“Summing it all up, friends, I’d say you’ll do best by filling your minds and meditating on things true, noble, reputable, authentic, compelling, gracious—the best, not the worst; the beautiful, not the ugly; things to praise, not things to curse.” – St. Paul (Philippians 4:8 – The Message)

Bear with me today. I want to connect some seemingly unrelated ideas into a more compelling argument for remaining intellectually and emotionally agile.

The one time I endorse Revisionist History

If a butterfly submitted her first draft, she’d be an unimproved worm.

I am a fan of Malcolm Gladwell’s writing, and I have been listening to his new podcast titled “Revisionist History.” During some recent travel, I listened to several episodes, and was struck by two ideas I wrote down to share with you. In one episode, Gladwell recounts the story of how NBA legend Wilt Chamberlain scored an unmatched 100 points in a single game. Part of the reason the 7′ 1″ superstar was able to score so many points was that for that one game only, he shot free throws underhanded — a technique made famous, but not popular, by NBA Hall-of-Famer Rick Barry.

Gladwell marvels that after his record-breaking score, Chamberlain never used the underhand technique again in his career. One would think — and Rick Barry says so — that Chamberlain would have been an even more significant asset to his team, if he had continued to use what had worked so well. Keep in mind that Barry still has one of the highest free throw percentages in NBA history, so he is the expert. But Chamberlain reverted to the conventional and less accurate shooting method. Gladwell adds that Wilt Chamberlain was not the only man to persist using an inferior method. Only two players in the NCAA use the Barry method — and one of them is Barry’s son.

In a separate episode, Gladwell explores what economist David Galenson calls Experimental Innovation by tracing the revisions and iterations taken by two songwriters — Elvis Costello and Leonard Cohen — of their respective songs. In the latter’s case, Gladwell explains the years-long path that Cohen’s song “Hallelujah” took from his own many drafts to John Cale’s cover, to Jeff Buckley’s cover of Cale’s version to Buckley’s untimely death and posthumous success to the classic status the song now enjoys. None of this would have happened if Cohen had not been the sort to revisit his assumptions, and to rewrite remorselessly.

The contrasting creative style, according to Galenson, is Conceptual Innovation. A conceptual innovator tends to create earlier in his life — or perhaps he completes more works earlier in his career — because he tends to formulate a more exact plan and execute according to it with minimal editing after the fact. If Cohen and Costello are Experimental Innovators, the artist Pablo Picasso is a Conceptual Innovator.

Then I heard a TED Talk

Quite providentially, the next podcast I listened to was a TED Talk given by Julia Galef, a noted skeptic, who told the story of the Dreyfus affair — the case of a French artillery captain, Alfred Dreyfus, who lost his commission and his freedom after being falsely accused and imprisoned for treason. Dreyfus was Jewish, and antisemitism among his fellow officers contributed to the miscarriage of justice. A fellow officer, Lt. Col. Georges Picquart, worked ten years to clear Dreyfus’ name, despite his own prejudice against Jews. Galef says this persistence resulted from Picquart’s innate sense of curiosity and desire to identify the real culprit.

Scout vs. Soldier Mindset

Galef coined two metaphors to characterize the mindset of Picquart and that of his fellow officers. The soldier mindset is the practitioner of what Galef calls motivated reasoning. This way of thinking also belongs to the category known as confirmation bias. Those of a soldier mindset tend to argue more vigorously for their biases and tend to discount the arguments of their critics, while at the same time finding fault with arguments or data that conflict with their settled assumptions.

The Scout Mindset appears less focused on a specific end result. instead, it is open to consider contrary arguments and to cede valid points. Col. Picquart in her telling was motivated to seek the truth of the Dreyfus case — wherever it led.

Here in the real world

I thought the Galenson characterizations and the Galef mindset metaphors were interesting in their overlap and their application in the lives of men. If you followed the 2016 US presidential election cycle, you saw both creative processes and both mindsets at work on the left and the right. The mindsets continue today.

