The 365 Commitment

Guy Reams

The 365 Commitment Podcast focuses on helping people make and keep life changing commitments.

  1. 1d ago

    Day 361 - Is the Brain Getting Old or Just Changing?

    When I was younger, I had a steel-trap brain. I was wickedly smart and remembered every little detail. This superpower came in handy. Everything from system admin command-line details to the day's grocery list. Now that I am getting older, that trusty recall capability has started to fail me. It is unsettling to suddenly realize that I cannot remember every detail. I have to write things down or find a way to keep track so I don't find myself drawing blanks at the wrong time. So is my brain just getting old? Recent studies suggest it's less about getting old and more about changing jobs. When you were younger, capturing details was an important part of the job. However, as you get older, your brain may shift toward more important tasks. Healthy aging may shift cognition away from preserving every detail and toward extracting meaning, judgment, and transferable wisdom. Recent research from the University of Arizona by Fabian-Xose Fernandez and colleagues has introduced an adaptive aging concept. They theorize that healthy aging includes this exact shift in focus away from the brain's frontal systems and toward areas that need more integration. So there is still hope for me. What I need to understand is that I am finding it difficult to recall details with the same capability as my younger self, not because something is wrong, but because there is a natural cycle going on as I get older. I am being drawn away from the technical minutiae that have been part of my entire life toward higher-order things that imply more meaning and purpose. The important point is that perhaps I should focus less on holding myself accountable for consistently collecting and learning facts. That consistency can mature from collecting more facts to transmitting what matters. So rather than being discouraged about losing mental power, I should instead be listening to what my brain is encouraging me to do. It could very well be that my mind knows what it is good at and I am being slowly guided in that direction. Ah, that feels better. Now, if I could only remember what I was supposed to be working on today?

    Day 361 - Is the Brain Getting Old or Just Changing?
  2. 2d ago

    Day 360 - The Concept of Eudaimonia

    In my early days of college, I had a pair of humanities teachers who could tie pretty much anything in life back to Greek writings. They'd say something like, "Well, if we look back at what the early followers of Socrates had to say on this matter..." One day, they thought it would be a great exercise for us to read Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, Book I, as a class. Fun times, to say the least. In this writing, Aristotle observes the highest human good, which he calls eudaimonia. The concept is that human good can be defined when our activities align with the virtues we cherish. So when we do things that align with our values, we are doing good, and in Aristotle's mind, that is the highest order of good. You might have heard the phrase that one swallow does not make a summer. Meaning, the sight of one of these birds does not mean summer is upon us, but hundreds of them do. Apply this to your actions, and the concept makes sense. You are not good just because I am looking at one action, but because of a series of actions over time. That is what provides the person with evidence that they have achieved this eudaimonia. This helps us understand what it takes to feel genuinely happy, rather than just experiencing a temporary feeling of pleasure. Happiness seems to be a general sense that your life is good, worthwhile, and sufficiently aligned with what you value. A wealthy person who has money to burn and spends it on a constant source of pleasure will eventually become despondent. They will start to seek real happiness once the allure of satisfying the need to just feel good is gone. Aristotle cared less about whether you felt happy in a particular moment than about whether you lived well and did well over the course of a complete life. So, when we talk about living well, it's not just about chasing fleeting highs or avoiding every bump in the road. It's more about finding that rhythm where what you do, day in and day out, really clicks with what you believe in. It's about building a life that, when you look back, feels yours and full of purpose genuinely, even with all its messy bits. Maybe it's about seeing those moments of struggle not as roadblocks, but as essential parts of the journey that make the good times even richer.

    Day 360 - The Concept of Eudaimonia
  3. 3d ago

    Day 359 - Opinionated or Good Judgement?

