I don’t think you are missing anything.

I wrote Steve an email telling him that he was losing the ability to inspire people sine he was coming off as being apart from and better than other people.

It seems like that blog entry was response to his having listened to my points.

That I feel he listened and exposed a not so flattering aspect of his life changes my opinion of him.

I do agree that he needs to be aware of how the tone of his writing hits people.

Perhaps another polite email from someone else might help Steve.

Everything he says can be found in any time management book, but I find it useful to have that stuff doled out in daily snippets on the web.

Going to the web at work is a needed break for me, but it easily turns into a big time waster sometimes. Being able to go to a time management site and get inspiration for better time use on the web, a place where I might otherwise waste my time is a tremendous boost to my daily productivity.

I get inspired and get off of the web much quicker.

If his intentions were indeed genuine, well then, he’s sorely misguided. So you think you’re enlightened? What, because you’re a good goal setter? That’s great. But what makes you think that there aren’t other, more-enlighted people, overhearing your conversations, and mocking your “barely conscious” existence?

And honestly, who gives a crap? We’re all still just physical animals working through our lives, trying to learn and improve and enjoy the ride. It’s the “trivialities” that make us most human. They are to be embraced, not mocked.

I like a lot of Steve P’s stuff, but he lost a lot of credibility with this one article.

I would like to say that it is refreshing to get mature and intelligent replies to what I had to say.

I too enjoy Steve Pavlina’s site. By popping into it at work and reading some short entries I get inspired to make better use of my time.

Does anyone know of any similar sites? Something like what Steve Pavlina does but without the self congratulatory tone in the writings?

FWIW, one thing I always liked about Stephen Covey’s original book is that toward the end of it he admitted that he struggled, hard, following his own principals.

It helped me to read that.

I can’t see Steve Pavlina doing that in a heart felt way.

Sure, help people, show them the way, and even urge them to move forward from time to time. But it’s their life; if they are a bear then let them be a bear.

The last stage of becoming an eagle is to understand that other people are in control of their lives, and it’s their choices that define those lives. Taking enjoyment from tormenting those that have not come to see your view of existence is no better than a child tormenting ants.

When they are at a stage in their lives when they are capable of undergoing the awakening, they will seek out an eagle. When the student is ready the teacher will appear.

Oh, and caterpillars and butterflies would be a better analogy than bears and eagles - there is a real progression between the two. Though, they are a lot less changed with elemental emotional meaning, which would make the article sound less impressive.

Steve: “People do bow down to easily to their fears, but not everyone can be an eagle. Some people don’t have economic opportunities, live in countries with limited freedom, or they have people to care for.”

I don’t think Pavlina is saying that becoming an eagle requires you to live on passive income and spend your waking hours enlightening “bears”. After having read a fair bit of Pavlina’s articles I think this definition of an eagle is somebody who “lives consciously.” That is all.

Given this, why do you believe that that people with lesser economic opportunities and lesser freedoms would be *unable* to be an eagle? How would having people to care for be a hindrance?

I know hardships and constraints in my life have often been the catalyst for me to grow, and I only wonder whether it could do the same for those living under the hard circumstances you mention.

Given that the title of the article is “Are you a bear or an eagle?” I think his intention is to get readers to recognise the separation of living with and without a heightened perspective and to ask them to make a choice to step over the line and to live life consciously.