Those of the political left charge that their opposite numbers on the right only read websites, blogs and newspapers that agree with their home truths. Those on the right accuse their opposite numbers of inhabiting a liberal echo chamber. Here we see the Soldier Mindset in full flower — at least among the most outspoken. But what about the creative strategies?

Both major candidates — or their campaign staffs — appeared to be experimental innovators. If we were to score on the candidates alone, the flatter — some would say non-existent — campaign organization of Donald Trump suggests him to be a natural Experimental Innovator. Whether it came from the candidate or from an influential campaign manager or consultant, both parties tested and iterated constantly, measuring effectiveness through polling data, as they sought to win on election day.

A couple of Old Testament examples

If you’ve been reading here awhile, you know I admire King Solomon and the wisdom shared in the biblical book of Proverbs. Elsewhere we’ve talked about how Solomon departed from sound judgment at the end of his life. I submit to you that Solomon embodied the Soldier Mindset — being so invested in what he wanted that he failed to consider the consequences, and persisting against wisdom — like Wilt Chamberlain did — along a less effective course.

But let’s contrast Solomon with Caleb, a man we meet in the Old Testament books of Joshua and Numbers. Moses had sent Caleb and Joshua and some of their fellow Israelites to collect intelligence on the Promised Land. Everyone except Caleb and Joshua looked at the size of the people living there and their fortifications and were too scared to obey God. So God caused them to wander in the desert another 40 years as a judgment for their unbelief. When only Joshua and Caleb were left from the scouting party, Caleb was 85 years old. Even then he was open to new ideas and asked for the portion of land with the biggest, baddest foes. That’s the Scout Mindset!

And in my life

I see benefits of both creative processes, and I believe each of us likely is more of one type than the other. For much of my life I’ve tend toward a “first-thought-best-thought” creative style, but I have learned not to fear the re-write. Despite its disadvantages, I can think of certain areas where having a Soldier Mindset is an asset. Faithfulness in marriage is the most vivid example. But within that solid commitment, having a Scout Mindset can keep you growing within your marriage. And we haven’t talked about how being agile can enhance your career.

Spelling it out

I recommend taking some time to review some of your past decisions to notice how you came to each decision. Did you plan and then act, or did you begin and adapt as you went along? Are you willing to listen to other points of view without unfriending people with whom you disagree? Are you allergic to a better idea?

Don’t forget, we are not captive to our thoughts. We can choose them — and we should. In his second letter to the church at Corinth, St. Paul wrote:

We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ…” (2 Corinthians 10:5 – ESV)

If we can take thoughts captive, then clearly you and I can “change the channel” of our thoughts and be generous to our neighbors, even the disagreeable ones. But there’s something more important here. We have covered it before, but we need to remember that our feelings begin with our thoughts. Thoughts lead to feelings, feelings lead to actions, and actions lead to habits.

This taking thoughts captive and replacing them with more positive and godly thoughts will improve our feelings and dispositions and lead to more noble actions. Over time, that leads to noble character and a good name — or as I like to call it, the best possible version of yourself.

So how about you? What channel are you watching? How are you going to cultivate a Scout Mindset and a noble character? Add your comments below.

“Summing it all up, friends, I’d say you’ll do best by filling your minds and meditating on things true, noble, reputable, authentic, compelling, gracious—the best, not the worst; the beautiful, not the ugly; things to praise, not things to curse.” – St. Paul (Philippians 4:8 – The Message)

Bear with me today. I want to connect some seemingly unrelated ideas into a more compelling argument for remaining intellectually and emotionally agile.

The one time I endorse Revisionist History

A butterfly or merely an improved worm?

I am a fan of Malcolm Gladwell’s writing, and I have been listening to his new podcast titled “Revisionist History.” During some recent travel, I listened to several episodes, and was struck by two ideas I wrote down to share with you. In one episode, Gladwell recounts the story of how NBA legend Wilt Chamberlain scored an unmatched 100 points in a single game. Part of the reason the 7′ 1″ superstar was able to score so many points was that for that one game only, he shot free throws underhanded — a technique made famous, but not popular, by NBA Hall-of-Famer Rick Barry.