    Having an opinion is a cognitive trait we usually admire, especially when it's grounded in evidence. However, being opinionated is different. This usually refers to people who hold opinions strongly and frequently and tend to push them on others. So when do we cross this line? What social dynamics are at play? Conversation depends on a kind of reciprocity. A back-and-forth, and we tend to like the game evenly matched. We expect people to say what they think, but also to remain open to what others think. An opinionated person is perceived as having moved from: “Here is what I think.” to “Here is how things are.” Strong opinions can signal certainty beyond evidence. We tend to admire conviction when someone has earned it through expertise or careful thought. But when someone seems equally certain about everything, certainty starts looking like arrogance. The problem isn't the strength of your belief; it's your unwillingness to update it. Another reason people put you in the opinionated camp is that you express your opinions frequently. Someone who has a forceful position on politics, restaurants, parenting, software, movies, how you load the dishwasher, and the correct route to the airport can become exhausting. Their opinions begin consuming conversational space. The lesson is that a strong, well-informed opinion doesn't have to be received negatively by others. The point is that you need to deliver this appropriately. “Opinionated” tends to be used when the observer thinks the expression of the opinion has exceeded what the situation calls for. Know what you think. Explain why. Act on it when necessary. But remain genuinely interested in evidence that might change your mind. That combination tends to be perceived not as opinionated, but as good judgment.

    Day 359 - Opinionated or Good Judgement?
  4. 3d ago

    Day 358 - We Remember Legend

    A person or group doesn't become legendary simply by doing something impressive. Other people have to keep telling the story, and that retelling becomes the legend. History may be what actually happened, but legend is what people decide is worth remembering. If you extend this concept over a few hundred years, history no longer matters. Essentially, if no one remembers it, then it might as well have not happened, at least in the eyes of those who are alive at the moment of the telling. Extend that over thousands of years, and only the legend remains. Think of the story of Noah and the ark. Did that actually happen? Was there a flood? Was Noah a real person? I would venture to say yes, and I would be inclined to believe there was a real person and that some event occurred. I would also be willing to say Noah was probably a gifted individual with unique characteristics. However, it is also equally true that his deeds got exaggerated in the retelling. Oral and cultural transmission produced a need to place this remarkable character in a magnificent story, and so that is what happened. Then cultural and symbolic meaning was introduced, and all of this happened because some great Hebrew scholar, perhaps even Moses, decided to write the story down. Then you ponder: is the story true? That is entirely the wrong question because thousands of years of humanity is not capable of delivering up historical accuracy; it is only capable of producing a story, and that one will always be rooted in legend, at least the ones that survive. So the real question is: what is so meaningful about this legend that humans felt so compelled to hold onto it for so long? Why did they create this legend in the first place? Consider your own family. What legends do you have? We have several, and it is really interesting to consider how they got created and why they were passed down. I have noticed that some are growing dim, while others are starting to emerge. It's fascinating what we remember about our own families as generations pass by. Which leads me to the final conclusion. As I look over the many decades of my life, I wonder what parts of my life would even be considered legendary? Or at least a story the next generation would be compelled to remember, exaggerate, and embellish as the years roll along. Not sure; I might have one or two, but perhaps this is an opportunity to find something that I could do with the last half of my life that might be considered legendary in some fashion?

