I have been studying the field of epigenetics for about ten years or so now? Something like that. Since the field of genetics has been a personal interest of mine for decades. But I only relatively recently became of aware of modern epigenetics and began studying it in depth.
I see it as being directly related (as a manipulation mechanism) to my theory of the Renaissance Man and the polymath.
Anyway I thought this was a rather good but very basic summary of some of the recent research advances and studies in the field.
This image shows inheritance and transmission of the epigenetic mark H3K27me3 in C. elegans.
The 1-cell embryo (left) shows the mark (green) inherited on sperm
chromosomes but not on the oocyte chromosomes (pink) contributed by a
mutant mother lacking the methylation enzyme PRC2. The 2-cell embryo
(right) shows transmission of the mark on the sperm-derived chromosomes
in each daughter nucleus. Credit: Laura J. Gaydos
A growing body of evidence suggests that environmental stresses can
cause changes in gene expression that are transmitted from parents to
their offspring, making "epigenetics" a hot topic. Epigenetic
modifications do not affect the DNA sequence of genes, but change how
the DNA is packaged and how genes are expressed. Now, a study by
scientists at the University of California, Santa Cruz, shows how
epigenetic memory can be passed across generations and from cell to cell
during development...
Study shows how epigenetic memory is passed across generations
17 hours ago
This image shows inheritance and transmission of the epigenetic
mark H3K27me3 in C. elegans. The 1-cell embryo (left) shows the mark
(green) inherited on sperm chromosomes but not on the oocyte chromosomes
(pink) contributed by a mutant …more
A growing body of evidence suggests that environmental stresses can
cause changes in gene expression that are transmitted from parents to
their offspring, making "epigenetics" a hot topic. Epigenetic
modifications do not affect the DNA sequence of genes, but change how
the DNA is packaged and how genes are expressed. Now, a study by
scientists at the University of California, Santa Cruz, shows how
epigenetic memory can be passed across generations and from cell to cell
during development.
Study shows how epigenetic memory is passed across generations
17 hours ago
This image shows inheritance and transmission of the epigenetic
mark H3K27me3 in C. elegans. The 1-cell embryo (left) shows the mark
(green) inherited on sperm chromosomes but not on the oocyte chromosomes
(pink) contributed by a mutant …more
A growing body of evidence suggests that environmental stresses can
cause changes in gene expression that are transmitted from parents to
their offspring, making "epigenetics" a hot topic. Epigenetic
modifications do not affect the DNA sequence of genes, but change how
the DNA is packaged and how genes are expressed. Now, a study by
scientists at the University of California, Santa Cruz, shows how
epigenetic memory can be passed across generations and from cell to cell
during development.
And about bloody time too. I've been saying the same thing, and following the same design principle with my ownAISTHPLEIS Suit design for over a decade now.
The idea makes far more sense and would be far more efficient and pragmatic than either a bulky, cumbersome diving bell type suit (current designs) or a totally artificial/mechanical robotic machine type exoskeletal suit (current military designs).
Biomechanical, bio-organic, nanobiological, human imitative and human enhancing and direct somatic interfacing technologies such as this are the wave of the future, not old style mechanical and robotic technologies.
The MIT BioSuit, a skintight spacesuit that offers improved
mobility and reduced mass compared to modern gas-pressurized spacesuits.
Credit: Jose-Luis Olivares/MIT
For future astronauts, the process of suiting up may go something
like this: Instead of climbing into a conventional, bulky,
gas-pressurized suit, an astronaut may don a lightweight, stretchy
garment, lined with tiny, musclelike coils. She would then plug in to a
spacecraft's power supply, triggering the coils to contract and
essentially shrink-wrap the garment around her body...
Do more and more liberals find the emotions unleashed by the arts—I mean all of the arts, from poetry to painting to dance—something of an embarrassment? Are the liberal-spirited people who support a rational public policy—a social safety net, consistency and efficiency in foreign affairs, steps to reverse global warming—reluctant to embrace art’s celebration of unfettered metaphor and mystery and magic? If you had asked me ten years ago, I would have said the answer was no. Now I am inclined to say the opposite. What is certain is that in our data- and metrics-obsessed era the imaginative ground without which art cannot exist is losing ground. Instead of art-as-art we have art as a comrade-in-arms to some more supposedly stable or substantial or readily comprehensible aspect of our world. Now art is always hyphenated. We have art-and-society, art-and-money, art-and-education, art-and-tourism, art-and-politics, art-and-fun. Art itself, with its ardor, its emotionalism, and its unabashed assertion of the imagination, has become an outlier, its tendency to celebrate a purposeful purposelessness found to be intimidating, if not downright frightening.