Gladwell marvels that after his record=breaking score, Chamberlain never used the underhand technique again in his career. One would think — and Rick Barry says so — that Chamberlain would have been an even more significant asset to his team, if he had continued to use what had worked so well. Keep in mind that Barry still has one of the highest free throw percentages in NBA history, so he is the expert. But Chamberlain reverted to the conventional and less accurate shooting method. Gladwell adds that Wilt Chamberlain was not the only man to persist using an inferior method. Only two players in the NCAA use the Barry method — and one of them is Barry’s son.

In a separate episode, Gladwell explores what economist David Galenson calls Experimental Innovation by tracing the revisions and iterations taken by two songwriters — Elvis Costello and Leonard Cohen — of their respective songs. In the latter’s case, Gladwell explains the years-long path that Cohen’s song “Hallelujah” took from his own many drafts to John Cale’s cover, to Jeff Buckley’s cover of Cale’s version to Buckley’s untimely death and posthumous success to the classic status the song now enjoys. None of this would have happened if Cohen had not been the sort to revisit his assumptions, and to rewrite remorselessly.

The contrasting creative style, according to Galenson, is Conceptual Innovation. A conceptual innovator tends to create earlier in his life — or perhaps he completes more works earlier in his career — because he tends to formulate a more exact plan and execute according to it with minimal editing after the fact. If Cohen and Costello are Experimental Innovators, the artist Pablo Picasso is a Conceptual Innovator.

Then I heard a TED Talk

Quite providentially, the next podcast I listened to was a TED Talk given by Julia Galef, a noted skeptic, who told the story of the Dreyfus affair — the case of a French artillery captain, Alfred Dreyfus, who lost his commission and his freedom after being falsely accused and imprisoned for treason. Dreyfus was Jewish, and anti-Semitism among his fellow officers contributed to the miscarriage of justice. A fellow officer, Lt. Col. Georges Picquart, worked ten years to clear Dreyfus’ name, despite his own prejudice against Jews. Galef says this persistence resulted from Picquart’s innate sense of curiosity and desire to identify the real culprit.

Scout vs. Soldier Mindset

Galef coined two metaphors to characterize the mindset of Picquart and that of his fellow officers. The soldier mindset is the practitioner of what Galef calls motivated reasoning. This way of thinking also belongs to the category known as confirmation bias. Those of a soldier mindset tend to argue more vigorously for their biases and tend to discount the arguments of their critics, while at the same time finding fault with arguments or data that conflict with their settled assumptions.

The Scout Mindset appears less focused on a specific end result. instead, it is open to consider contrary arguments and to cede valid points. Col. Picquart in her telling was motivated by a desire to find the truth of the Dreyfus case — wherever it led.

Here in the real world

I thought the Galenson characterizations and the Galef mindset metaphors were interesting in their overlap and their application in the lives of men. If you are following the US presidential election cycle, you can see both creative processes and both mindsets at work on the left and the right.

Those of the political left charge that their opposite numbers on the right only read websites, blogs and newspapers that agree with their home truths. Those on the right accuse their opposite numbers of inhabiting a liberal echo chamber. Here we see the Soldier Mindset in full flower — at least among the most outspoken. But what about the creative strategies?

Both major candidates — or their campaign staffs — appear to be experimental innovators. If we were scoring on the candidates alone, the flatter — some would say non-existent — campaign organization of Donald Trump suggests him to be a natural Experimental Innovator. Whether it comes from the candidate or from an influential campaign manager or consultant, both parties are testing and iterating constantly, measuring effectiveness through polling data, as they seek to win on election day.

A couple of Old Testament examples

If you’ve been reading here awhile, you know I admire King Solomon and the wisdom shared in the biblical book of Proverbs. Elsewhere we’ve talked about how Solomon departed from sound judgment at the end of his life. I submit to you that Solomon embodied the Soldier Mindset — being so invested in what he wanted that he failed to consider the consequences, and persisting against wisdom — like Wilt Chamberlain did — along a less effective course.

