My Mama Don’t Told Me

My par­ents always threat­ened me with the
fol­low­ing statement:

” If you don’t study hard and work hard you will end up a sec­re­tary and
have to type all the time and you know how much you hate that!”

Well we stud­ied hard, we made the grade and for a few years in the 70’s
we lived the dream, with your own sec­re­tary, screen­ing calls, mail, appoint­ments
and meet­ings, etc..

Then along came the com­puter and we have been typ­ing ever since, thank­ful
we took
typ­ing in High School, we have also been stu­dents in an ever
chang­ing environment.

From Page­Maker to Quark, Free­hand to Illus­tra­tor, Quark to InDe­sign,
Illus­tra­tor to Fire­works, Pho­to­shop to After­Ef­fects, Flash to Dreamweaver,
HTML to HTML5, Action­Script 2 to 3, CSS to CSS, Joomla to Word­Press and all
over again the task is con­stant as is the dis­cov­ery and learning.

My par­ents are laugh­ing at the fact that I am read­ing and typing/writing all
the time, and say­ing, “You work to live not live to work”

I ask us all to reflect on the fact, we must absorb infor­ma­tion knowl­edge
And all that we need to be able to give our con­tri­bu­tion to the cre­ative pool.
As con­duits of cre­ative thought we often for­get that we must place our­selves
in a place were we can recharge and imag­ine and travel the unknown places in our
brains, thoughts and surroundings.

Take a moment every­day to find your ZEN ZONE and take a deep
for creativity.

The word ZEN is derived from the Japan­ese pro­nun­ci­a­tion of the Mid­dle Chinese/Mandarin:
Chan, which comes from the San­skrit word dhyana, which can be approx­i­mately
trans­lated “absorp­tion” or “med­i­ta­tive state”

Find Your Zen Zone!


Philoso­phers and their thoughts for you To Zen On


Plato was one of the ear­li­est philoso­phers to pro­vide a detailed dis­cus­sion of ideas.
He con­sid­ered the con­cept of idea in the realm of meta­physics. He asserted that there
is a realm of Forms or Ideas, which exist inde­pen­dently of any­one who may have thought
of these ideas. Mate­r­ial things are then imper­fect and tran­sient reflec­tions or
instan­ti­a­tions of the per­fect and unchang­ing ideas. From this it fol­lows that these
Ideas are the prin­ci­pal real­ity. In con­trast to the indi­vid­ual objects of sense
expe­ri­ence, which undergo con­stant change and flux, Plato held that ideas are per­fect,
eter­nal, and immutable. Con­se­quently, Plato con­sid­ered that knowl­edge of mate­r­ial
things is not really knowl­edge; real knowl­edge can only be had of unchang­ing ideas.

René Descartes

Descartes often wrote of the mean­ing of idea as an image or rep­re­sen­ta­tion,
often but not nec­es­sar­ily “in the mind”, which was well known in the ver­nac­u­lar.
“Some of my thoughts are like images of things, and it is to these alone that
the name ‘idea’ prop­erly belongs.“
In con­trast to the indi­vid­ual objects of sense expe­ri­ence, which undergo con­stant
change and flux, Plato held that ideas are per­fect, eter­nal, and immutable.
Con­se­quently, Plato con­sid­ered that knowl­edge of mate­r­ial things is not really
knowl­edge; real knowl­edge can only be had of unchang­ing ideas.

John Locke

In strik­ing con­trast to Plato’s use of idea is that of John Locke.
Locke defines idea as “that term which, I think, serves best to stand for
what­so­ever is the object of the under­stand­ing when a man thinks, I have used it to
express what­ever is meant by phan­tasm, notion, species, or what­ever it is which the
mind can be employed about in think­ing; and I could not avoid fre­quently using it.”

Immanuel Kant

Immanuel Kant defines an idea as opposed to a con­cept. “Reg­u­la­tor ideas” are ideals
that one must tend towards, but by def­i­n­i­tion may not be com­pletely real­ized. Lib­erty,
accord­ing to Kant, is an idea. The auton­omy of the ratio­nal and uni­ver­sal sub­ject
is opposed to the deter­min­ism of the empir­i­cal subject.[9] Kant felt that it is
pre­cisely in know­ing its lim­its that phi­los­o­phy exists. The busi­ness of phi­los­o­phy
he thought was not to give rules, but to ana­lyze the pri­vate judge­ments
of good com­mon sense

Rudolf Steiner

“Think­ing … is no more and no less an organ of per­cep­tion than the eye or ear.
Just as the eye per­ceives col­ors and the ear sounds, so think­ing per­ceives ideas.”
He holds this to be the premise upon which Goethe made his natural-scientific

Charles Sanders Peirce

He pro­posed that a clear idea (in his study he uses con­cept and idea as syn­onymic)
is defined as one, when it is appre­hended such as it will be rec­og­nized wher­ever it
is met, and no other will be mis­taken for it. If it fails of this clear­ness, it is
said to be obscure. He argued that to under­stand an idea clearly we should ask
our­selves what dif­fer­ence its appli­ca­tion would make to our eval­u­a­tion of a
pro­posed solu­tion to the prob­lem at hand.

G.F. Stout and J.M. Baldwin

It should be observed that an idea, in the nar­rower and gen­er­ally accepted sense
of a men­tal repro­duc­tion, is fre­quently com­pos­ite. That is, as in the exam­ple given
above of the idea of chair, a great many objects, dif­fer­ing mate­ri­ally in detail,
all call a sin­gle idea. When a man, for exam­ple, has obtained an idea of chairs in
gen­eral by com­par­i­son with which he can say “This is a chair, that is a stool”,
he has what is known as an “abstract idea” dis­tinct from the repro­duc­tion in
his mind of any par­tic­u­lar chair (see abstrac­tion). Fur­ther­more a com­plex idea
may not have any cor­re­spond­ing phys­i­cal object, though its par­tic­u­lar con­stituent
ele­ments may sev­er­ally be the repro­duc­tions of actual per­cep­tions. Thus the idea
of a cen­taur is a com­plex men­tal pic­ture com­posed of the ideas of man and horse,
that of a mer­maid of a woman and a fish.

Dr. Samuel Johnson

John­son claimed that they are men­tal images or inter­nal visual pic­tures.
As such, they have no rela­tion to words or the con­cepts which are
des­ig­nated by ver­bal names.

A Book that Puts all that Zen together

Imag­ine: How Cre­ativ­ity Works  “Jonah Lehrer”

Did you know that the most cre­ative com­pa­nies have cen­tral­ized bath­rooms?
That brain­storm­ing meet­ings are a ter­ri­ble idea? That the color blue can help
you dou­ble your cre­ative out­put? From the New York Times best-selling author of
How We Decide comes a sparkling and rev­e­la­tory look at the new sci­ence of cre­ativ­ity.
Shat­ter­ing the myth of muses, higher pow­ers, even cre­ative “types,”
Jonah Lehrer demon­strates that cre­ativ­ity is not a sin­gle gift pos­sessed
by the lucky few. It’s a vari­ety of dis­tinct thought processes that we
can all learn to use more effectively…


Zen for the Zen Of It…

No related posts.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>