View

My Yoga teacher recently introduced me to the term “View”. A Yoga practice should have a view – a purpose, context and direction. For example, I live in what I experience to be an insecure and threatening “reality” – the current view of my practice is to prevent growth of fear, sadness and depression by nurturing a soft heart (attitude), a clear mind (perception),  and a healthy body (in that order). This view guides my training – it indicates what tools and practices I should (and shouldn’t) use.

Without a view a practice can be worthless and even damaging. Yoga isn’t good or bad – it is what you bring to it and make of it. This is why Yoga is best served by a teacher – if all you put into it is yourself, all that will come of it is more of yourself. If you add a teacher and teachings into the mix – you may end up with a better “yourself”. It is possible to practice “Yoga” for 20 years without any noticeable effects and it is possible to practice “Yoga” for 6 months with noticeable adverse effects.

An excellent example of how powerful a view can be is given in this excellent talk by Alvin Toffler on Education. American public education started with a clear view: “a system that will create industrial discipline … which meant that you show up on time and do the same work again and again … “. That View still dominates modern education systems despite all the indications that it is failing & dysfunctional and despite all the knowledge that there are better alternatives. That’s how powerful a View can be.

My Doubts

Gaming does not have an educational View. Gaming does not have a social View. If Gaming has any view – it is to be a satisfying and addictive experience that can be translated into profit.

Any qualities that manifest in Gaming settings are natural human traits – Gamers had them before they became Gamers. It may be useful to explore why these traits do not manifest in day-to-day social settings. It is wrong to attribute them to Gaming.

Gaming is an escape in which natural human qualities can appear. Gaming is thriving because there aren’t enough opportunities for these qualities to manifest off-line. Gaming is neither changing gamers nor the world we live in. Gaming is actually inhibiting any offline individual or social improvement – because it is diverting creative energy away from it into an ineffective online space. People can get drunk in a bar and experience relaxation – but that relaxation isn’t carried outside the bar into the tensions of day-to-day life – it only makes it possible to sustain them longer.

Reincarnation

So what does the Bhagavad Gita have to do with all this? If you are not familiar with the Bhagavad Gita – you may want to read this introduction to it. It documents a conversation between Arjuna – the greatest warrior alive and Krishna – an incarnation of God. Arjuna is about to fight a just war against an enemy made up of friends, family and guru’s – and he gets depressed about it. The 18 chapters of the text cover different topics from Vedic philosophy which Krishna presents to Arjuna to help him restore clarity.

The second chapter contains an explanation what “self” is – it describes a View on life – Krishna explains to Arjuna that:

• 2.13: There is a “body-bearer” which (as surely as a body does die) transfers from one body to another.
• 2.19: The “body-bearer” cannot be killed and does not kill.
• 2.20: The “body-bearer” is never born, never dies and therefore never ceases to be. It is eternal.
• 2.22: The “body-bearer” is an “owner of the body” and changes bodies as a man changes clothing.
• 2.26: Death is inevitable and so is rebirth

This is essentially reincarnation – one of the first teachings in the text. Having explained this Krishna says to Arjuna:

• 2.31: Now that you understand that – do your duty “for there is nothing better for a warrior than a righteous battle”.

As I was reading this I realized that reincarnation is one of the key elements of Gaming. You can die and come back again and again. This grants you a freedom of action that otherwise you wouldn’t dare. Now here’s the thing – nothing of this translates into off-line life (or if it does, it leads to recklessness). Gamers live by reincarnation when playing but live life as if “you only live once”.

You don’t have to believe in reincarnation – that just happens to be a dominant example in Gaming. The problem is that too-often real life does not have a view. What do you believe? What is your life about? Has that led to expression of your natural talents and qualities or has it blocked them? Gaming is not a solution for an absence of teachers and teachings – it is only a coverup. You can get drunk every night and forget about your worries, but they will still be there to greet you in the morning.

and this is just one example …

“We cannot reform our education system, we must replace it”

Some things or all things?

What is health-care?

