On Stating the Obvious
A few days ago I wrote a piece that I posted here called Seeing Around Corners. There were several hundred views and two comments. Both of the comments criticized the piece as “stating the obvious”. I’ve been writing about business and risk management for a number of years and I’ve had a number of people disagree with me and on occasion, regrettably, I’ve had some errors in my thinking or my facts pointed out to me, but I don’t think I’ve ever been accused of being “obvious”.
Some background might be useful in the point that I would like to make. For most of my adult life I have worked in management positions – in mental health, financial services and advertising. It has really only been in the last four years that I have become aware of, among other things, the component parts of our financial system and the impact of the exponential function. That has contributed to my writing as well as a weekly radio program – where I had the opportunity to interview Chris a few months ago (now that he is becoming famous I can always say I knew him when…). The pieces that I post on the site are syndicated on a number of other sites around the world – from http://www.forceforgood.com in the UK to http://www.consciousmedianetwork.com in California (this latter site has also promoted this site – it’s how I got to Chris).
From what I can see, PeakProsperity.com is about to experience the exponential function. The PBS program will no doubt be a platform from which Chris will be able to expand his audience and the website will likely gain members at an exponential rate. Many of these people will likely be “newbies”; a category in which I would probably include myself. But they will also be people who bring a variety of new perspectives. They will be cops and lawyers, operating officers and insurance salespeople and all sorts of others – perhaps some who have been lumped into the category of “spiritual.
So in defense of stating the obvious I would say two things. First, although there are many readers on the site there are relatively few people who contribute to threads. I suppose there is nothing one can do to insist that others contribute but sometimes it gets the feeling of inside baseball. New people are going to bring new ideas and they may or may not have fully integrated the ideas in the Crash Course. I know that I learn something new each time I review a section so there may be a benefit in restating in a variety of ways the ideas on the Course.
Second, in my experience as a teacher I have occasionally had students who have taken some of the concepts that I had spent a good deal of time in developing and gone off in a completely new direction – one that I hadn’t anticipated and one that has a lot of validity. There is always a challenge when a set of ideas gains acceptance by a larger audience. Those who were there first feel some sense of ownership. After all, they endured the slings and arrows of the majority who couldn’t see the value or, for lack of a better term, the obvious truth in what they were saying.
So, after thinking about it for a few days, I guess I’m OK with stating the obvious.
I wish to express my deepest regrets for criticizing your piece. If I have caused you any distress, I am truly sorry.
Your Humbled Friend;
Perhaps it was not so much "stating the obvious" as no one felt the need to address what you wrote.
I read your comments and interpreted them as a "stream of consciousness" laid down on paper. I note that you had 229 views, so a number of folks spent time looking at your post.
However, nothing that you wrote triggered my "need-to-respond gene" – nor too many others either. Please don’t interpret this as negative as many posts go without any comment at all. Some of mine have received some views and absolutely no comments. That’s normal in a busy forum like this site. So much has already been discussed that only fairly provocative posts tend to get any reaction these days.
Next time, write about religion, guns, or sex. You’re sure to get some interest that way!
I always measure my emotional response against an experience I had many years ago when a 225lb patient that I was counseling came at me with an 8 inch butcher knife – that hurt my feelings.
ignore the static here, I enjoy your observations and they are very much a welcome addition to this site. There are some intimate circles promoting their take here and it will be refreshing to read a newer and broader variety of input. Chris has been adept at leaping some very large chasms in getting this far with his promotional techique’, and I feel we are indeed at the very base of an exciting ‘exponential function’.
I look forward to your future articles,
Bill my comment was meant and addressed for Gadfly to prove that however lacking in verbosity, someone else could be even more so. The moral highground is hard to hold.
I must admit that I find long posts difficult as I don’t spend long enough here to read every one and often skim or worse not even read some long ones. I try to guage if a subject is of interest to me then to see how much reading is involved before I post. No doubt there is some sort of balance involved and not easily attained.
My appologies too if you took my response as criticism. I hold and held no view on the subject matter but truly believe that diversity is our greatest strength and applaud your contribution to it.
7 billion people can be wrong, very wrong
I am saddened to hear of this violent attack on your person. I hope it was not due to an intolerance towards loquaciousness, as that would certainly be an overreaction on his/her part.
Your Personal Apologist:
Sorry about that Gadfly,
You were caught in the line of fire…
There is no need to be sorry, friend. I respect a man who will state what is on his mind without resorting to half-truths and total fabrications. I detect no deception from you.
it is at times like those where it helps to be from the streets of new york