You need to read the full article…

Hello Solecito. I did read the article. And while it might seem that the author and I were saying the same thing, I saw distinct differences.

“We are not fulfilled by what we can seek to please us, but what we can build and offer. It is not fame, or money, or recognition that makes for a thoroughly meaningful life, it is how we put our gifts to use.”

This aligns well with my own thoughts that I shared, but there’s also talk of work never being “easier” than other work, and so on. The case is also made that we should embrace what we’re good at rather than going after what we’re passionate about. That’s what I disagree with. I believe we should be figuring out how to combine our natural talents with our passions and aspirations.

For example, my dream has always been to able to help lift people up. I care very much about people and my relationships with them. Not surprisingly, I’m a natural when it comes to customer service matters. One could say that these are the types of things that I should be doing because I have a knack for it, but I’m not interested in being a supervisor, psychologist, or anything that involves working with people as an employee of a company.

But writing comes naturally to me. And so I’m combining my passion to help people with my skills as a writer so that I can do what comes easily to me while doing what I love. I’m blogging, writing for Personal Development sites, and working on setting up workshops with the local detention center. Doing what I’m “good at” wouldn’t have made me think such things were possible, but here I am pursuing them.

Perhaps the author is implying that in her article, but that wasn’t how I interpreted the overall message. Thus, I am merely expanding on what was or wasn’t expressed here.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.