But let’s contrast Solomon with Caleb, a man we encounter in the Old Testament books of Joshua and Numbers. Moses had sent Caleb and Joshua and some of their fellow Israelites to collect intelligence on the Promised Land. Everyone except Caleb and Joshua looked at the size of the people living there and their fortifications and were too scared to obey God. So God caused them to wander in the desert another 40 years as a judgment for their unbelief. When only Joshua and Caleb were left from the scouting party, Caleb was 85 years old. Even then he was open to new ideas and asked for the portion of land with the biggest, baddest foes. That’s the Scout Mindset!

And in my life

I see benefits of both creative processes, and I believe each of us likely is more of one type than the other. I tend to be more of a “first-thought-best-thought” creative, but I have learned not to fear the re-write. Similarly, I can think of certain areas where having a Soldier Mindset is an advantage. Faithfulness in marriage is the most vivid example. But within that solid commitment, having a Scout Mindset can keep you growing within your marriage. And we haven’t talked about how being agile can enhance your career.

Spelling it out

I recommend taking some time to review some of your past decisions to notice how you came to each decision. Did you plan and then act, or did you begin and adapt as you went along? Are you willing to listen to other points of view without unfriending people with whom you disagree? Are you allergic to a better idea?

Don’t forget, we are not captive to our thoughts. We can choose them — and we should. In his second letter to the church at Corinth, St. Paul wrote:

We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ…” (2 Corinthians 10:5 – ESV)

If we can take thoughts captive, then clearly you and I can “change the channel” of our thoughts and be generous to our neighbors, even the disagreeable ones. But there’s something more important here. We have covered it before, but we need to remember that our feelings begin with our thoughts. Thoughts lead to feelings, feelings lead to actions, and actions lead to habits.

This taking thoughts captive and replacing them with more positive and godly thoughts will improve our feelings and dispositions and lead to more noble actions. Over time, that leads to noble character and a good name — or as I like to call it, the best possible version of yourself.

So how about you? What channel are you watching? How are you going to cultivate a Scout Mindset and a noble character? Add your comments below.

Note: In honor of the start of football season, here’s a post from the early days of this blog.

For a lot of men, fall means football.  Perhaps it’s the memory of their own playing days in Pop Warner leagues, sandlot games or the varsity squad.  Maybe it’s memories of going to games with Dad.  Or maybe it’s the vicarious thrill of watching two teams at the peak of their athleticism battle for supremacy.

Some men are fans of the high school game, uncorrupted so far by money. Others are partial to the unpaid professional college game which combines the opportunity to engage with both the sport and the university fielding the team.  Still others are obsessed with the pro game — installing satellite TV to be able to catch every game, decorating house, car and wardrobe in team logos, and even participating in fantasy leagues.  As intense as some fans are, one would think that the men with the greatest love for the game would be the ones who played it for a living.  In at least one case, it isn’t so.

Nobody loves the game as much as the guys who play it for a living, right?

Meet Curtis Martin

Curtis Martin played ten seasons in the NFL as a running back — first for the New England Patriots, then for the New York Jets.  During his career, he amassed the fourth highest career rushing yards of all time, and in 2012, Curtis Martin was inducted into the pro football Hall of Fame.

Why Are We Talking About Football?

What is remarkable about Curtis Martin was that he was never a fan of football at any level.  Growing up without a dad in the house, in a violent Pittsburgh neighborhood (he lost several loved ones to murder), his mother made him choose an extracurricular activity just to keep him away from the danger he faced just by being in the neighborhood.  So Curtis joined the football team for the first time as a high school senior.

That success led to a scholarship which in turn led to a successful college career, which led to his being drafted by the New England Patriots.

In his Hall of Fame induction speech, Martin recounted receiving the phone call from Patriots coach Bill Parcells asking if he’d like to play for the Patriots.  Although he answered yes, he said, he hung up the phone and told his family he really didn’t want to play football.

