The Creation Quest involves bringing something new into existence. Everyone is doing that all the time, even if only in small ways. Why? Because personal endeavour is unavoidable for us. So the might reasonably require of everyone: « », but one of the fundamental assumptions in THEE is that this is unavoidable. Certainly, no can sensibly require you to be so devoted to that you subordinate normal life and relationships to your creative activity. Such extremes are only for those actually on the .
From the endeavour and achievement frameworks, it is easy to see how a person is working. Are they taking on challenges? Are they noticing what is going on? Are they concentrating on whatever they do, no matter how small? Are they diligent and committed? Step away from work into everyday activity and the issue revolves around whether a person is making a proper effort in regard to the task in hand—like shopping or vacuuming or delivering a gift.
So thisseems to be best formulated as: « ». Only by being creative is it possible for you to . So the notion of « » includes both full willingness and use of the imagination—it is equivalent to being diligently creative in accord with your ability and your situation.
While there is no doubt that a person may or may not do their best, there is less awareness that this includes being creative. There is a common misconception that only special people can be creative. But:
Put these together and voilà:.
Another error is the notion that « If, in the event, it is not good enough, then perhaps you need to element of creative commitment. of how that came about. Are there any implications for you? It might well turn out to be a failure from which you , which just happens to be the most basic» that a person can do is objectively determinable. Even if there happens to be an objective standard, it is not relevant to the . You have to , not someone else's. « » is an inner standard that applies to you personally and no-one else.
"It's all too much, and I never get properly appreciated or rewarded." The same line of thinking easily diverts your imagination to escapist dreams of success based on fame, wealth or rapid promotion. Laziness becomes attractive.turns out to be mostly mundane. It is 99% perspiration and only 1% inspiration. It involves taking pains and accepting Murphy's Law i.e. tolerating repeated frustrations that seemingly come out of nowhere. A voice in your head whispers or shouts:
If you say to yourself that nobody notices or cares, then mediocrity can become the quick and easy way forward. The notion of kakonomicsGloria Origgi: "Kakonomic worlds are worlds in which people not only live with each other's laxness, but expect it: I trust you not to keep your promises in full because I want to be free not to keep mine and not to feel bad about it. What makes it an interesting and weird case is that, in all kakonomic exchanges, the two parties seem to have a double deal: an official pact in which both declare their intention to exchange at a High-quality level, and a tacit accord whereby discounts are not only allowed but expected. It becomes a form of tacit mutual connivance. Thus, nobody is free-riding: Kakonomics is regulated by a tacit social norm of discount on quality, a mutual acceptance for a mediocre outcome that satisfies both parties, as long as they go on saying publicly that the exchange is in fact at a High-quality level." was invented to capture the way people mutually implicitly agree to low quality outcomes while hypocritically claiming high quality explicitly on both sides.