We have this word for a certain kind of excitement which we feel for a few seconds here and there. It often seems connected to subsequently performing some action or behavior. We call that “motivation.”
I hear about it a lot in the fitness industry. People talk about getting motivated, staying motivated, losing motivation. There are motivational speakers and motivations speeches. Although, if you examine the people who’ve listened to some of the best speeches, on average they’re entirely unchanged 5 years later.
The thing is, I don’t know if I buy it. The greatest accomplishments in history are generally borne out of a pretty demotivated and defeated feeling. The greatest successes I’ve ever had, known, seen, or heard of, grew out of the depths, not the heights.
So seeking “motivation” as an explanatory tool or a catalytic starter hits me as illusory. People have purpose, or they don’t. People are honest with themselves, or they aren’t. People trend toward the familiar, the same patterns, thoughts, behaviors. If we always trend toward the familiar, how does motivation really fit philosophically? Moreover, how can we honestly believe it should play a role in the pretext of our efforts or the explanation for our downfall?
We already know whatever this made-up thing is, this “motivation,” that the most real and palpable it ever will be is temporary. Does that make it reliable? Does that make it important? Does the fact that it comes and goes make it a smart investment tool?
Really, I don’t care about motivation. The most motivated you ever felt didn’t stay. The most motivated you’ll ever get will vanish. Find something real, something steady, something bigger.
Or get stuck in the illusion.
I hear about it a lot in the fitness industry. People talk about getting motivated, staying motivated, losing motivation. There are motivational speakers and motivations speeches. Although, if you examine the people who’ve listened to some of the best speeches, on average they’re entirely unchanged 5 years later.
The thing is, I don’t know if I buy it. The greatest accomplishments in history are generally borne out of a pretty demotivated and defeated feeling. The greatest successes I’ve ever had, known, seen, or heard of, grew out of the depths, not the heights.
So seeking “motivation” as an explanatory tool or a catalytic starter hits me as illusory. People have purpose, or they don’t. People are honest with themselves, or they aren’t. People trend toward the familiar, the same patterns, thoughts, behaviors. If we always trend toward the familiar, how does motivation really fit philosophically? Moreover, how can we honestly believe it should play a role in the pretext of our efforts or the explanation for our downfall?
We already know whatever this made-up thing is, this “motivation,” that the most real and palpable it ever will be is temporary. Does that make it reliable? Does that make it important? Does the fact that it comes and goes make it a smart investment tool?
Really, I don’t care about motivation. The most motivated you ever felt didn’t stay. The most motivated you’ll ever get will vanish. Find something real, something steady, something bigger.
Or get stuck in the illusion.