Technology, in common with many other activities, tends toward avoidance of risks by investors. Uncertainty is ruled out if possible. Capital investment follows this rule since people generally prefer the predictable. Few recognize how destructive this can be, how it imposes severe limits on variability and thus makes whole populations fatally vulnerable to the shocking ways our universe can throw the dice.

As I read this I thought of Fred Wilson – the only person I currently read from venture-capital-startup-land. He appeared in my thoughts in two contexts: (1) he is a subject of Herbert’s writing; (2) I believe he believes he isn’t – because he subscribes to the fashionable idea of disruption. Disruptive is a popular theme in the world of technology startups. Luckily Fred also lists Yoga among his interests. I am more passionate and more knowledgeable in Yoga (then I am in business) so I would like to try exploring the subject in this light.

Agitation

My teacher recently hosted an event celebrating the launch of a new book in Hebrew about the Yoga Sutra. I didn’t attend the event nor have I seen the book but I did speak with my teacher about it before and after the event. The book is an academic analysis of the Yoga Sutra – it is an artifact of reading, writing and thinking – a product of mind. I am not inclined to reading it because to me the Yoga Sutra is a source of inspiration – I believe that intellectually dissecting it misses this quality and defeats it’s purpose.

My intuition (and prejudice) about the book was confirmed when my teacher described the author’s physical presence. She said that he was physically agitated and had very nervous body language. These are symptoms that Yoga, as outlined in the Yoga Sutra, describes as illness that can be healed. To me this says that this person does not yet know the Yoga Sutra.

Sloka 2.25 of the Yoga Rahasya states:

“The teacher, having understood the Sastra-s, must practice regularly for himself and then teach the prescribed asana-s to others.”

Energy: Health & Illness

Yoga views the body as a system of energy which flows through an extensive system of channels (nadi). In his book “What Are We Seeking?” TKV Desikachar likens our energy systems to a natural system of irrigation in which energy (like water) flows naturally. Optimal flow is a state of health. Optimal flow is disrupted when it encounters obstacles (in mind and body). An obstructed flow of energy manifests as illness (mental, emotional, physical, etc.).

Purification

Purification is a core idea in Yoga – it is intended to remove obstacles. Purification takes place in mind and body. Purification makes it possible for energy to resume it’s natural & healthy flow.

It is a common misperception that Yoga is a kind of peace-invoking practice when actually Yoga is a disruptive and agitating practice. To correctly understand the concept of disruption in Yoga it is necessary to remember the context in which it is being used – illness – the already disrupted flow of energy.

Note to Yogis: If you have taken offense from the suggestion you are in any way “ill” – please remember that Yoga sets a very high bar for “success” – unity with that which is within and eternal. In that light, manifestation in human form always falls short – it is an “illness”.

Administering Disruption

Yoga practices are a disruption of an already disrupted flow of energy. Proper application of Yoga is outlined in sloka 2.26 of the Yoga Rahasya:

“After having examined the origins of the diseases of the body and senses, the teacher must apply Kriya yoga. Otherwise there will be no benefits.”

Krishnamacharya‘s commentary adds:

“Before doing Kriya-yoga, the teacher must find out the history of the student’s illness and symptoms. Based on his observations he should ascertain the origin of the illness. After much meditation on this, he should teach the student the appropriate asana-s.”

A disruptive intervention assumes:

1. There is a student.
2. The student has a potential state of healthy energy flow.
3. The student is currently in a state of illness.
4. The illness is caused by obstacles which are disrupting the healthy flow of energy.
5. A purifying practice can remove the obstacles and restore healthy flow of energy.
6. A purifying practice needs to be administered by a teacher.
7. The teachers needs to be healthy.
8. The teacher needs to identify the student’s obstacles.
9. The teacher needs to meditate on this before acting.
10. The teacher needs to introduce a practice that is suitable for the student.

All of these are required for “disruption” … otherwise it will lead to more disruption, more obstacles more illness ..  at best “no benefits”.