The erosion of art’s imaginative ground, often blamed on demagogues of the left and the right, is taking place in the very heart of the liberal, educated, cultivated audience—the audience that arts professionals always imagined they could count on. The whole question is so painful and so difficult that I have frankly hesitated to tackle it. It is relatively easy to point to the deformations of art at the hands of politically correct left-wingers and cheap-shot moralists on the right, as the late Robert Hughes did in the fast-paced, witty series of lectures that he published as Culture of Complaint in 1993. It is far more difficult to explain why people who pride themselves on their carefully reasoned view of the world want to argue that art is not a value in and of itself, but rather a vehicle or a medium or a vessel through which some other human value or values are expressed. That these thoughts are often voiced indirectly makes them no less significant. Indeed, such thoughts may be all the more significant because they are being expressed by critics and scholars who would deny that they are in any way discomfited by the unique powers of the arts. An illiberal view of art is gaining ground, even among the liberal audience. This is one of the essential if largely hidden factors that is undermining faith in our museums, our libraries, our publishing houses, our concert halls, symphony orchestras, and theater and dance troupes.
Good. We should be relying upon American corporations not hostile foreign nations for our Space Exploration endeavours.
On the other hand we shouldn't be relying upon the American government for our Space Exploration efforts either. The future of Space Exploration is Private Enterprise.
NASA awarded contracts today to Boeing and Elon Musk's SpaceX to ferry
astronauts to and from the International Space Station, signaling the
agency's return to manned spaceflight after the end of the space shuttle
program.
"This is the fulfillment of the commitment President Obama made to
return human space flight launches to U.S. soil and end our reliance on
the Russians," NASA administrator Charles Bolden said.
The winning designs will end U.S. dependence on the Russian Soyuz for
transportation back and forth to the International Space Station.
Ready, set, print me a reaction. Credit: Chaikom
If you stop and think about it for a moment, you will realise what
an astonishing feat of precision engineering your colour printer is. It
can take the primary colours – cyan, yellow, magenta and black – and mix
them together carefully enough to achieve more than a million different
hues and shades. Not only that but the drops of colour are mere
nanolitres (billionths of a litre) in volume, each of which is then
placed on the paper – assuming its not jammed in the feeder tray – with
better than pinpoint accuracy...
This is hardly a day to celebrate, of course, but it is a day to remember
so that we may hopefully better foresee the future.
What bothers me about this day is not that we were ambushed, for anyone can
be, or even that we did not anticipate 9/11/01 (we should have, but humans are
humans, we do not anticipate everything, even those things we easily should) but
how easily we have dismissed the implications of this day.
We are in the very early stages of what may very well promise to be another
Hundred Year’s War.
Yet so many are still so naïve, so self-absorbed, so easily deluded.
They thought this would all be over quickly, won easily, that they could
return unabashed and untroubled to their self-indulgent and erroneous political
theories and their quaint causes and their video games and their personal
interests du jour and that the War on Terror would disappear because they and
their self-appointed leaders so desired. Merely because they chose to stop
calling it a war. As if anything ever disappears simply by un-naming it.
Good luck with that.
You’re sure as hell gonna need it.
Evil doesn’t give a shit what you
think of it. It doesn’t care what you want. It doesn’t care how complacent or
apathetic or naïve or just plain ignorant you desperately desire to be. It
doesn’t care who you are. It likes to make martyrs, not be martyred, it likes
the weak, it likes the naïve, it likes the apathetic, and it especially loves
the overly sophisticated, the urbanized intelligentsia, and wholly self-deluded
(I apologize for being redundant, that was just for emphasis). They all make for
awful good eating.
Evil is what it is folks, and it is a hunter of the unprepared, and it is
extremely patient, and it smells blood where you smell your own self-absorption
and Danish topped coffee stains.
So just get used to it, it is the way of things.
You might think war is something you wage on TV and film screens,
something that will be won in a single tow-hour fictional combat by Captain
America and Batman. You might think it can be won by words and empty suit
promises by painted pretty boy Presidents who can’t wipe their own asses for
confusing it with a back-nine grass-covered golf hole.
