‘There is a concept in psychology called risk homeostasis. It refers to the idea that humans have a degree of risk they find acceptable and strive to live their lives at that level.’*
‘Organisations around the world are recognising that either they can expand their thinking to match the real system they belong to or they can artificially shrink the system they are managing to match their thinking.’**
What if one way of defining happiness is being open to more, present to more, and realising more?
If you were then to identify your happiest time in life, would this be some point in the past? Or right now? And, depending on your answer, is the future positive or negative for you?
It has been said that we are not so much concerned with the meaning of life, but wanting to know if we’re alive.
In the West we’ve developed stable and less risky environments, but these appear to have come at some cost. Stability becomes a disadvantage when leaves us wondering if we’re alive.
The first quote, above, is Frans Johansson’s auditing of the way people are willing to take more risks when the degree of safety goes up – like pushing cars harder when we know ABS is fitted. There appears to be something about being human that needs to risk.
The second quote comes from Peter Senge, and makes a lot of sense for the individual as well as the organisation. We’re asking questions about what is real, about the stories we tell ourselves, and are these the only way of understanding life in this world.
We’re reworking our imaginations, dreaming more, opening up possibilities, exploring reality, and risking from a strong place within – integrity leading to wholeness, wholeness leading to perseverance, perseverance leading to integrity – the cycle of the revolutionary life.