Recently, I have trained my logical strength. It is interesting! It freed me from intense empathy, and I also made various discoveries. One example is the feeling of hardship. Today, I will talk about it.
How to get out of adversity
Sometimes, we want to get out of adversity, especially if we have a goal.
Many factors hinder us from proceeding with our goals. Examples are other trivial choirs, results not going as planned, losing our motivation, and lack of talent. They irritate us and lose our mental balance.
We sometimes don’t know how to deal with these hardships. We feel like we can only struggle.
However, I recently realized that I no longer experienced hardships after I started to train my logical sense. Although it is still a short time, I realized that rationality eliminated the feeling of adversity.
Today, I will explain why it drives away the suffering of difficult situations. This might help you get out of your current predicaments.
Empathic approach vs. logical approach
Living with logical sense eliminates the feeling of adversity.
The reason is simple. The feeling of hardships is caused by empathic imagination, and rationality limits empathy.
In other words, we don’t process the meaning of irritation rationally when we feel difficulties. That makes us keep feeling emotional stress of hindrance.
There are two approaches to accomplishments, as follows:
- Empathic approach: We try to achieve based on our images. We have clear, imaginable goals. It means that factors that contradict the image are all adversities.
- Logical approach: We try to achieve based on our rationality. We have directions, which can also be principles, instead of goals. It means we follow our curiosity toward unknowns. New rational behavior is always something unknown to us.
They tell us why a logical approach eliminates adversity. Clear goals cause hindrance. If we follow our curiosity, nothing obstructs our goals. This is because we don’t have goals.
Clear goals cause suffering for people with unique individuality.
Let’s take a closer look below.
Why having a clear goal is pointless
If we have unique natures that we don’t know how to show, having a clear goal will be pointless. This is because we cannot set a goal if we don’t know how to use our talents.
We want to use our uniqueness. If our goal is appropriate, we never encounter hardships. This is because we can show all the talents we have.
However, adversities are areas in which we cannot use our abilities. Our purpose is to show our talents. There is no point in sticking to them.
In other words, we have to modify our goals whenever we face adversity. Holding the initial clear goal is meaningless.
It tells us we don’t need even a goal. Problems always arise at any time, regardless of their size. It is unreasonable to identify new clear goals every time in response to new issues.
That is why having a clear goal is pointless for people with the uniqueness that we don’t know how to use.
Finding our talents first
The concept of minimalism in production that I introduced in the previous article (this article) is for this purpose.
In that method, we try to find principles, which are the areas that indicate our talents. The earlier we identify how to use our uniqueness, the more effectively we can live.
To find it efficiently, we use curiosity. Curiosity is a logical feature that breaks down difficulties into easy steps. It allows us to develop our skills with joy.
It means there is no adversity. In a place where we can fully utilize our abilities, suffering is minimized.
Which to choose
That tells us the efficient way to use an empathic approach and a logical one. They are as follows:
- If we are satisfied with the current situation, an empathic approach would give us more satisfaction.
- If we are unsatisfied with the current situation and want to change, a logical approach is more rational.
In other words, it is unreasonable to struggle with hardships if we want to change our current situations by using our uniqueness. Instead, we can seek easier, concrete steps as early as possible. That would be rational.
Deciding based on our values
Of course, logically, we never determine which is better. Both have pros and cons.
For example, comparing our situations with more unfortunate people makes us spiritual. There are so many tragedies in the world, such as war, famine, illness, poverty, and disasters.
Spiritually speaking, we should be grateful for our situation. In my case, I have no such misfortune. It tells us that everyone must know contentment.
However, logically speaking, it doesn’t create efficiency for the future. If there is even one person in the world who is more unfortunate than us, should we continue to endure the current situation? No! It is unreasonable. We can improve ourselves and the world.
They are the typical example of our duality. We have contradictions, even inside one body.
Deciding based on our philosophy
The final criterion would be one’s philosophy. If we value our responsibility, we judge based on our moods. On the other hand, for people who prefer sociality, deciding by social values would be a better way.
It tells me we can choose freely.
In my case, my mind says it is unsatisfied with my current situation and wants change, so I am now trying a more logical approach with fun. I am living with my duality.
Conclusion
That is why logical sense eliminates the feeling of adversity.
There are two approaches: empathic and logical.
If we have unique individualities that we don’t know how to show, a logical approach would be rational, although we can choose them freely.
This might help you get out of your current predicaments.
Thank you for reading this article. I hope to see you in the next one.