But what you’re likely gonna get is something altogether different and more
costly than that.
So, get used to it sunshine.
You just have no
idea of what’s coming... and how little you yet understand.
And God help us, maybe you’ll just get lucky, eh?
Then again luck is no more of a plan than Hope and Change.
For those of you familiar with blogging I have a question to ask. I'd like to solicit your advice.
I
have four blogs, one is my personal blog, one is my literary blog, one
is my business and invention blog, and one is my gaming and design blog.
Three of my blogs are on Wordpress, one is on Blogger.
When each is old enough and well established enough (I just started
them a couple of months back) each will go private, but for now they are
hosted.
So here is my question: of these two platforms, Wordpress
and Blogger, which is better for building your audience and which is
better overall if your aim is blog success to support your business and
writing enterprises?
At this stage of my blog development process which do you think is the superior platform?
Which do you recommend, and why? Your advice is appreciated.
I've reinitialized the Missal.The Missalwill now become my personal and political and religious blog, though I'll also cover other topics as well, such as military and law enforcement matters. I'll disclose more details later, but for now I'll be making regular blog posts to the Missal once or twice a week again.
I also have other blogs I am currently writing. If you would like to visit one of my other blogs they are as follows:
Wyrdwend : my Literary blog covering my writings - fiction and non-fiction, my songwriting, and my poetry.
Launch Port : my business and entrepreneurial blog covering business, career, entrepreneurship, start-ups, capital and funding, and my inventions.
I’ve done some research on the term and the
etymological history and as far as I can discover miscegenation (see definition,
origins and etymology below) is an entirely modern American democrat term. Even
though it is Latin in construction I knew the term could not be Latin in origin
since the Romans never thought in this way about race (nor has anyone, except
the Chinese and Japanese, at least not until modern times, they only thought in
relation to Roman citizenship versus barbarian and Greek versus barbarian). It
is interesting but totally logical and completely unsurprising that it was a
term coined by Democrats in an attempt to supposedly prevent
“miscegenation.”
(As an interesting historical sidenote I think
that one of the other ways the Democrats tried to prevent miscegenation was to
promote the wholesale abortion of blacks by pushing for free, easy, and
legalized abortion for all – but targeted mainly at black women. Wholesale
abortion and miscegenation would be circular and supporting political aims for
the Democrats, modern, and their forefathers in government during the Civil War
era.)
Anyway I have long thought about developing a
counter-term or a term to replace miscegenation in the English language (since
it no longer applies legally, socially, or even politically among democrats)
with a term that reflects the advantages of genetic variation in off-spring.
Now I am not a proponent of macro-evolutionary
theory as espoused by Darwin, there is no demonstrable scientific evidence at
all that one species transforms into another. But on the micro-level (within a
species or genus) variation is obvious and easily observed. And it is a well
known fact that at this level genetic variation offers a wide range of benefits
versus a “pure”, highly restricted, or narrow genetic line. Homogenous genetic
lines produce all kinds of defects and problems that varied genetic lines tend
to weed out. The mutt is far healthier and probably more capable than the
purebred. Just the truth of the matter.
Therefore I want to coin a term that will speak
to the many advantages of poly-genus (that gives me a sort of preliminary idea
to work with, poly-genius). I want to avoid the term miscere altogether, and
possibly the term genus, because although they are perfectly good and
descriptive Latin terms (if you think about it the very term miscegenation
itself is a perfectly good and positive invented term, it was only turned askew
by modern liberal and democratic political aims) they have now become corrupted
by false use and bad application.
In other words the term miscegenation might have
easily had at least as many positive denotations and connotations as negative
ones, but because of Democratic political aims the term became entirely negative
in both denotation and connotation. (Yet another obvious example of how modern
liberal political aims distort even the very language in an attempt to promote
their insane and misbred theories.) So I’m going to try and avoid the terms genus
(at least directly) and miscere (to mix). What I want to emphasize instead is genetic
variation, advantage, and benefits.
Now I don’t want to create a term with overt
political implications. To promote the idea that interracial marriage is the
only way to achieve genetic variation, or that all genetic variation is good, is
both a silly and preposterous idea. It is also unscientific, it is merely a
political aim dressed up as science, as disastrously occurs so often nowadays.
Every good thing is somehow degraded and defined downward to serve a twisted
political aim.