A Good Example

Curiously, one technology project came to my mind, as I was writing, that is actually in the process of administering what seems like effective disruption. I thought it would be nice to see how it resonates with these assumptions. The project is Mozilla’s Drumbeat project:

1. Student: are people who are not aware of the value of and inherit threat to Internet freedom.
2. Healthy energy: the presence and involvement of people in a free Internet.
3. Illness: energy flow is currently compromised.
4. Obstacles: people’s lack of awareness to forces (business entities that are diverting the natural flow of energy for financial gain) threatening Internet freedoms.
5. Purifying: Drumbeat is trying to to make people aware of the benefits of participating in a free Internet.
6. Teacher: Drumbeat is created by Mozilla.
7. Healthy teacher: Mozilla is an organization dedicated to keeping the Internet free.
8. Identifying the obstacles: this is what Drumbeat is currently doing in the spirit of a free Internet (open collaboration).
9. Meditating – though some ideas have surfaced, they are gradually being developed and discussed – Mozilla is not shy about not knowing what needs to be done.
10. Practice – we’ll see what the future brings

An Unknown Example

Though Fred writes a lot and I’ve read much of his writing I have not yet seen through to a clear “disruption-purpose” that drives him. I believe he is inherently good but I also believe he exists in a disturbed (ill) system. I would like to see how these 10 principles apply to him and his business. The fact that he is a venture-capitalist makes it a formidable challenge. Tackling it, I believe, is a small step towards a better future.

Advertising Based Business Models

One of the most popular and undisputed revenue models amongst technology companies is advertising. These companies create an engaging service that is offered for free and captures the attention of it’s users and then sells that attention off to advertisers.

My jaw dropped when I recognized a description of this business model in the Yoga Rahasya – Sloka 1.42:

“Through the disturbance of Prana, all the indriya-s (senses), get disturbed and move along with the mind towards external objects, which are poisonous. Therefore, through exhalation, inhalation and retention, Prana must be regulated.”

According to Yoga philosophy Prana is something that Spirit created when it wanted the freedom to get around in the world (instead of just witnessing it). The first thing (before all of the subtle elements of nature) to manifest from Prana was faith. Prana is too great a force for any conscious entity to abuse. Faith isn’t.

Note to Yogis: Did you notice that breathing (not asana) is indicated as a primary practice to reducing the disturbance of Prana?

I view design as an opportunity to go deeper – to revisit the purpose of a product, it’s alignment with the larger purpose of a business, it’s value to customers, who the customers are … many questions that come before screens are actually designed, even before user experience and way before usability is addressed. I believed (and still do believe) that having a clear purpose of where you want to go makes everything that comes after that (design, development, testing, sales, support … literally everything!) smoother, more efficient, more pleasant … better. Without it is too easy to drift off course without even knowing it … sometimes until the business itself fails (you can create a failed product with superb usability). All of this, I am happy to say is aligned with my personal beliefs and pursuits.

The problem was that customers did not share my views. Customers would usually reach design at the end of their development cycles – when there were very little time, resources or motivation to actually do design. There really was’t space for raising the kind of challenges design can bring to the surface – it would mostly introduce insecurity, aggrevation & frustration. So the alternative was a compromise. Sometimes the compromise would work OK – not necessarily in the sense that we would arrive at a good product – but a satisfied and paying customer – I never was at peace calling that “OK”. Sometimes it wouldn’t work and that would lead to friction and divert the project into harsh & unpleasant energies – I hated that but  I was OK with it – because I wasn’t expecting anything else. The odds were that “design” wasn’t going to work out well (with one outstanding exception which deserves a separate post).

I do believe that bridges between different views can be built – but that takes care, time, patience and requires that everyone involved want to pursue that. I also felt that there were some pretty long bridges to build. Design, if given a chance, inevitably introduces creativity and unknowns into any process. Most the organizational cultures I encountered were not mature enough or open to these qualities. This would start with top executives who felt it important that the fact “they don’t like yellow” be incoporated into the design process – through to programmers that would decide that some of the visual details were too much of a hassle to implement. Unfortunately the circumstances of little time, budget or patience in which most of the design projects took place – left little chance for any bridge-building.

Many times I felt that the place to start was to take the leading executive aside for two years of Yoga – and then, when the foundations were in place, to resume design. Customers didn’t want that, it wasn’t part of the contract … but it came to a point where I felt that was the only way to move forward. I felt that people needed Yoga but didn’t want it. Add to that the fact that I like teaching Yoga waaaay more then I like design – and you may be able to see why I chose to leave my career behind.

