As the GTD experts often kindly say. . . .

G

gtdstudente

Registered
As the GTD experts often kindly say:

"You don't have problems . . . you have Projects [outcome thinking . . . what does done look like]"

Kind of likewise?

Projects are "Figuring Out(s)" . . . like 'figuring-out' the Next Action

As you see GTD fit. . . .
 
Last edited:
Not to discourage you, but sometimes determining "what it should look like in the end" is much easier than determining the path to "what it should look like in the end".
 
That’s an interesting way to frame it. “Figuring out” really does capture the spirit of how GTD encourages constant clarity. It’s like every project starts as a question we’re slowly answering through each Next Action.
 
Palgent said:
That’s an interesting way to frame it. “Figuring out” really does capture the spirit of how GTD encourages constant clarity. It’s like every project starts as a question we’re slowly answering through each Next Action.
Click to expand...
Project: Explaining the quantum theory of gravity.
Next action: Er..., um ..., well ... ;)
 
Tom_Hagen said:
Project: Explaining the quantum theory of gravity.
Next action: Er..., um ..., well ... ;)
Click to expand...
What would you like to know? How to quantize the standard Einstein-Hilbert action? How to start from flat-space spin-2 perturbations of the metric tensor and go from there? Renormalization of gravity? Maybe an explanation of Hawking radiation from black holes?
 
René Lie said:
Well, for starters, the meaning of life, the universe, and everything is 42...
Click to expand...
In fact, the first person to come up with the idea of calculating the final result was the Polish writer Stanisław Lem in the 1960s. I mean the story "How the World Was Saved" from the collection "Fables of Robots". In this story, a machine constructed by Trurl is supposed to calculate the entire meaning of the Universe. The result? The machine finally "began to growl, snort and thrash internally, and then suddenly fell silent and spat out the result:

one.

Interpretation:
This "1" is a humorous, philosophical summary - that everything comes down to unity, to being, to something absolutely simple. It is also a satire on the human need to find one, ultimate meaning - and to try to measure it mathematically.

Douglas Adams was the second...
 
Tom_Hagen said:
In fact, the first person to come up with the idea of calculating the final result was the Polish writer Stanisław Lem in the 1960s.
Click to expand...
@Tom_Hagen Thank you for remembering this great Polish science fiction writer. The Iron Curtain and Philip K. Dick (who claimed that LEM is a communist disinformation network) have made it very difficult to popularize his insightful novels, short stories and fables in the West. In 1960s he has foresaw the dangers of the global information network – that it would make us dumber since it would increase the availability of stupid things.
 
Last edited:
TesTeq said:
@Tom_Hagen Thank you for remembering this great Polish science fiction writer. The Iron Curtain and Philip K. Dick (who claimed that LEM is a communist disinformation network) have made it very difficult to popularize his insightful novels, short stories and fables in the West. In 1960s he has foresaw the dangers of the global information network – that it would make us dumber since it would increase the availability of stupid things.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info. I like the one he predicted the most: Kindle, although he called it Opton:

"I spent the whole afternoon in the bookstore. There were no books in it. They hadn't been printed for almost half a century. And I was so looking forward to them, after the microfilms that made up the "Prometheus" library. Nothing. You could no longer browse the shelves, weigh the volumes in your hand, feel their weight, announcing the size of the reading. The bookstore was more like an electron laboratory. Books were crystals with fixed content. You could read them with the help of an opton. It was even similar to a book, but with one, single page between the covers. When you touched it, subsequent pages of text appeared on it."

It was 1961 :)
 
mcogilvie said:
What would you like to know? How to quantize the standard Einstein-Hilbert action? How to start from flat-space spin-2 perturbations of the metric tensor and go from there? Renormalization of gravity? Maybe an explanation of Hawking radiation from black holes?
Click to expand...
That is exactly what I've been wanting to ask you! It's like you read my mind!
 
Tom_Hagen said:
In fact, the first person to come up with the idea of calculating the final result was the Polish writer Stanisław Lem in the 1960s.
Click to expand...
I beg to differ I would argue that the first one I know about is "The Nine Billion Names of God" is a 1953 science fiction short story by Arthur C. Clarke.
 