But what I do want to do is create a term that
shows that not only is miscegenation (the mixing of genotypes) not a bad thing
(remove the liberal political smear and it is primarily a good and healthy thing
that promotes advantageous genetic variation, adaptability, and the
multiplication of capabilities) but that it is potentially a great thing. A
beneficial thing.
(As another sidenote I would not actively
promote the idea of interracial marriage and miscegenation, even though I have
such a marriage and have such children, as a standard that society should
legally, politically, or socially pursue, but rather as a condition that society
is likely to benefit from when it occurs. Human relations are far too complex
and marriage is far too sacred an institution to me to have government involved
in encouraging or demanding who marries who or who produce offspring with who.
For government to politically promote interracial marriage is as bad an idea as
it is for Democrats to have tried to suppress it. Government should be entirely
restricted from the human procreation business. Rather it should be what it is
and society should take advantage of the benefits as they arise as a natural
course of events.
So the best term I’ve developed so far is
polygenius, though that doesn’t really convey all of the elements of the term I
wish to create. Anyway I am open to suggestions about developing such a term
to replace miscegenation. Not because I hate the term miscegenation, I don't, it
just means “genetic mixing (the underlying implication being race-mixing and
that race mixing is bad because liberals are race-obsessed so any race mixing
just naturally has to be bad),” but what I do very much dislike is when people
take terms and totally corrupt them for personal political agendas and then
further bastardize a word for some evil purpose.
Maybe it is because I’m a writer, maybe because
I despise modern liberal politics and its insidious goals, maybe it is because
accurate definitions mean much to me, maybe just because it is unjust and
juvenile, but I really can’t stomach that kind of twisting of history and
backward-minded shit. Especially directed at my English language.
By the way, this idea, that genetic variation
and mixed marriage produces beneficial genetic variation and “polygenius” is
sort of a recurring theme in my own writings, fictional and non-fictional, so I
have that as an ulterior motive as well.
I just think it is time I coined a phrase to
encapsulate what I mean so I don’t have to keep re-explaining the idea over and
over again.
Everyone is free to comment and I'll consider
everyone's
suggestions. ______________________________________________________
Etymological history
Miscegenation comes from the Latin miscere, "to
mix" and genus, "kind". The word was coined in the U.S. in 1863, and the
etymology of the word is tied up with political conflicts during the American
Civil War over the abolition of slavery and over the racial segregation of
African-Americans. The reference to genus was made to emphasize the supposedly
distinct biological differences between whites and non-whites, though all humans
belong to the same genus, Homo, and the same species, Homo sapiens.
The word was coined in an anonymous propaganda
pamphlet published in New York City in December 1863, during the American Civil
War. The pamphlet was entitled Miscegenation: The Theory of the Blending of the
Races, Applied to the American White Man and Negro.[5] It purported to advocate
the intermarriage of whites and blacks until they were indistinguishably mixed,
as a desirable goal, and further asserted that this was the goal of the
Republican Party. The pamphlet was a hoax, concocted by Democrats, to discredit
the Republicans by imputing to them what were then radical views that offended
against the attitudes of the vast majority of whites, including those who
opposed slavery. There was already much opposition to the war effort.
The pamphlet and variations on it were reprinted
widely in both the north and south by Democrats and Confederates. Only in
November 1864 was the pamphlet exposed as a hoax. The hoax pamphlet was written
by David Goodman Croly, managing editor of the New York World, a Democratic
Party paper, and George Wakeman, a World reporter.
By then, the word miscegenation had entered the
common language of the day as a popular buzzword in political and social
discourse. The issue of miscegenation, raised by the opponents of Abraham
Lincoln, featured prominently in the election campaign of 1864.
In the United States, miscegenation has referred
primarily to the intermarriage between whites and non-whites, especially
blacks.
Before the publication of Miscegenation, the
word amalgamation, borrowed from metallurgy, had been in use as a general term
for ethnic and racial intermixing. A contemporary usage of this metaphor was
that of Ralph Waldo Emerson's private vision in 1845 of America as an ethnic and
racial smelting-pot, a variation on the concept of the melting pot. Opinions in
the U.S on the desirability of such intermixing, including that between white
Protestants and Irish Catholic immigrants, were divided. The term miscegenation
was coined to refer specifically to the intermarriage of blacks and whites, with
the intent of galvanising opposition to the
war. _________________________________________________
irregular < Latin miscē(re) to mix + gen(us)
race, stock, species + -ation; allegedly coined by U.S. journalist David Goodman
Croly (1829-89) in a pamphlet published anonymously in 1864
What the Federal government can and should and must do if it is to survive, (and frankly I don't care if it does) and to encourage Capitalism, Free Enterprise, and the Building of Wealth among American Citizens:
1. Lower Rates of Taxation, at both the Corporate and Individual Levels, and abolish many forms of taxation, such as Social Security taxes, institute a fair tax or consumption tax, and thereafter encourage the development of just and beneficial allodial and fee-free tax systems.
