Wired for Work: Learning that assures in-depth Relationships
By the title of this paper, it would sound contradictory to note that the term work was introduced barely in 1826 by the French mathematician Gaspard-Gustave Coriolis as "weight lifted through a height"; which is based on the use of early steam engines to lift buckets of water out of flooded ore mines. If we were wired for work, then how be it that this term was coined only two, 2 centuries ago? Could this be associated with the negative connotations that have become associated with work? Everybody loves to play! But what about work? Thomas Edison makes a joke of this dilemma in the quote below:
Three, 3 different definitions of work are presented, in the attempt to outline the form of this concept. In physics, a force is said to do work if, when acting on a body, there is a displacement. For instance, when a ball is held above the ground and then dropped, the work done on the ball as it falls is equal to the weight of the ball, a force; multiplied by the distance to the ground, a displacement. In thermodynamics, work performed by a system is the energy transferred by the system to another. And the rate at which work is performed is power. Thirdly, electrical work is the work done on a charged particle by an electric field. The following three, 3 concepts stand out:
- Energy, and
In addition, two, 2 parties are involved in the work process. These include the actor or protagonist who originates the process, and the receptor or benefactor. With humans, all four, 4 observations would still be relevant; albeit with a slight modification, especially when work is defined as the improvement upon phenomena. This identifies a certain threshold that must exist, which would be synonymous with the initial state of an electrical, thermodynamic, or mechanical system. After the improvement or optimization, a new state would be arrived at, which would be superior to the first. In general, the initial state is nurtured into the ultimate state, which would then define the nature of the phenomenon. For the point of departure, this latter state would represent the location at which it would be wasteful to attempt any further improvements. And the former would define the minimum requirement, for the phenomenon to exist. Force would however still be required, to effect the displacement from nurture to nature. And energy would still be used up, in the process.
Hard work spotlights the character of people: some turn up their sleeves, some turn up their noses, and some don't turn up at all
samewing104937.html?src=t_work— Sam Ewing
Two, 2 sources of energy would be distinguished. The impulse, which defines the rate of change or power, also funds the energy that is required for the initial state to be. And the sustenance provides the energy that is required for the optimization process. For instance, to move up a stream in flood, the energy that is required could be split in two, 2. First, energy would be required to withstand the flood, F. And then energy would be needed for the motion up stream, for a total energy of L = 2F ± 1. From this model, it would be sufficient that both energies are equal, for 2F. In this case, it would be the nurture and the sustenance that would be equal.
Then the total energy expended would add up to C’ = CWk + CNd, which accounts for the commitment to the task. This defines learning as some kind of work. In this case, it would be the person’s self that benefits from the process. Both the protagonist and the beneficiary would be the same person. But after learning has happened, the person becomes positioned uniquely, to affect another person, for optimization. And the cycle is complete, which demonstrates that humans are wired for work. To the extent that we are learners, we would be workers. Could this connection explain the difficulty that people have with learning? Could there be a relationship between the difficulties with work and with learning? It appears obvious however that a person, who is not able to learn, would not be able to work. While learning affects the thought pattern, work is determined by the behavior pattern. When both patterns predict each other, this would be sufficient evidence that the difficulties may have been overcome, for CNd → 0. To the extent that they do not predict therefore, this would indicate the inability to have resolved the difficulties with learning; as well as with work, for CNd ≥ 0. It would be these difficulties that would translate into strained relationships. In general, relationships occur at two, 2 levels as follows:
- Trust, and
With synergy, it would be sufficient that the parties are agreed on the procedures for the performance at work, even when they disagree in other aspects of life. But trust goes deeper than this, to include the essential aspects of life and living. Trust is relevant with families, where ties and bonds are rather sensitive. Wherever people are thrown together for long periods, relationships would go beyond synergy to trust, for survival. As with work and learning therefore, so it would be with synergy and trust respectively. Difficulties with relationships in the family would spill into the work place, especially when trust is an integral part of the work culture.
These would be inconsistencies that affect both reliability and validity. When people become valid, relationships at home and at work would be cordial, for optimum productivity, which decreases with validity. The key areas, in which people need to be agreed for trust, include the spiritual, mental, and material. Spirituality concerns salvation and worship, which shape the values; mentality involves family and work, which define the thought pattern; and materiality is a reference to wealth, which depends on the behavior pattern. The behavior pattern is an expression of the procedure that is derived during learning. In general however, it would be a function of engagement, retention, employment, and predictability.
Far and away the best prize that life has to offer is the chance to work hard at work worth doing
theodorero109913.html?src=t_work— Theodore Roosevelt
This teaser is posed to test the depth of trust between a husband and wife. The husband is an acclaimed hunter and max-man, revered by all the animals in the vicinity that then plot to eliminate him. A bird is used to set him up, when he and his wife are sighted on a hunting trip. The bird poses the following riddle, after the hunter aims his gun and is ready to shoot:
If you shoot me, you die
If you do not, your wife dies
Now the choice is yours