Jay makes a very good case for Twitter — assuming, of course, that you’re not a crackhead (Chris Pirillo definition of Twitter: “crack for the distractible.”)
Though I’ve not been a regular Twitter user, I can easily defend it’s value. With intentionality it can be a powerful part of your personal information system.
Mindcasting. It’s a good word.
When thinking about the motivations that lie behind what we do with reference to the environment … there’s a question that may be helpful in pointing the mind in the right direction.
There are several versions:
#1 Do you have any personal responsibility around preparing for a post-petroleum world (projected to be about 50 years out)?
If the answer to #1 is YES… then
#2 What are those resposibilities?
- Now ?
- 1 Year ?
- 5 Years ?
etc.?
Have patience with everything unresolved in your heart and … Try to love the questions themselves as if they were locked rooms or books written in a very foreign language. Don’t search for the answers, which could not be given to you now, because you would not be able to live them. And the point is to live everything. Live the questions now. Perhaps then, someday far in the future, you will gradually, without even noticing it, live your way into the answer. Rainer Maria Rilke
How, Then Shall We Live? “Muller meditates on four questions–Who am I? What do I love? How shall I live, knowing I will die? What is my gift to the family on the earth? This quietly magical program also offers several exercises and practices. Muller’s voice is calm, soft, and reassuring as he weaves meditations, poetry, religious allusions from East and West, and his personal experiences as a minister. He captivates with the strength of his message.”
Via Amazon and P.B.J. © AudioFile 2001, Portland, Maine
American Journalism Review: “Instead of asking Sarah Ferguson, for example, ‘Is it hard being a duchess?’ ask: ‘What’s it like being a duchess?’ Instead of asking Ronald Reagan, ‘Were you scared when you were shot?’ ask: ‘What’s it like to be shot?’ “
(Via Susan Paterno at AJR.)
American Journalism Review: “His method is based on asking questions beginning with what, how, why and to a lesser degree, who, when and where. Not exactly a novel concept. But what Sawatsky succeeds in showing is how even the best-constructed questions will fall flat if laden with the interviewer’s attitude. “
(Via Susan Paterno.)
NPR : The Art of the Interview, ESPN-Style: “ The old saying goes, “There’s no such thing as a stupid question.” But in the opinion of at least one major television network, there is such a thing, and some of the least effective questions are coming from top broadcast journalists.”
Via
This question construction may have promise. Ask a good grammarian to analyze it … to get at what the question is actually doing.
1. What did you like about it? [Ask the group]
2. What did you not like about it? [Ask the "victim"]
3. What would you change? [ Ask the victim or everybody when people feel safe ]
Two column responses:
Column 1: Your immediate or obvious response to the question.
Column 2: The deeper answers that most closely approach the values you hear when you listen to the still small voice of your spirit, the voice you may have tried to ignore or drown out in your day-to-day life.
What do I desire?
Why is there something rather than nothing?
Who am I?
Can I love?
Am I free?
What is wrong with me?
What would it be like if I were healed?
What help is there?
Who are my people?
What is evil?
Is there meaning in my life?
How do we heal the earth?
From Sam Keen via Suzanne Stabile, Workshop on Contemplation and Action, Life in the Trinity, Summer 2006
