A good leader only needs to posses one trait

After doing a lost research and having the privilege of running my own business, I’ve found that good leaders have a variety of traits, but in the end a leader only need to posses one vital trait to be a good leader and that is: A good leader is a person who gets the MOST out of their employees with the LEAST amount of alienation.

To prove this lets reverse the sentence and see if still it make sense:  A good leader is a person who gets the LEAST out of their employees with the MOST amount of alienation.

Compare the two sentences and see what happens.

1) If you are getting the most out of your employees, then they are producing, and if they are not alienated, they are happy employees. We all know that a happy employee is a productive employee. A person who is happy is comfortable and will not go out to seek another job.

2)If you are getting the least out of your employees they are not being productive. If the employee is being highly alienated, you are now giving the employee more reasons to leave than to stay. Humans are lazy and creatures of comfort, so if you don’t give them more reasons to leave than to stay they will stay, Otherwise they will be looking for new jobs while they are supposed to be working.

In the end the only question you need to ask  yourself as a leader, is : Do I get the most out of my employees with the least amount of alienation? If the answer is no then, you need to dig deeper and figure out how to do so.




The self awareness of thought

Thoughts, they are elusive little bastards! You hold on to thought for hours and hours, days and days, then when the time comes and it is perfect to unleash this thought, the little fucker up and runs away.

Leaving you struggling to try to “remember” what you were just thinking. You Curse as you remind yourself once again to write down your thoughts, yet in the end forgetting to do so. Ironic is it not?

 This leads me to the conclusion, that thoughts contain power within themselves, and these thoughts also have awareness about themselves. This awareness allows them to escape your mind, when they deem themselves to powerful, or destructive to be yielded outside one’s own imagination and unleashed into the universe through the careless hands of a human being.

And god said.

And god said to all people.

“I only Exist in your imagination.”

Ethics, and the natural law.

Definition, Natural law: A body of unchanging moral principles regarded as a basis for all human conduct.
The problem with natural law is the definition is flawed, and is does not align with empirical natural laws. Thus causing unneeded confusion for the already confusion bound field of philosophy.
A natural law ought to be defined as “A condition that cannot be violate by choice, and is bound entirely outside of choice”.
A natural law must occur consistently throughout nature, and withstand all empirical tests aside from choice. Gravity is a good example of a natural law. It occurs beyond our own choosing, and we cannot choose to violate it. I.e. I can throw an apple in the air, but without the aid of another device, the apple will be bound to the law of gravity.
The fact that generally ethical people chose to be unethical from time to time, creates a contradiction that one cannot over look, combine this with the very existence of people who are amoral; one can draw no other logical conclusion than: ethics cannot be constructed with the concept of natural law. The only part of ethics is bound by natural law is the determination of whether a person is moral or amoral. This is the only area in ethics, that the person had no choice, and even if they had wanted to choose differently, it would not affect the result, because their ethics would bound to them by the natural law.

Verifying Your Type- Eliminating Type Confusion.

The most common mistake I see in type, is people taking the MBTI or another type indicator and assuming that they are that type. The problem with this is you have only  tested the way you view yourself, not the way others view you. Are you who you perceive you are or are you what others perceive you as?

The proper way to determine type is a two step process.

1)You take the test

2)You pick 3-5 people that know you best (relatives and close friends) and have them take the test based on what they see of you. Do not stand over their shoulder while they do it, in fact leave the room.

if 1 and 2 line up you can be pretty sure of your type.

if 1 and 2 don’t line up do the following.

Look at all the 2’s if they all come out with the same result, you see yourself differently than the world does, and you are probably what your friends think you are.


Also it is best to take the test in different modes, work mode versus home mode. Upset or Sad versus happy or excited….

As you age the inferior process start to develop and balance you out, therefore it is easier to determine type at an earlier age than a later one.




World Hunger Solution?

After reading this news article http://printers.iyogi.com/types/3d-printers-types/researchers-print-living-tissue-using-3d-printer.html, a question immediately jumped into my mind.

If these printers can print living tissue in human beings, should they not be able to print the tissue that makes up food?

And if they are able to print food, does this not solve the to world hunger problem?

Absolute and Relative morality, are not types of morality, they are types of morality tests.

Feeling is the basis we try to objectively rationalize into morality; the paradox is formed because feelings are both subjective and irrational. To determine if something is pure morality the only possible solution must be one that includes both the rational/objective approach and the subjective/irrational approach: absolute and relative morality. Absolute and Relative Morality are NOT types of morality, they are types of morality tests which we use to determine the morality of an action.
The absolute morality test is a utilitarian, objective, rational test, and constant; while the relative morality test is: centered on the person, subjective and irrational. Once the results of action are subjected both morality test we can formulate four basic types of morality (Pure, Group, Individual, and A/Anti). The fact that these two types of morality test are polar opposites, it can only be assumed that if an action passes both tests then it has to purely moral.
Humans are seldom purely moral. Depending on their temperament they will normally operate in Group morality (Absolute) or Personal morality (Relative), however there are a few who will operate in the A/Anti Moral spectrum. Pure morality is elusive due to the fact that often an action or decision will be good to for the group and bad for the individual and vise-versa; in these situations pure morality is not possible.
Pure Morality (Both Ethical and Integrity)
Relative Morality – Pass
Absolute Morality – Pass
Real Life Situation: You have extra food, and it makes you feel good to share with your neighbors who are hungry, because they are short on food and get paid tomorrow.

Group Morality – (Ethical)
Relative Morality – Fail
Absolute Morality – Pass
Real Life Situation: You have to kill a person to save an entire village of people.

Individual Morality (Integrity)
Relative Morality – Pass
Absolute Morality – Fail
Real Life Situation: You drive above the speed limit because you like the feel of the power of the car.

Real Life Situation:
A/Anit-Moral (Unethical, and Lacks Integrity)
Relative Morality – Fail
Absolute Morality – Fail
Real life situation: You steal from your employer, and you feel bad about it.

%d bloggers like this: