A recent post by Glen Alleman, titled “Statements About Absolutes” made me think about the concept of ‘Extraordinary’ and what constitute a person/situation/scenario that could be defined as one.
Sam Harris, in his recent book ‘The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values‘ advocates the notion that, contrary to the conventional wisdom, it should be possible to identify specific facts, relating to moral issues, which could be associated with specific and generally accepted human values (thus removing the conceived lack of correlation between morality and human knowledge).
In a similar vein, one could argue that a determination of what constitutes ‘Extraordinary’ versus that which is ‘Normal’ or ‘Ordinary’ could be subject to a similar sort of logic. Although, mistakenly perhaps, one could propose that what is extraordinary to one is nothing but normal for the other; nevertheless we should be able, scientifically, determine the bounds of ‘ordinary’ versus ‘extraordinary’.
Having researched this a bit further I’ve come across a beautiful essay, published in a blog called ‘Check with Chuck’ where he writes the following:
How many times have we all decided that we could set the world on fire with our talents and abilities, only to have the matches taken away for fear we may be pyromaniacs? The solution is to hold on to the dream and the goal and let the purpose be the fuel. Write out the reasons, maybe 100, for why you do what you do that you care about, your goal. When you do that, your grip on your matches will be far stronger than before and when you start the flame going, it will be too big to put out.
Think about it!