Recently I had another “business-related” incident – which prompted this collection of thoughts. I was participating in a high-friction business-related conversation (there is no customer this time – it is a project I initiated) – and it reached an  impasse that had a deja-vu feeling from my design days. But this time the other side wanted and insisted on understanding. So we got into a conversation about communicating, the limits of understanding and it’s friction with the need to understand … and finally I tabled my theory and said “But this isn’t about me being your Yoga teacher – you don’t really want that!”. Before I finished saying those words I intuited what the response would be – and it was “Yes I do”. Woah!

This stayed with me for a few days – and I began to wonder … is it possible that people I met in business were actually looking (consciously or unconsciously?) for a more spiritual significant context in their lives that I overlooked? Is it possible that many of the frictions I experienced (and sometimes still do) are actually an expression of unspoken words? It is possible that people need Yoga and (consciously or unconsciously) do want it?

Knowing this doesn’t make building bridges any easier. A “mind & control” dominated business relatioship does not resonate well with a “heart & surrender” teacher-student relationship. Reasoning can lead the way in business, but it takes faith to let a spiritual teacher into your life. I have no doubt that qualities that can be acquired in Yoga can be beneficial in business – but they can’t be acquired using the way things are acquired in business.

Things keep going round and round

This morning I came across this quote from the “Children of Dune” and as I read it I made two replacements: (1) I replaced “melange/spice” with money ; (2) I replaced “God” with good.

“It is commonly reported … that there exists great natural virtue in the melange money experience. Perhaps this is true. There remains within me, however, profound doubts that every use of melange money always brings virtue. Meseems hat certain persons have corrupted the use of melange money in defiance of God Good… they have disfigured the soul. They skim the surface of melange money and believe thereby to attain grace. They deride their fellows, do great harm to godlinnes goodliness, and they distort the meaning of abundant gift maliciously, surely a mutilation beyond the power of man to restore. To be truly at one with the virtue of spice money, uncorrupted in all ways, full of goodly humor, a man must permit his deeds and his words to agree. When your actions describe a system of evil consequences, you should be judged by those consequences and not by your explanations.”

Disclosure: I don’t use Facebook, I tried it twice and left it behind. Whenever I reach a Facebook login page I walk away. I consider Facebook to be a very low quality form of social interaction and I strongly urge people I care about to refrain from using it. I consider people who criticize Facebook while still using it to be hypocrites.

Early adopters are passionate about new technologies, they are willing to spend time and effort to puruse their sense of curiosity. I wonder if inadvertently they are also a doorway into wider social acceptance? Tech companies seek early adopters to test the waters with new products and services. Assuming of course, that when early adopters sign-off on a service they will become points of origin for a natural process of viral distribution. So in a way (and I assuming there are other factors involved in the process)  early adopters lead their social circles into technological environments.

With Facebook I believe that early adopters were Pied Pipers, playing a nice melody but leading their followers into a dangerous place. Now the dangers are more apparent – but not to everyone. Technologists can envision the implications of Facebook’s anouncements on privacy, but most of the 400 millions Facebook users are not technologists – and they have no idea what the issue is. So a few technologists may walk away form Facebook, but most of the people will stay in the hands of a company that will stop at nothing (including legal prosection if it is deemed worthwhile) to infringe on their privacy and freedom to make a profit.
Do early adapters inadvertently play such a role in society in our technologicaly dominated era? Do their inherent curiosities and talents represent a dynamic evolutionry force? Do they know this? Should they?

End note: as I was searching for a “Pied Piper” image I came across something inspiring – it is a symbolic finding considering the context that brought me to it

Designating Purpose

If you were a God, all seeing, all knowing, able to span endless space, travel through time… really do it all. What would your pass-time be? What could possibly keep you amused? How about creating another god and seeing what it does? Nah… that wouldn’t be too interesting… why would it be any different then you? OK then, how about creating another god and give it something to do – one specific things it needs to accomplish – a purpose? Sure, eventually it would come around and realize it’s being played (after all it is a god!) – but until it realizes that, there’d be a good show to be had? Now that’s entertainment.