Oogiem said:
I beg to differ I would argue that the first one I know about is "The Nine Billion Names of God" is a 1953 science fiction short story by Arthur C. Clarke.
Click to expand...
Yes and no. Note that we are talking about a serious answer here, I would say a metaphysical one: knowing the truth leads to the end of the Universe, and the reader does not know the truth as such. If we are to think this way, we must point to the Bible, which for us believers gives the answer to the ultimate meaning of the Universe.

On the other hand, the idea of a grotesque answer in the form of a final number is found for the first time in Lem.
 
Tom_Hagen said:
knowing the truth leads to the end of the Universe, and the reader does not know the truth as such. If we are to think this way, we must point to the Bible,
Click to expand...
At the risk of delving into areas where I'm stepping on personal beliefs. I will grant that there are numbers in the many of the versions of the Christian bible. There are other texts that other religions consider to be sacred that also use numbers to indicate things. However as someone who is not religious I treat them all like the fiction stories mentioned above. I do recognize that for many people various religions offer comfort and solace and are deemed worthy of their attention and efforts but I've never been one of them.
 
Tom_Hagen said:
Yes and no. Note that we are talking about a serious answer here, I would say a metaphysical one: knowing the truth leads to the end of the Universe, and the reader does not know the truth as such. If we are to think this way, we must point to the Bible, which for us believers gives the answer to the ultimate meaning of the Universe.

On the other hand, the idea of a grotesque answer in the form of a final number is found for the first time in Lem.
Click to expand...
@Tom_Hagen

"metaphysical . . . knowing the truth leads to the end of the Universe . . . Bible . . . the answer to the ultimate meaning of the Universe."

In the spirit of GTD in the hope of having as much "Mind Like Water" as possible through 'meaningful focusing' as much as possible

Perhaps one could suggest the two following questions can save a lot of time, energy, etc.
Philosophy seems to be primarily concerned with "What Is?"
Religion seems to be primarily concerned with "Why Is?"

On this end, for good meaningful and hopeful living, the following has also been very helpful

Faith, and not limited to, without Reason is Superstition
Reason without Faith is Misery

As you see GTD fit. . . .
 
Last edited:
Oogiem said:
At the risk of delving into areas where I'm stepping on personal beliefs. I will grant that there are numbers in the many of the versions of the Christian bible. There are other texts that other religions consider to be sacred that also use numbers to indicate things. However as someone who is not religious I treat them all like the fiction stories mentioned above. I do recognize that for many people various religions offer comfort and solace and are deemed worthy of their attention and efforts but I've never been one of them.
Click to expand...
A large part of the numbers in the Bible are symbolic but do not constitute a final answer in themselves. If religion were only about comfort, it would be a waste of time - a good friend or vanilla ice cream would be enough. :)
It is about God, who is Love.

Warmest greetings to you
 
gtdstudente said:
@Tom_Hagen

"metaphysical . . . knowing the truth leads to the end of the Universe . . . Bible . . . the answer to the ultimate meaning of the Universe."

In the spirit of GTD in the hope of having as much "Mind Like Water" as possible through 'meaningful focusing' as much as possible

Perhaps one could suggest the two following questions can save a lot of time, energy, etc.
Philosophy seems to be primarily concerned with "What Is?"
Religion seems to be primarily concerned with "Why Is?"

On this end, for good meaningful and hopeful living, the following has also been very helpful

Faith, and not limited to, without Reason is Superstition
Reason without Faith is Misery

As you see GTD fit. . . .
Click to expand...
I agree. Faith must be rational. Here I recommend the encyclical "Fides et Ratio". As for philosophy, it seems to me that it asks somewhat broader questions. "What is it?" is just one of its branches, i.e. ontology. I would also add that science answers completely different questions, such as: "How does it work / function" and absolutely does not answer the questions "For what purpose" because it operates in a completely different cognitive field than faith.

It seems to me that we are already quite far from the subject of this group :))
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top