2. Abolish much of government.
3. Spend far less on government.
4. Assist in educating Private Citizens and the entire Society on the advantages of Capitalism, Free Enterprise, Private Industry and Individual Wealth Building, and how these things are actually accomplished (versus the socialistic and communistic principles now being taught as pseudo-science and distorted macro-economics in Federally supported public schools and universities).
5. Abolish many forms of regulation, and severely curtail many other forms of regulation to the lowest possible level in order to still maintain acceptable safety protocols, as well as abolishing subsidies to industry.
6. Eradicate Social Security and all others forms of failed socialistic economic policies and instead replace these with tax incentives and education programs to encourage and develop individual savings and investment and insurance accounts.
7. Abolish Public Education at the Federal level.
8. Return the Federal government to its necessary and very limited functions. Acknowledge and eradicate its numerous and unnecessary losses, rather than encouraging and subsidizing constant and continual states of failure.
9. Employ far fewer people at far less pay and benefits (especially at the Congressional, Court, and Administrative levels), see itself as a Service Oriented and temporary Career or Profession, rather than as a permanent and fixed political class (America should be political-class-free) and a personal benefits industry and life-long occupation. Government is not a "calling," service in government is a calling. But government is not, and should never be, a life-long enterprise. It is public service, not life-long employment at Public Expense. Americans are not Imperial-era Romans, and neither should we be run like a Third World Banana Republic. To this end it is also extremely necessary to institute Tort and Court reform.
10. Actually become Pro Business, Capitalism, Free Enterprise, Industry, and Private Wealth Creation, as well as becoming Self-Limited and self-limiting, and self-disciplined.
What the Federal Government actually does:
1. Seeks any and every opportunity to raise tax rates and to increase the bureaucratic tax burden.
2. Seeks constantly to grow itself at the expense of the nation, the culture, and the People.
3. Seeks constantly to spend more, and to bankrupt itself, the nation, and the American People.
4. Seeks constantly to engage in Socialistic Care-taking policies like Social Security, subsidizing failed enterprises, and seizing control of whole industries like the Medical and Defense Industries.
5. Seeks constantly to increase the regulatory burden of government on every sector of the economy, finance, and enterprise, and even on individual behavior even when the evidence is clear that such regulations cripple or destroy market and national competition and entire sectors of industry and the economy.
6. Constantly grows socialistic programs while at the same time funding them by means that would in every other circumstance be considered illegal and immoral, while suppressing the development of Individual Business and Saving and Investing and Charity and Philanthropy incentives and programs that would actually work, both societally and financially.
7. Constantly fails to educate most people, at great and ever increasing public expense, and the educational efforts it does operate are inefficient and more often than not outright erroneous and inaccurate.
8. Constantly seeks to enlarge and spread its creeping, corrupting, and nefarious influence into all aspects of American life and culture. Continually excuses and subsidizes its own abysmal rates of failure, moral and financial bankruptcy, and horrendous and miserable acts of unrepentant incompetence.
9. Seeks constantly to swell its rank of employees, dependants, unionized collectives, and supporters to give its gargantuan and bloated bulk an apparent and superficial legitimacy it does not really enjoy.
10. Engages in constant acts of sabotage, injury, regulatory destruction, and burdensome taxation and exhaustion against Individual and Corporate acts of Business, Capital Accumulation, Charity and Philanthropy, Free Enterprise, Market Development, Productive Industry, and Private Ownership and Wealth Creation.
Work is a subject upon which I have spent much time, labor, and effort (pun intended). I have also spent much time studying Work, how it operates, how to improve my own productivity and the productivity of others, what it achieves, what the limitations of work may be, and so forth. Work is also a subject very dear to my heart, for I think Work is an extremely important aspect of human life. One of the fundamental aspects.
