Essentialism (XVI): Essence Of The Essentialist: Explore: Select

 "No More Yes.  It's either H^LL  YEAH! Or No."  This quote at the beginning of this chapter delivered by Derek Silvers at a TED talk, delivers what is the heart of this element of the Essentialist.  Said (and quoted) a bit more politely, "If the answer isn't a definite yes, then it should be a no."

Thought of in a different way by McKeown, it is The 90% rule:  

"You can think of this as the 90 Percent Rule, ant it's one you can apply to just about every situation or dilemma.  As you evaluate an option, think about the single most important criterion for that decision, and then simply give the option a score between 0 and 100.  If you rate anything lower than 90 percent, then automatically change the rating to 0 and simply reject it."

He notes that this skill, more than any other, emphasizes the reality of trades offs - meaning sometimes we will have to turn down a good option and have faith that the perfect one will come.  The perfect one may not come, but the very action of making applying selective criteria means that we - and not others - are making the decisions for ourselves. 

Fail to apply this sort of logic, McKeown states will lead to decisions that are too broad and commitments that are too many.  And by using a numerical values means that we are applying such decisions in a conscious, logical, and rational manner - instead of emotionally or impulsively.  

By defining high criteria, we remove those things that are not quite as high but drain just as much energy and time.  And by using criteria that are both selective and explicit, we have in our possession a systemic tool for discerning that which is essential and those things that are not.

He suggests applying to this to those questions that get at the root of Essentialism:  What am I passionate about?  What taps my talent?  What fills a significant need in the world?:  "We are not looking for a plethora of good things.  We are looking for the one where can make our absolutely highest point of contribution."

---

Application:

This, to my ears is harsh language.  It is exactly two of the things I hate doing:  Applying a rating scale and being willing to walk away from things.  And yet, if I look back on my life, I have to ask the rational question "What would that look like?"

I get to ask the question because I am in the process of doing a form of this right now.

In my case, it is the sorting of books.  The question I am starting to ask is "Will I likely ever pick this up or use this again?"  While the answer is not "No" all the time, in certain genres - such as foreign languages - the answer is "yes":  Yes, I will likely never have the time to pick up that line of study again.

I am trying to apply it to new interests and projects as well.  Once I get past the initial blush of interest, is this something that - to quote McKeown above - is a 90% item for me?  If not - if there is not a logical reason to undergird my emotional reaction - I quietly put it to the side.

Am I perfect at it?  No, not yet - and maybe never.  But can I use it to give myself a reason to walk away from a thing without feeling like I am giving up on it? Absolutely.

Even the smallest application of this principle has lead to forward motion in my life.  Certainly something I need to apply more.