The Time Paradox – by Dean Acheson We have contained in the processes of GTD the most basic essence of TIME.
One could say there are three kinds o time – and you will recognize these: PAST time, PRESENT time and FUTURE time. And when we look at these three components square on, we get paradoxes. What do I mean? Well, let’s see i I can fgure out where to begin. Logic doesn’t always ollow along with the way things actually are, so I’ll try approaching this rom a circuitous route and maybe we can sneak up on things beore we realize what’s happening. Past time, in its raw orm, appears to be an infnite; that is, no matter how ar your imagination takes you into the past, there always seems to be something that existed earlier. (You might want to stop or a bit and think about that.) Future time, likewise, appears to be infnite. No matter how ar you stretch your imagination into the uture, it seems difcult to imagine an end point. It’s as though there will somehow be more o something later – somehow, somewhere, sometime. (You might want to stop or a bit and think about that one, also.) And, i you’ve stuck with me so ar, and this way o looking at things sort o rings a bell, you will note that present time in actuality can seem like a micro slice – you no sooner perceive the now beore it is already a split second later. (Be sure to get that one!) The paradox is that it’s this infnitesimal slice o “now” that is the ONLY ONLY time that we are ever in. So, with all that infnite past and all that infnite uture, here we are – always actually existing in this tiny piece o continually changing, miniscule moment called “present”, and it is actually the ONLY moment. I mean, the past has already come and gone; the uture hasn’t yet arrived; and the present is always with us. So the present is the tiny slice that always IS, and the infnite past and the infnite uture are always NOT. Hmmm – seems like a paradox! The infnite continuousness o the infnitesimal now! So how does this relate to GTD?
The underlying aspect o GTD that separates it rom other systems is that it more or less ignores the concept o importance and addresses these three actors o time. Are some things more important than others? O course. However, i one is to weigh actions according to importance, one has to evaluate lots o dierent realities and signifcances. Let’s slow way down and look at some o the actors that would be involved as criteria in selection o importance. 1. The Past:
a. How long has the item been here? b. What other projects is the item connected with? c. What are those other projects connected with? d. How are those importances evaluated (i.e., evaluated regarding career? amily? health? customer? boss? elementary survival?) e. What is the weight o this item compared to other items in the stack? (Many o which we have yet to take a look at…)
www.davidallengtd.com
©2008 Dean Acheson Used by the David Allen Company with permission.
page 1
2. The Future:
a. Which goal area does this item support? b. Which goal area is more important? c. Is this item even connected with a goal at all? d. In this stack o stu, how does this item relate to the others in terms o tomorrow’s importance? Well, you get the idea. It’s like we have to evaluate all the items against all o the criteria above in order to place our items in the correct order o importance; and o course we can’t really begin to do that until we look at all the items, so we can perorm the comparative evaluation. Seems like a rather impressive Catch-22. Well, you say, that’s the genius o the human mind – it can do instant evaluations with all this complexity. That concept has a signifcant element o truth in it. However, most people have been down so many roads, and have so many areas in which they are attempting to succeed, along with so many other people they are attempting to impress or obey, that each item can contain the potential o precipitating a mental avalanche. By removing the signifcance o an item when processing it, you are bypassing the questions having to do with relative importance, and simply asking the question, “Is this item actionable?” You don’t sit and stew about whether it is actionable or not. You simply trust yoursel to decide, based on your own mental magical knowledge and your gut eel. The mind, i given the chance, would at times love to do the mental gymnastics o opening up the plethora o past experiences relating to an item, as well as all the uture contemplations one could come up with to make one’s sel eel creative. In truth, or each person, every action item under the sun that belongs to that person is in one o three states: 1. the action hasn’t been started; or 2. the action has been started and is in process; or 3. the action is complete. Note the relevance to the three kinds o time – past, present and uture. Perhaps you will fnd it interesting to note that there is even more to the time paradox. The starting and the doing (in process), and the end or done or stop, all again into a time concept inversion. The time contained in “start” is instantaneous – it is that tiny slice o no time where one simply transitions rom “not started” to “in process”. The middle part, or “in process”, or the “doing” stage, is where the time is spent. (And the action in “DO” is, in reality, simply the changing o the state or location o something, but that is grist or another article.) Then there is the “end” or “stop” or “fnish” or “completion”, and that is simply the cessation o “DO” when one declares the action complete. Again, this declaration is another tiny slice o no time between when something is still in process, and when an action has been declared to be complete. The declaration o “stop” happens in an infnitesimal slice o time. I you are in charge o the “start”, in charge o the “do”, and also the “complete”, then you are in control. In act, i you ollow the concepts here, when you are in control o the whole action cycle, you are in control o time itsel. Notice that there is no signifcance here. An action is either done or in process or not started. This is not a “BHEC” (“Big Hairy Esoteric Concept”)! Pretty simple, really. Most undamentals are.
For more David Allen Company tools and educational content, check out our GT D Products section at davidco.com. For our online learning center, visit GTD Connect at gtdconnect.com.
www.davidallengtd.com
©2008 Dean Acheson Used by the David Allen Company with permission.
page 2
