“… a warrior knows that he cannot change, and yet he makes it his business to try to change, even though he knows that he won’t be able to. That’s the only advantage a warrior has over the average man. The warrior is never disappointed when he fails to change.”
Carlos Castaneda

The Second Ring of Power

Ikigai: A Reason for Being (Purpose)


The concept of Ikigai:


I don’t feel that I’ve been able to live in this convergence. I would also want to see another dimension in it … one that relates to happiness and well-being since I believe it is possible to live in this convergence with negative outcomes and personal sacrifice in well-being and happiness.

I came across Ikigai in this OK, but tedious and not as convincing as I wanted it to be, presentation from Michel Bauwens:

What disappointed me in the Bauwens presentation was that is felt academic and theoretical (which I’ve come to expect from Bauwens) and offered nothing actionable.

The first question that was given to him by the host (Yohai Benkler – which feels like a name I should recognize but don’t) was good but in my opinion faulty. It assumed (and was not challenged) that because past transitions involved war and bloodshed, that the coming / current value transition would also require wars … and asked where those wars would be. The question forced Bauwens into a kind of theoretical prophecy that led to a very high-worded academic but, in my heart, empty response.

The question of violence also touched on the issue of feminine and masculine dominance (which I felt was wrongly framed as men & women) which came up in the presentation and in a followup question.What if these two issues are related. Could it be that if we had more feminine guidance that we could approach transition with softness instead of harshness? Could it be that that transition is already in the making?

During numerous points in the presentation I felt that Alexander’s unfolding wholeness is a key dimension that was missing from it. Unfolding wholeness, in a way, pulls the rug out from the assumption that there is going to be a definitive transition (or that there ever was one). Instead it postulates that we will witness a continuous and gradual development and change (which is hinted at in the presentation). What if we experience “wars” when we resist this kind of natural development and instead try to push systems (natural and human) into forced, mechanistic and usually destructive change that is better aligned with a dominant (and dominating), male and controlling attitude?

Maybe in a more balanced masculine/feminine world Ikigai is a valid diagram. In the male dominates world we live in, it needs a definitive feminine dimension to be complete.

This entry was posted in AltEco, Intake, outside and tagged . You are welcome to read 2 comments and to add yours


  1. Posted October 23, 2016 at 10:17 am | Permalink

    on your “I would also want to see another dimension in it … one that relates to happiness and well-being”…
    the “what do you love?” section involves that…

    it’s about exploring what makes one happy, what nurtures, what brings joy/warmth/smile to heart&soul, what makes one worth waking up in the morning, is there something one do and does not feel burden / working, what makes one forget about the world & time, what would someone be(/do) if money / society / outside systems would not demand things from him/her, what would someone do today if this would be the last one in their life, etc…

    I am “using” this “digram” in “career counseling” (and not only) for a long time

    • Posted October 23, 2016 at 12:19 pm | Permalink

      I was thinking of Itsik … I think it is safe to say that he is in “what do you love” … and yet something is missing … that is the dimension I was reflecting on.

      Upon further reflection I wondered what would this diagram look like if instead of adding a dimension, one of the existing circles would be removed … what if “what you get paid for” was taken out of the equation?

Leave a Reply