Thinking about balance and counterbalance today. This is a mental concept. We try to fit as many things into our 24hours as is possible to "live life to the max" or because of FOMO. We want to make the most of every moment (which in itself is admirable and desirable) but EVERY moment? Is it possible to be 'on point' at every point in time?
I have lived by the mantra of "It's all about balance" for many years - all things in moderation, don't go overboard, The Golden Mean. But I am thinking - is maintaining the balance what is required for a maximised life? Keller suggests that nothing of value is found in the middle, it's always at the extremes. Scientific breakthroughs, educational wins, political revolutions, personal triumphs. How many times have we heard heroes or athletes talk about "coming to the end of myself" or "pushing myself further than I thought possible"?
Perhaps, life isn't about balances. Perhaps it isn't about fitting everything in and spinning all the plates that our three-score-years-and-ten offers. Perhaps in giving yourself to a few things really well or even ONE thing wholeheartedly, there is freedom, purpose, significance, greatness, happiness, wholeness.
Just a thought...
That said, it is not all about extremes. Keller suggests that there is a need for counterbalance instead of balance - the ability to swing back where necessary from the extremes. Civil servants who worked 55+hour weeks were 67% more likely to die from heart disease! I couldn't put it better than he did:
So...in work, you can be extreme and in personal life you need more counterbalance is his conclusion. Not a bad little thought. Is it really possible? The jury is out on that.