That being the case I'll present my own views about Work and productivity, which have changed over time as I've experimented with different work methods and with different means to increase my own productivity. Now I have to first admit, in the interest of fairness, that I do many different kinds of work and that each different kind of work may require a different method of efficiency and action (as regards the particular details). I suspect that is true for everyone, no matter what kind of work they do.
So, that being said, here are my general observations about work, how to be more productive, and the relationship between vacation and occupation.
1. People are supposed to spend far more time working than they are entertaining themselves. Or being entertained. That seems counter-intuitive in modern society, but it is true.
2. Most of the time it is better to work than to be entertained. Work is good for people and part of the expression of their soul, it is not just something you do for cash. If it is something you just do for cash you're in the wrong line of work. (Nothing wrong with money, I'm not saying that, but money is just one kind of motivation for doing good work, it should not be the only motivation for doing good work.)
3. Good work is good for you, bad work is bad for you. Seems self-evident but you'd be surprised the people that never figure this out.
4. A certain percentage of your work time should be spent in a relaxed and casual mode, this helps you to problem solve, and then again a certain percentage of your time should be spent in a very serious even stressful mode - this helps you to focus and concentrate on the task. Percentages of work-mode activity will probably vary by individual.
5. Socializing all of the time at work makes you less productive and lazy. Socializing efficiently, or a certain percentage of the time, probably makes you more, not less, efficient. No man is an island, but no man should be nothing more than a social butterfly either. If you want to be a social butterfly, be that on your own time. At work socialize efficiently and casually, not obsessively and constantly.
6. Vacations are vital to help you recover from the stress of long or extended work periods. Take them, in moderation. I think a lot about work when on vacation, then again for some of my work, like writing and inventing, vacations are perfect times to get new ideas and to take notes. This doesn't bother me at all, and makes my vacations far more enjoyable to me. But if you don't wanna think about work at all on vacation, then don't. But take vacations when you can. They are good for you. They help you recuperate and regain your energy and focus. They generate new ideas. They allow you to travel. They are beneficial. In moderation. Like wine is good for you in moderation. But drink all the time and you're a lush and a drunk. Vacation constantly and you do nothing more than avoid work constantly. You're slothful.
7. The same is true for entertainment. There is nothing wrong with entertainment. Enjoying yourself is very good for you. But there is something very, very wrong with the modern idea that you must be entertained at all moments of the day and night, even at work. Let a certain part of each day be reserved for entertainment. Otherwise do your work. And work before entertainment, certainly not the other way around. That's laziness and lack of ambition.
8. Relaxation is good for you. A certain percentage of your time should be devoted to relaxation, to hobbies, personal enjoyments. Relaxation is like a mini-vacation you can take each day or week. In moderation of course, but nevertheless such time periods are very good for you. And they are good for the people around you, and they are excellent times to associate and socialize with others freely and without restriction. Your main socializing times should be during periods of relaxation, vacation, and entertainment. Not during work cycles.
9. The proper amounts of rest, sleep, entertainment, relaxation, vacation, exercise and sex will all improve your productivity. Suppression of these things tends to make you less efficient, less effective, and less productive. A good diet will also certainly improve your overall efficiency. A bad diet will make you stupid, slow, inefficient and unproductive. Improper amounts, and improper kinds, of anything decrease or suppress productivity. Proper amounts, and the proper kinds of most things, make you far more productive. Proper and improper amounts probably vary by individual. And by period. At least in some matters. (I.e. Everyone needs necessary levels of water and air to live, not everyone needs the same levels of exercise, sleep, or sex.)
10. Self-disciple is more important to high levels of productivity than is discipline inflicted by outside forces. Self-discipline is the one virtue without which no-one can ever be truly efficient or highly productive. So cultivate it as an operating principle in your own life. If you desire to work well or do important work.
11. Everyone should experiment with different methods and techniques for improving their own productivity and work capabilities. Adopt those principles which work best, discard inefficient and ineffective techniques and methods. I'd say the same is true in every area of your life. Too much of life is spent wasted pursuing ineffective and bad techniques for work, in relationships, even in entertainment. Experiment, and if something is a failure discard it, if something works then adopt it, and if something works modestly then improve it.
12. Seek out work which makes you happy and which is of benefit and profit not only to yourself but to the rest of the world. You'll be glad you did, and so will others.
13. You're not wedded to the same work or job for your whole life. If you're dissatisfied with your work then improve your current work, find another occupation, make your own work, or start your own business. That might be nearly impossible in some parts of the world, but probably not for you. What prevents you from being satisfied with your work is you. Plain and simple. Everything else is just excuse making. You might not find or make satisfactory and enjoyable work overnight (that rarely happens), but you sure as hell won't find it sitting on your furry and flea-bitten tail howling at the moon about it. Risk scouts the way, complaint kills the day.
14. Variety is very important to satisfaction in work involving constant change and new challenges. Consistency is very important as regards repetitive work. The quality and productivity of your work will be determined to a large extent by your individual nature. If your nature naturally seeks variety, seek out work involving constant change. If you have a nature that desires stability and consistency, seek out work that does not change much. Fit your work to your nature, and your nature to your work. As much as possible. Levels of variation between stability and change will fluctuate over time.
15. Schedule yourself and generally speaking you will be more productive. Allow a certain level of flexibility in your schedule, but stone by stone lain rightly builds the mighty coliseum. Better to do a little well every day, than to attempt to drink up the ocean overnight. You will have to make both sacrifices and efforts for work. The disciplining of time is the disciplining of actual achievement. Fail to discipline your time and time escapes you. And time escaped cannot be recaptured.
16. Failure is the best method of learning what won't work. Yet you'd be surprised at the people who either stubbornly won't learn that lesson, or never bother to notice it. Yet it directly affects your real productivity.
17. Be yourself, and your work will flourish. Be what you are not, and your work will fail.
18. Your work is important. If it isn't something is definitely wrong with either your work, with you, or with both.
19. Work should be a natural part of your life and soul. So look first at your life and soul and this will help you determine what work is best for you to pursue. When your work is an extension of your own soul, you will love your work. When your work suppresses your soul, that is totally unnatural and counter-productive. I do not consider my work as being separate from my family, my friends, my community, state, nation, the world, or God. Rather my work integrates with all of these either things. As it should. That is the good way. It should not be the uncommon way.
20. Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy. Whatever your Sabbath, keep one day devoted to being vacated from work, and to pursuing other things that are just as important (if not more-so) as work, such as family, home, your soul, and God. Working at your own soul will not only make you far more productive, it will make you a far better person. Work is supposed to make the world better, working at your own soul will make you better.
To me these are the most important general principles of work and productivity.
The Missal is my personal Blog. It covers a wide range of materials and matters including, but not limited to:
Politics, Personal Hobbies, Criminal Affairs, Vadding, Local, State,
National, and International Affairs, Humor, Opinions and Editorials, Writings, Inventions, Science, Art, Religion, Technology, Theory Pieces, Reviews,
Criticisms, Military and Intelligence Matters,
and various other subjects. Feel free to read, comment, or contact me if you wish. The Missal is also the Gateway to all of my other Blogs, Websites, Portfolios, and Newsletters which comprise my public presence on the web. Please see my Personal Links Section below. Unless otherwise noted all Blog content on the Missal is copyrighted by me and is my work.
However any articles, entries, or posts made by guests or other contributors to the Missal are to be considered entirely their own work and protected by their personal copyright. Posts made by other contributors or guests may not necessarily reflect an opinon in accord with my own nevertheless I reserve the right to violently agree with them if need be.
Above the Reader can discover a link for a website or blog which I highly recommend as being thought provoking, very well written or constructed, content rich, pleasing, agreeable, worth inspecting, fascinating, extremely entertaining, or in some way productive and useful.
These sites are my Recommendations. I visit many of these recommended websites and blogs often, or am even in some cases subscribed to their Syndicated Content. I may not agree with everything espoused on these various sites, but I find each valuable and worth reading. Recommendations are rotated once every two week.
Also, immediately above this section the reader can find a Pollwhich will periodically be displayed on this website.
As a Reader or Visitor feel free to give your opinion on whatever poll interests you. There will also almost always be a section marked Otherin which you can write in your own opinion regarding the subject matter of that poll. Polls will be run an average of once per month. Then a new poll will be cycled in to replace the old poll. Polls can be on any matter but will definitely periodically include the following subjects; politics, religion, art, science, the military, intelligence matters, criminal affairs, technology, domestic affairs, international affairs, the media, psychology, and culture. Readers are also encouraged to suggest subject content, as well as questions pertaining to that subject content, for inclusion in future polls.