    Day 358 - We Remember Legend
  5. 5d ago

    Day 357 - Curiosity is Cheap

    I have an admission to make that is important for this discussion to make sense. The problem is that conversations with people drain me. Classic introvert problem. When you get into a conversation, you leave feeling drained, like someone took your energy. As a result, you tend to avoid interactions with people, even when you know they are important and necessary. You simply cannot build a relationship with someone without having conversations with them, and this created a constant dilemma. You absolutely must make time to talk, meet, engage, and interact with the person or people you are trying to build a relationship with. I know this sounds obvious, but for someone like me, it is a mountain I climb almost every day. Why is this? I have spent decades wrestling with this problem, and I have figured a few things out. First of all, interacting with people absolutely is an energy transaction. You resist or dread talking to other people because you are anticipating the energy cost of that experience. If, for example, you had to have a difficult conversation with an employee, you would anticipate it being hard. You would know ahead of time that the conversation would be difficult and most likely emotionally challenging. That's how I view every conversation. This is to not to say that I do not like people. I do. I enjoy relationships and truly want them; it is just the anticipated energy cost of conversation that is hard. So I tend to avoid it, even though I know avoidance is bad. I am not alone in this. Chances are if you are still reading or listening to this, then you have also experienced this or are dealing with someone like this. So what is a technique to overcome the hesitancy to meet with others due to the angst over having another draining conversation? When someone is already feeling down, discouraged, or struggling in life, then it gets even worse. They want to hide away because they avoid any potential drain on their mental energy while in preservation mode. So this technique must also consider this challenge. The perceived energy cost has to be significantly reduced so a person will not avoid or dread the pending conversation. How? Although I have many strategies, the one that has been the most helpful to me is the concept that curiosity is cheap. These conversations drain me because of the energy I put into preparing, thinking about, and then replaying them in my mind. I imagine the version of myself that I have historically brought into professional situations: engaged, articulate, carrying conversations, making people comfortable, generating ideas, building enthusiasm. That version of me is expensive in terms of mental energy. Curiosity, however, does not require that version of myself. Curiosity requires little preparation. When you're socially depleted, the expensive part isn't necessarily being with people. It's the sense that you have to produce something for them. This is the thinking that gets you into trouble: I need to be interesting. I need to have something intelligent to say. I need to demonstrate value. I need to keep the conversation moving. I need them to like me. That's expensive. You're simultaneously generating ideas, monitoring their reaction, choosing words, remembering context, managing your presentation, and thinking about what comes next. Curiosity reverses the direction of the energy flow. Instead of producing, you're receiving. Asking questions is cheap because it reduces self-monitoring. You move away from internal psycho analysis to thinking about the other person. An added benefit: curiosity shows the other person that your intent is genuine interest, which goes a long way to improving any relationship. Curiosity gives you permission to arrive without bringing the show, and that is good for both sides of the conversation. So remember, if you are dreading the next conversation, use this simple concept. Performance is expensive; curiosity is cheap.

    Day 357 - Curiosity is Cheap
  6. 5d ago

    Day 356 - Anger Caused by Friction

    I have been spending more time lately trying to get in touch with my emotions. Finally, after all these years, I am confronting those internal demons and doing what that preschool teacher told me when I was 4. She said, " You need to get in control of yourself! I have spent over 50 years trying to figure out just what that woman meant by that. What is control? Who is in control? How can I control myself? Alas, she probably did not realize the lifetime of mental torment she would inflict upon me, or perhaps she did? Anyway, one emotion that I experience from time to time is that of aggravation. Or at least that is what I call it. It is this sudden irritation that makes me want to scream, or clench my fists or something of that nature. It happens sometimes at the silliest of moments. I drop something, a pen, on the floor, and that was the last straw, and now I am feeling this sudden massive flood of emotion. I decided to spend some time researching and thinking about this phenomenon. The important idea that I uncovered is that this feeling of aggravation is a real, low form of anger that is caused by friction. Something gets in the way of what you are trying to do, and that friction causes you to respond. However, why is it sometimes at DEFCON 1 and other times at DEFCON 5? I think there is wisdom in viewing this as an escalation pattern. You experience friction (DEFCON 1), then you feel irritated (DEFCON 2), then you start to get aggravated (DEFCON 3), and then you get angry (DEFCON 4). I suppose the last straw is when you start throwing things, having a temper tantrum, or deciding to sell your house and buy a sailboat. The emotional intensity often grows not because the actual problem becomes much larger, but because your mind begins accumulating evidence: this keeps happening, nothing is changing, and I have to keep spending energy on it. This added element makes it more than frustrating. The added element is that you feel you shouldn't have to deal with this at all. So frustration plus the friction you feel is unnecessary becomes aggravation. To put this all in a useful phrase that has helped me put this into perspective: Aggravation is often the emotional response to repeatedly spending attention on something you believe should not deserve that attention.

