There is a theory of “the path of least resistance” that implies the one should go with the flow. With that in mind, how do you continue to nurture the growth resulting from challenges? Does the rationale of the path of least resistance conflict with the challenges of life that are required for change?
Does the rationale of the path of least resistance conflict with the challenges of life that are required for change?
No:
“Life provides enough problems without us making more.”
Yes:
If you’re up to your neck in water, (maybe) it’s time to stop walking, and start swimming.
If you don’t have enough challenges you can make what you’re doing more difficult—or go find something better (harder) to do.
Imagine you are at the beach. If you swim out far enough, you can surf back in. If you get caught in a rip tide/rip current, the current may be too strong to fight.*
Metaphorically, just because you’re going in the direction of the current doesn’t mean you have to just stay afloat** - you can swim.
* - swim perpendicular to the beach, then go back in.
** This behavior also seems characteristic of something having gone wrong. (If this is the case, identifying and addressing the problem may be as important as trying to change tack—which is not a 1d move in the literal world.)
Yes. Therefore you should not do that. “Least resistance” and “going with the flow” are for those who want to remain asleep, to do nothing, to be nothing.
There is a theory of “the path of least resistance” that implies the one should go with the flow. With that in mind, how do you continue to nurture the growth resulting from challenges? Does the rationale of the path of least resistance conflict with the challenges of life that are required for change?
Does the rationale of the path of least resistance conflict with the challenges of life that are required for change?
No:
“Life provides enough problems without us making more.”
Yes:
If you’re up to your neck in water, (maybe) it’s time to stop walking, and start swimming.
If you don’t have enough challenges you can make what you’re doing more difficult—or go find something better (harder) to do.
Imagine you are at the beach. If you swim out far enough, you can surf back in. If you get caught in a rip tide/rip current, the current may be too strong to fight.*
Metaphorically, just because you’re going in the direction of the current doesn’t mean you have to just stay afloat** - you can swim.
* - swim perpendicular to the beach, then go back in.
** This behavior also seems characteristic of something having gone wrong. (If this is the case, identifying and addressing the problem may be as important as trying to change tack—which is not a 1d move in the literal world.)
Yes. Therefore you should not do that. “Least resistance” and “going with the flow” are for those who want to remain asleep, to do nothing, to be nothing.
Would you say the same of “the path” in emotions and relationships?
I am not sure what that is.
It still takes effort to travel along a path. And there are many paths to choose from.