Design is an act of creation, an activity that puts people who pursue it on a playing field with gods. Design is ultimately about assigning purpose … and then seeing what happens. “Good” purposes last longer and reach further. Lesser purposes lead into dead-ends… where you simply start over with hopefully a new and better purpose.

Everything we do is potentially an act of design. That potential manifests when a secret ingredient is added : Intent – the act of assigning purpose – performing an act with a conscious choice in heart and mind. Thankfully not eveyrthing we do is (or needs to be) an act of design (imagine chewing like that!?). Somethings come with a clear & demanding intent assigned to them  – hugging a loved one, feeding a baby – those are easy. Many things we do may at first seeem ambiguous intent-wise  -  these are opportunities to make a choice, and in making a choice making a difference.

Designers are people with (1) a nose for finding opportunities to make choices; (2) a passionate drive to make choices; (3) skills required to put their choices to action. Everyone has these tendencies and skills to some degree in some contexts. Designers have them more then others.

Not Knowing

Though much of design work is about observation & research into the current reality… inevitably it is about creating something that does not exist. Everything that is known to a designer serves as a jumping board into what is as yet unknown. Any methodology or process may be useful in preparing for the jump… but in the end you have to jump. You jump into a world where logic and reasoning are replaced by… unknowns.. you are no longer in control… you don’t find things … you find that things have found you. A designer can accommodate not knowing, I would even suggest that a designer is a master at getting there and enjoys being there. It is a peak experience of being in “the zone”.

Organizational systems, especially corporate and business, exist in a playground with set rules – and like most games, people play to win. To play in these playgrounds you have to know the rules. But here’s where it gets interesting – the surest way to win is not to play by the rules, but to kind of cheat – to test their limits and find some loophole which sets you free from them. Design is a strategy for cheating – it’s a kind of trick for escaping from what is known into what is unknown and coming back a little bit wiser.

Design & Business

I don’t necessarily agree with the suggestion that “Design and business have traditionally made uneasy bedfellows, with practitioners of each eyeing each other suspiciously”. I think that a hundred+ years ago , when some metal-worker was forging a plough for his farmer neighbour, that design and business went hand in hand – it was kind of obvious that if a metal-worker wanted to have food on the table, he needed his farmer friends to be able to do their work effectively – so he designed and crafted good, enduring, smooth working ploughs.

I do agree that design and business nowadays make uneasy bedfellows. Design (assigning purpose) is rooted in a value system you can’t deny and cheat – a system that can only strive for better and better. Many (most?) businesses seem to have evolved to a point where “good enough” is better. So naturally when design meets these business there is friction. In such cases it is unclear to businesses what design is (or even if it’s really necessary) and designers are not clear about what they can do (beyond moving the mouse around in Photoshop). These are the businesses that can hire ludicrously expensive design firms and sit them down with a CEO that asks if they can avoid using yellow – because he really doesn’t like yellow!

There are of course meetings of design and business that bloom beautifully – leading to great designs and great business – so much so that they seem one and the same.

One of my background notes for this posts says that “design is killing business”. I believe that in some way, design, the fundamental kind Raymond Pirouz talks about, is like a force of nature sifting and rummaging through the business world. It is attracted like a magnet to those instances of business that can accommodate what is has to offer and carryies them into the future  with literally a renewed sense of purpose. In it’s wake are businesses who are incapable of change – and will eventually be phased out of existence. Passionate designers are demanding agents for change at the corporate table – their presence there is a remarkable achievement regardless of what actually takes place during their stay.

Design Thinking

… is a futile attack on the nature of design. It signifies a friction between value systems. Design & designers should not make a mistake of assigning this phrase any unwarranted importance or consequence. Thinking is, thankfully, a common enough quality in most disciplines of our modern lives. Design is unique because it has the potential and mandate to go beyond thinking. Design & designers should be grateful and humbled in light of the magical force that shines from them and through them to others – a spreading inspiration.

I, for one, am thankful for joyful places where thought and words cannot go.