What matters is your focus, do you agree?

[FranknBerry]

There is an element of truth to the so-called "law" of cause and effect. While what matters is subjective in structure, when presented as a statement/question of if what matters is your focus then it becomes difficult to argue against. Anything that is deemed to "matter" must be a focal point of ones perception. As such whatever you're not focused on doesn't "matter" at that moment in time. However, some things can be argued as not mattering while existing in ones focus. I suppose I'm just "splitting hairs" at this point.

I agree in that what one focuses on defines who they are at any given point in time. Our perceptions are pulled and pushed about by what we are exposed to. Habits result from repetition. Mood is no different. I disagree with the notions that small goals are more beneficial than large ones and vice versa. The size of the goal wouldn't matter unless one has a negative association with "failing" to meet said goal. If the goal is simply the journey regardless of how it comes to pass and a positive perception is held in regards to every aspect of being alive then the size of a goal would be unimportant. As I have doubts that there are many (or any) who actually perceive in such a way then the size of a goal would matter. It would vary dependent on the individual though. Some would do best with smaller, others with larger. There is no "one size fits all" approach.

[LuckyR]

Most folks benefit more from achieving small goals than missing large ones.

It is true when you target for big goals and miss your loss will be great, and it will be small if the goas are small. But the opposite is true as well. If you succeed in achieving a big goal, your gain will be great too.

Anyway, setting unrealistic goals won't take you nowhere. But if one has the potential isn't it good to go for bigger goals rather than being content with smaller ones?

My point is that success is much better than failure. This is more important than the size of the success or failure. Thus it is better to shoot for achievable goals than long shots.

It is good if one can prevent big failures, because the amount that you loose will be proportionate. But why should someone avoid bigger goals? No target is impossible, but you should have a plan and determination. And I agree that bigger goals come with bigger risk of failure followed by bigger levels of sadness and humiliation. But the ones who have kept a name in the world are the ones who simply did not get afraid of that.

But is having a name in the world the right goal? I'd much rather be guaranteed private success (with all of the trappings of success), than a small chance of notoriety and crazy success.

[FranknBerry]

It is true when you target for big goals and miss your loss will be great, and it will be small if the goas are small. But the opposite is true as well. If you succeed in achieving a big goal, your gain will be great too.

Anyway, setting unrealistic goals won't take you nowhere. But if one has the potential isn't it good to go for bigger goals rather than being content with smaller ones?

My point is that success is much better than failure. This is more important than the size of the success or failure. Thus it is better to shoot for achievable goals than long shots.

It is good if one can prevent big failures, because the amount that you loose will be proportionate. But why should someone avoid bigger goals? No target is impossible, but you should have a plan and determination. And I agree that bigger goals come with bigger risk of failure followed by bigger levels of sadness and humiliation. But the ones who have kept a name in the world are the ones who simply did not get afraid of that.

But is having a name in the world the right goal? I'd much rather be guaranteed private success (with all of the trappings of success), than a small chance of notoriety and crazy success.

The "right" goal is dependent on the individual. For many having a name in the world is the "right" goal and for many others it is not.

[Sushan]

There is an element of truth to the so-called "law" of cause and effect. While what matters is subjective in structure, when presented as a statement/question of if what matters is your focus then it becomes difficult to argue against. Anything that is deemed to "matter" must be a focal point of ones perception. As such whatever you're not focused on doesn't "matter" at that moment in time. However, some things can be argued as not mattering while existing in ones focus. I suppose I'm just "splitting hairs" at this point.

I agree in that what one focuses on defines who they are at any given point in time. Our perceptions are pulled and pushed about by what we are exposed to. Habits result from repetition. Mood is no different. I disagree with the notions that small goals are more beneficial than large ones and vice versa. The size of the goal wouldn't matter unless one has a negative association with "failing" to meet said goal. If the goal is simply the journey regardless of how it comes to pass and a positive perception is held in regards to every aspect of being alive then the size of a goal would be unimportant. As I have doubts that there are many (or any) who actually perceive in such a way then the size of a goal would matter. It would vary dependent on the individual though. Some would do best with smaller, others with larger. There is no "one size fits all" approach.

I agree that matters of concern and importance can be dependant highly on the perception of different people. One may see having money is success and will focus on earning, while another may think happiness is the success and will focus on achieving that.

To achieve whatever that one wants he/she has to have full attention on that. Maybe the result won't be the best or the most healthy one, yet 'focus' will definitely lead you towards that. As an example, some may want to become the most dangerous serial killer ever lived. So he has to focus on the matter, study about other killers, and study the law enforcing authorities, and plan what he has to do. People may judge you, but still you may have achieved what you focused on. And we have to keep in mind that though focus may be important, it is not the only thing that matter.

[Sushan]

It is true when you target for big goals and miss your loss will be great, and it will be small if the goas are small. But the opposite is true as well. If you succeed in achieving a big goal, your gain will be great too.

Anyway, setting unrealistic goals won't take you nowhere. But if one has the potential isn't it good to go for bigger goals rather than being content with smaller ones?

My point is that success is much better than failure. This is more important than the size of the success or failure. Thus it is better to shoot for achievable goals than long shots.

It is good if one can prevent big failures, because the amount that you loose will be proportionate. But why should someone avoid bigger goals? No target is impossible, but you should have a plan and determination. And I agree that bigger goals come with bigger risk of failure followed by bigger levels of sadness and humiliation. But the ones who have kept a name in the world are the ones who simply did not get afraid of that.

But is having a name in the world the right goal? I'd much rather be guaranteed private success (with all of the trappings of success), than a small chance of notoriety and crazy success.

No one has to become world famous. And if anyone who become successful become famous too, there won't be a thing called becoming famous. Success can be seen in different ways through different eyes. One may look forward for fame while another look forward for happiness. Having a bigger goal will make you to have bigger efforts. So even if you fail there is a high chance for you to remain at somewhere above than your current status. But when the goal is small the efforts are small and failure might give you nothing at all. That is why I say always dream and target in a bigger (yet practical) scale.

[Sushan]

My point is that success is much better than failure. This is more important than the size of the success or failure. Thus it is better to shoot for achievable goals than long shots.

It is good if one can prevent big failures, because the amount that you loose will be proportionate. But why should someone avoid bigger goals? No target is impossible, but you should have a plan and determination. And I agree that bigger goals come with bigger risk of failure followed by bigger levels of sadness and humiliation. But the ones who have kept a name in the world are the ones who simply did not get afraid of that.

But is having a name in the world the right goal? I'd much rather be guaranteed private success (with all of the trappings of success), than a small chance of notoriety and crazy success.

The "right" goal is dependent on the individual. For many having a name in the world is the "right" goal and for many others it is not.

One can have a goal to have a name in the world, and that can be purely based on personal perceptions. But this goal can be achieved in many ways. One can become a successful businessman, become a billionaire, and the world will talk about you. Another one can smuggle heroin, earn billions, and again the whole world will talk about you. Either of these can be right in the eyes of the person. But the world will judge the person based on ethical, moral values, and law and order. So the 'right' goal has to be right for the person, as well as per the social norms.