedule", or something like that, as a criterion for perfomance. The problem with that, as I see it, is that it says nothing about whether the schedule was well constructed, or, whether what was accomplished with the schedule is valuable. Rather than using this, I would want to continue using a criterion like "Effectiveness", because it judges what was actually accomplished.
Regarding a tangential issue, I made a point in the fall about not penalizing myself for things beyond my control. I still agree with this principle, in general. However, I still want to focus on the end, rather than the process. In other words, if I have good intentions, set out to do something, and because of something beyond my control, my endeavor is not successful, I won't reward myself for that (I won't penalize myself either). The judgment must be understood as a judgment of the product of action, and somewhat separate from me as the actor. Again, the point of this is to focus on things that are actually accomplished.
I also reconsidered on the issue of the Franklin virtues. Here's why I initially wanted to suspend my use of them: using them among my criteria created too much anxiety for me and thus cost me too much psychic energy to make it worth it. Here's why I think that that's wrong: ethics is fundamental. I still beleive that if you don't have ethics, you don't have sh*t. Basically, my intitial judgment erroneously gave more weight to the cost than the "benefit", but my new view holds the "benefit", or the justification, as being more important than the cost. While I was using the Franklin system, I was definitely more conscious of my behavior, and I acted more virtuously during that time. I think that setting a target maximium for acceptable transgression also helped me.
Concerning the list of virtues itself, I'm not 100% happy with it, but it's a great list, and I can abide by it for now. More discussion of this will follow.
In summary, I will try to post when I can, but I might not be able to post everyday. Furthermore, I will continue using the performance criteria that I was using pre-collapse, with the adjustments that I mentioned in my last post.
In regard to Dan's post: if you can sprint succesfully, without ever resting, more power to you. Definitely keep us posted on how that's going.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
