TED Conversations

Henry Woeltjen


This conversation is closed.

Improving Your Life: Step 1 - Relax!

For the next few weeks I will be posting some steps I think are necessary to improve your life. Take the journey with me and give me your feedback. Let's build a strategy we can all use to improve our life and the lives of everyone around us!

Step 1 - Relax!

All of us have stories to tell. Some are exciting and full of progress. However, some of us struggle to understand what's going wrong. These posts will be an attempt to facilitate a conversation about progress. We need to move forward. I believe we can help each other do just that.

Step one of this process will be one of the hardest. We all have stress, and sometimes our stress is overwhelming. We need to take a step back and relax! Before our journey begins we must have an open mind. Take a second, sit back, and relax. Feelings of anxiety and stress will only prevent you from moving towards your goals.

What are some things that help you relax? What are your coping mechanisms?


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Jun 16 2013: One thing, do not watch the news.

    Do you really want others to rent space in your head?
    • thumb
      Jun 16 2013: Pat,

      I can definitely understand where you are coming from. I would rather people watch the news, and take information they get with a grain of salt. Looking at information objectively is a key component to any thorough analysis. News broadcasts may provide information we just cannot get on our own.

      I would say, pick the news you decide to incorporate into your thought processes carefully. Even a small bit of false data can materialize biased opinions that have no foundation in reality.

      I understand your view though Pat. Many people share that view. I just think a more balanced approach is necessary.
      • thumb
        Jun 16 2013: Duly noted, however you are allowing others to then tell you what to evaluate.

        The news is emotion based, their only purpose is to sell advertising. Bad news sells good news does not. They would have me believe that most of the local environment was subject to fire, murder, car chases, gang war, financial ruin, environmental pollution, etc. etc. This is not true.

        What do you miss by not being informed about 99% of this?
        • thumb
          Jun 16 2013: A salesman comes to you with a proposition. He tells you of a storm that is coming. The storm will wipe out crops, homes, and livestock.

          He then tells you he has a talisman that will protect you from all harm. You laugh and decline the offer. You believe this is a trick.

          However, you then go around town to ask about the storm. Many people verify that a storm is indeed coming.

          The information you got from the salesman was indeed useful. However, it may have been disregarded because of his delivery. You may have disregarded the entire message about a storm.

          Since you did not, and took the information for further analysis, you were able to protect yourself.

          The news is like that salesman. They may provide information that is of no use to you. However, if they offer even a bit of information that is true, information you could not have obtained on your own, you would have been missing potentially valuable information.

          You didn't just believe a storm was coming and act. You asked around. The information was verified, and you were able to take action.

          Being informed is difficult at times. It requires that you have factual information. The news may not provide a great amount of substantial information, but if it does provide even 1% of the information leading to an informed opinion, it is valuable as a resource.

          I do believe we need to regulate information being portrayed as "news". Not because these agencies have some obligation to be accurate, but because these agencies gain viewers by portraying themselves as such.

          I am with you Pat. I agree that we shouldn't believe everything we hear. However, shutting a door completely is not the answer, in my opinion. Although I could be wrong.

          It would be possible to gain all of the necessary information with objective research. This may be what you do. In that case you may be right. It's a decision each individual must make. If you decide not to watch any news you may be better off. It's hard to tell.
      • thumb
        Jun 17 2013: Since I have not in decades, by empirical anecdotal evidence I'm not any worse off for my ignorance of the "news". I have noticed that since I have been looking into the ominous signs in the economy I have been more tense. But I do have to gather information about the possibilities.

        In fact I went to a therapist about this recent problem of not being able to relax. And I told her of a reoccurring dream I had where I would be a tepee in one moment and then a pup tent in the next moment, and this would go back and forth for some time. So I asked her what was wrong? She told me that I was two tents.
    • thumb
      Jun 16 2013: Good point Pat.....what we focus on expands:>)

      True Henry....Looking at information objectively is a key component to any thorough analysis. The challenge with newscasts is that they WANT to engage people as much as possible.....which is not a bad idea. However, newscasts often "play" with information to get more viewers.

      I agree with a "balanced" approach:>)

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.