Is Analyzing Personal Development Too Negative? Too inflammatory?

[sidsavara]

Hi guys,

I wanted to get your opinion on an article I wrote for my blog:

What Is Analysis Driven Personal Development?

I thought it was a very clear, cleanly written article just laying out the way I think. It was not meant to be inflammatory or negative or even really spur discussion - but some of my readers have taken offense to it and the principles I lay out in it.

I was wondering about your opinions on it.

From my understanding, Steve Pavlina, David Allen, Leo Babauta, Tim Ferris, Dale Carnegie - all my favorite authors are people who review situations, review outcomes, and analyze what has worked and what hasn't. I wouldn't call it a "scientific method" but definitely rooted in analysis (my opinion of their writing, not trying to put words in their mouth).

This has greatly impacted my own perspective and the way I approach personal development - and the purpose of the post was just to share that side with my readers.

I am honestly a little taken aback by the negative reaction, and was wondering if I could get some feedback in this forum about it. I of course am following up with my readers who have commented, but am wondering whether people here (who have a similar mindset to me) might be able to help me out with your opinions as well.

[Tanja]

Originally Posted by sidsavara

I thought it was a very clear, cleanly written article just laying out the way I think.
I am honestly a little taken aback by the negative reaction, and was wondering if I could get some feedback in this forum about it. I of course am following up with my readers who have commented, but am wondering whether people here (who have a similar mindset to me) might be able to help me out with your opinions as well.

Okay, I've read your article, and you make some good points about what to keep in mind.
I agree with you that it is a very clear written article.
However, I'm not quite sure what the intention behind the article was, just expressing your own personal method or encouraging people to use it (You didn't say what the people complained about).
Your article struck me as being for people who have already been into personal development for a longer time and this just sums up and reiterates what to bear in mind, it's just another point of view/method they might find useful.
However, for those who have just began and come across this article it might be a bit confusing, and what I mean by that is that you offer the ''what'' but not the ''how'' (in a clear way,my impression), some steps people can try, test and use immediately.
You talk about being introspection driven and results driven, but what about those who have a hard time identifying what it is that is holding them back, or have trouble getting started, or think they can't achieve results, can't figure out what they want. When people see research and evidence in the text, they might think 'oh boy, this is too much for me''.
I also clicked on the link ''how to approach personal change'' and skimmed the article, I think most people get stuck at can I? Maybe you could offer some more techniques in that respect?

As far as PD being reason based rather than emotion based, I agree and disagree with you on this one. I think our emotions can be a good gauge whether or not we're on the right track, and they can also be a good indicator of what issues we need to address, and find the reason behind them. How many times have you listed all the ''pros'', ''reason-based'' reasons for something but you felt the choice would be wrong and just not right for you.

On the whole, I liked the article, these are just some thoughts on what I might like to see in an article of this type, doesn't mean others would too

[seeker5]

Originally Posted by sidsavara

I thought it was a very clear, cleanly written article just laying out the way I think. It was not meant to be inflammatory or negative or even really spur discussion - but some of my readers have taken offense to it and the principles I lay out in it.

Where is the offense and the reaction to this "inflammatory" post? I see only 3 comments to that post, and one was simply a little skeptical and the other two supportive. I don't see evidence of this big negative reader reaction.

Hrm.

[sidsavara]

Tanja thank you so much for your feedback

You are absolutely correct, the article was very much a "What the heck is this?" more than a "This is how it is done."

I very much appreciate your feedback on my other article, and the discussion on emotion based versus reason based. I think that I need to dig deeper into that issue as you are right: perhaps there are times where we need to listen to our emotions and not "rationalize" the wrong thing to do based on the pros and cons. I am not sure how to best approach this issue, but you have given me a lot to think about.

Seeker, I replied to you via PM with more details, but to repeat (for benefit of those reading the thread) basically the negative reaction I had was more with people "voting with their feet" (email unsubscriptions) and people responding via email that they did not like all the "negativity"

I appreciate your skepticism though, and that's an excellent point - I didn't explain what the negative reaction was up front, and I should have.

[Tanja]

Originally Posted by sidsavara

Tanja thank you so much for your feedback

You're welcome! Let us know what you come up with regarding the emotion based versus reason based approach.

[Brutha]

The problem with the post is that it is inconsistent.
You do the opposite of what you are preaching.
Writing from an idealistic perspective about the virtues of the empirical perspective and criticizing the idealistic perspective comes of as being negative.

[Parthon]

Hmmm. For me it seemed very boring and reasonable. I couldn't sense the negativity, but there was no heart to it, no essence, no core. It was like a list of good ideas without any meat to it. It was skin and bone, but no flesh. Where's the actions to take? Where's the personal imbuement? Where's the love, the courage and the power? It sounds really good, but it lacks that oomph.

Out of the PD leaders that you have mentioned, I noticed that they communicate from heart to heart. There's no doubt they believe in what they say. They don't just communicate a reasonable list, they lovingly craft out the message they want to share with the world.

I wouldn't say that the article is bad, it's just non-good. People looking for PD want great writing. They don't want reasonable.