I have been thinking about the role of disconnection in becoming. Becoming does not look the same for all of us. My observations are based mostly on my own experience, and that of people that I am close to. I think that (for some of us) there are times that becoming looks more like transformation or even metamorphosis than continuous growth. In these times, it is natural, and even necessary to feel a sense of disconnection from who are (soon to be who we were) so that we can enter this new phase. I also think that the transition can be a little messy and even ugly. There are many metaphors to elucidate the idea (snake shedding its skin, caterpillars and butterflies, tadpoles and frogs). One of the challenges we have as humans is understanding when the disconnection we feel is pushing us deeper into our becoming and when it is keeping us from it. I'm curious if others have had this experience and what clues you look for in your life in deciding how to respond. Right now, in my own life, I see a transformation on the horizon as I am almost at the end of my child-rearing years. But currently, I feel very connected both to the life I am living now with shuttling kids to activities and many dishes, as well as to a future that is beginning to manifest as the kids take on more independence. I am wistful about time that is past, afternoons spent in playgrounds, for example. I told my daughter on our drive home, that time feel a bit like the stitches of a quilting thread, with some pieces of the past peeking through and others hidden beneath the surface. I don't know yet whether my life will be one large quilt or multiple separate pieces. The second, I think, requires disconnection, and either case can be full of beauty and goodness, which is what I aspire to bring into the world. I'm a little nervous about posting this, but it seems the best place to share this sort of reflection. Thanks @Steven Lawson for making a space where we can share.

Currently going through Aristotle for a research paper, and thought I’d share a fundamental idea of his that seems relevant to the ongoing discussion. This is a piece of quoted commentary on Aristotle’s general view of what nature and/or natural objects are: “Nature is, or natural objects are, that which itself contains the determination of what it is or is to be, while art is, or artificial objects are, that which has this determination elsewhere. In the plant the determination is in the plant; in the house it is in the builder. The plant makes itself under the conditions of its making. This the house does not do.” For Aristotle, the final end of a natural object, its purpose, its destiny, in some sense dwells within it from the moment it comes into being. This end, or telos, guides the growth and development of its matter, and its environment shapes this natural progression. Its path of becoming, then, is already set from its conception, and changes depending on how other natural objects and forces act upon it. While plants and animals certainly have this kind of determination in themselves, they do not have agency or possession over it. But humans do. And this is what it is to be an human being: to have a destiny, a journey of its own becoming, and perhaps more importantly, the capacity to intentionally engage the journey. Artifacts on the other hand, i.e., tools, buildings, machines, receive their end in a preconceived way. A builder has an end in mind, and chooses and shapes matter to bring his idea into existence; and it’s fitting and good for humans to work with the world in this way to bring forth art, expressing ideas by doing so. But something else happens in machine time. In machine time, an externally preconceived end is placed on the human person in way that’s indifferent to the end already existing within them. This industrial framework not only competes against the destiny of the human person, but blinds them to it. It also shapes the environment in which the person lives, making it difficult to even recognize the existence of the frame.

Does anyone have tips or pointers for using Monk Manual well along with a Google or Outlook calendar? One of my goals is to lessen my reliance on (addiction to?) devices but I need the digital calendar to share schedules, book online meetings, manage travel etc for work.

If you have been following along, you've likely noticed that I have been gesturing towards a new movement happening here at Monk Manual. Our tools aren't going away. We are just going deeper. We want to help people build a new foundation for their time and work, and by extension a new foundation for their life. Across my work with individuals over the past 8 years, a pattern has emerged. The real work for individuals is not time management. The real work for individuals is time leadership. "Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things" - Peter Drucker Moving forward, as we enter into the early phases of a new industrial revolution through AI, the Monk Manual exists to provide an alternative to commodity-based time and work. We want to provide a bridge for people to move from a life built for machines, to a life built for humans. This feels timely and important. We've just released the foundational videos for TimeWise in the classroom. I hope you'll take some time to check them out. Link underneath. https://www.skool.com/being-doing-club-6723/classroom/f3535435?md=2d1d48db46b941569119aac6e73ef32d Let me know what resonates below. This is the beginning of something new.

If you missed the workshop yesterday or would like to watch it again, the recording is now live in the classroom. Appreciate such a large turnout. We will look into adding seats for future workshops so everyone who wants to attend live is able to. For those who attended (or who watched the recording) - what was the biggest takeaway or lesson you took away?