    Day 356 - Anger Caused by Friction
  7. 6d ago

    Day 355 - The Canary Principle

    The canary principle can be best stated as follows: Before exposing the whole system to a change, expose a small part of it and watch closely. This idea comes from coal mining. Miners faced invisible threats such as carbon monoxide. Because canaries are more sensitive to dangerous gases than humans, a caged bird could provide an early warning that the atmosphere was becoming unsafe. Poor canary. This concept has since been used in software development. Martin Fowler, one of the forefathers of modern software development, describes it as gradually rolling out a release to a small subset of users before making it available to everyone. You have probably experienced this before when using a software interface, but you didn't realize what was happening. Perhaps you thought you were special for getting a new feature, but in reality you were the canary! This principle applies outside the development world and even in our personal lives. Consider an expanded definition: When uncertainty is unavoidable, reduce the cost of learning rather than trying to eliminate uncertainty. We all know we'll eventually have to face reality. However, perhaps we do not have to confront reality all at once. This life philosophy could serve us well. For example, are you considering changing jobs? The all-at-once strategy would say that you need to quit your job, start your consulting gig, and see if you like it. Wow! That is a big risk; what if you hate it? The canary principle would say you should take one consulting engagement first, see what the work is like, and then decide whether you want to go to the next level. You do not need to go all in and make irreversible decisions when reversible experiments will answer the question. Ask yourself, what is the smallest version of this that I can try? Can I reverse this decision easily, and how would I know if it was working? In essence, the canary principle encourages you to risk a little to learn a lot before you risk a lot.

    Day 355 - The Canary Principle
  8. Sep 28

    Day 354 - Evidence of Work is Not Evidence of Learning

    We all instinctively know this is not right, yet we tolerate it. Anyone who has recently made it through K-12 or has been a parent of these young people knows what I mean. School has increasingly substituted evidence of work for evidence of learning. A completed worksheet, a submitted Google Classroom assignment, a passing quiz, satisfactory completion of an online module. These all fall firmly into the evidence-of-work category. All of these things were intended to support learning, not replace it. They have become proxies for learning, and now we have a problem. Artificial Intelligence is brutally effective at exposing bad proxies. So schools are now banning devices, banning AI use, and spending billions on district-controlled devices and methods to restrict cellular traffic. Doing everything they can to prevent what they are referring to as the mechanism that is harming education. A student can now produce the worksheet, the five-paragraph essay, the chapter summary, the vocabulary definitions, the discussion-board response, and perhaps even the presentation without much underlying knowledge. Schools understandably see this as a crisis. Countless dollars spent on software, online curricula, and evidence-based modalities are now at risk. This begs the question. What exactly is under threat of being lost? If the educational activity was primarily “read this, answer these questions, submit it by Friday,” AI has not destroyed teaching. It has destroyed the mechanism schools were using to verify compliance. That is uncomfortable because it forces education back toward the expensive, difficult thing: actual teaching. What is being exposed here is a fallacy. For decades, we have often treated the production of academic artifacts as the same as the development of a mind. They are not the same thing. Three things that I was not eager to do in school were to read, write, and solve math problems represented in paragraph form, what kids call word problems. An essay is important because writing forces a person to organize their thoughts. Math problems help you build intuition for problem solving, and reading builds sustained attention and fosters comprehension. It is absolutely correct to fear that if a student performs these artifacts while skipping the cognitive work, then yes, something important is being lost. However, the answer cannot be "We need better ways to make sure students complete the worksheets themselves.” Which is almost a direct quote that I heard from a school administration official recently. AI proliferation is almost universal, at least in the halls of U.S. high schools, so it will get increasingly difficult to confuse completion with competence. The question is not whether the student completed the activity. The question is, did the student do the cognitive work the exercise was intended to create? Perhaps the real educational opportunity AI presents is that it makes busy work nearly impossible to defend. If a machine can complete an assignment perfectly while learning absolutely nothing, we should at least ask whether completion of that assignment was ever particularly good evidence that a human being had learned anything in the first place. We all already know this. AI did not create the crisis in education. It revealed that much of education had already been automated before AI arrived. We now need to make the thinking visible. Measure thinking, not completion. We can no longer focus on assessing the artifact. We will have to focus on our ability to explain, defend, apply, question, revise, and extend what we have produced, whether AI helped create it or not.

    Day 354 - Evidence of Work is Not Evidence of Learning

About

The 365 Commitment Podcast focuses on helping people make and keep life changing commitments.