A Timely Word

That evening, Curtis’s pastor, Leroy Joseph,  was visiting the family.  When he heard Curtis say he didn’t want to play football — that he wasn’t even sure he liked football enough to make it his livelihood — Leroy Joseph took  Curtis aside for a talk.  He asked Curtis if it was possible that football was the means God was using to enable Curtis to help other people.

“That became my connection with football,” he said, “and I don’t know if he wouldn’t have said that to me if football would have gotten out of me what it got out of me.”  He said from then on he understood that his success in the sport would only come from his having a purpose greater than himself and greater than the game.  His desire to help people spurred him to excellence.

In a previous post, I encouraged you to develop passion for the tasks in front of you rather than waiting for a job that enabled you to follow your passion.  Perhaps your day job enables you to finance your passion.  If so, keep that connection clear in your mind so that you excel at both.  Curtis Martin is an example of exactly that strategy.

By the way, you don’t have to love football.  Curtis Martin didn’t — and it landed him in the Hall of Fame.

So how about you? How are you discovering your purpose?  What are you doing to remain motivated? Add your comments below.

h/t Todd Henry and his book “Die Empty” for bringing Curtis Martin’s story to my attention.

Some men are fans of the high school game, uncorrupted so far by money. Others are partial to the unpaid professional college game which combines the opportunity to engage with both the sport and the university fielding the team.  Still others are obsessed with the pro game — installing satellite TV to be able to catch every game, decorating house, car and wardrobe in team logos, and even participating in fantasy leagues.  As intense as some fans are, one would think that the men with the greatest love for the game would be the ones who played it for a living.  In at least one case, it isn’t so.

Nobody loves the game as much as the guys who play it for a living, right?

Meet Curtis Martin
Curtis Martin played ten seasons in the NFL as a running back — first for the New England Patriots, then for the New York Jets.  During his career, he amassed the fourth highest career rushing yards of all time, and in 2012, Curtis Martin was inducted into the pro football Hall of Fame.

Why Are We Talking About Football?
What is remarkable about Curtis Martin was that he was never a fan of football at any level.  Growing up without a dad in the house, in a violent Pittsburgh neighborhood (he lost several loved ones to murder), his mother made him choose an extracurricular activity just to keep him away from the danger he faced just by being in the neighborhood.  So Curtis joined the football team for the first time as a high school senior.

That success led to a scholarship which in turn led to a successful college career, which led to his being drafted by the New England Patriots.

In his Hall of Fame induction speech, Martin recounted receiving the phone call from Patriots coach Bill Parcells asking if he’d like to play for the Patriots.  Although he answered yes, he said, he hung up the phone and told his family he really didn’t want to play football.

A Timely Word
That evening, Curtis’s pastor, Leroy Joseph,  was visiting the family.  When he heard Curtis say he didn’t want to play football — that he wasn’t even sure he liked football enough to make it his livelihood — Leroy Joseph took  Curtis aside for a talk.  He asked Curtis if it was possible that football was the means God was using to enable Curtis to help other people.

“That became my connection with football,” he said, “and I don’t know if he wouldn’t have said that to me if football would have gotten out of me what it got out of me.”  He said from then on he understood that his success in the sport would only come from his having a purpose greater than himself and greater than the game.  His desire to help people spurred him to excellence.

In a previous post, I encouraged you to develop passion for the tasks in front of you rather than waiting for a job that enabled you to follow your passion.  Perhaps your day job enables you to finance your passion.  If so, keep that connection clear in your mind so that you excel at both.  Curtis Martin is an example of exactly that strategy.

By the way, you don’t have to love football.  Curtis Martin didn’t — and it landed him in the Hall of Fame.

So how about you? How are you discovering your purpose?  What are you doing to remain motivated? Add your comments below.

h/t Todd Henry and his book “Die Empty” for bringing Curtis Martin’s story to my attention.