We often think that when companies sink, when we have to abandon a specific product choice, stop eating something, change activity, even change friends, it is something that happens by accident, or in negative circumstances. And indeed it can be negative — especially emotionally — , and it very often is, but I am going to develop another aspect of this natural rotation: that this rotation is a necessity.

Indeed, it ultimately protects you from the hazards of life that arrive far more often in patterns of unlimited repetition not bounded by a certain degree of curiosity which allows you, when paradigm shifts occur, to cross to the other side of the barrier when it becomes necessary.

And this is crucial: it's about having the “right” dose of open-mindedness, the dose that makes you take the step and jump the barrier — a decisive and determining act for your future position and which will guide your next actions — : here we are talking about a threshold, not an approximate quantity.

The result is a binary choice: you make the choice, and you land somewhere else, or you take the other path, and you continue doing what you usually did. And this degree to which you voluntarily expose yourself to uncertainty, to novelty, is exactly what will allow you to take advantage of the benefits of each paradigm, system, tool that will be most suitable according to your current needs.

Why would affliction from permanent change be a protector in the case of survival? Even though it inflicts stress on the organism, the point is to find the right balance: sometimes there are opportunities that will allow us to advance ten times what we used to do before with one. And if we miss this type of opportunity, it is not just a shortfall, it is a punishment: life will make you pay for your lack of scalability and your lack of discernment regarding possible futures. And in that case, you will suffer regressions / step-backs.

There are only extreme examples of systems or organisms that have survived for a very long time by doing the exact same thing.

And that is why we always find this dynamic in our current societies: there are those who push toward “progress” and innovation, and those who are afraid. And it is precisely there that the evolutionary advantage becomes visible: those who take the biggest risks are often the ones who fear it the least. And since life is not made only of risks, and true danger is only encountered at the apotheosis of its pursuit, those who seek danger find peace more easily in the apparent calm of banal and transitory life.

Thus, those who are in total rejection of risk and danger end up, in reality, suffering far more stress from a life of failures, devoid of meaning, and imposed by a system that, when it falls, will have no mercy for them.

Obviously there are many people who experience risk clumsily or randomly and end up paying the consequences, and this should never be omitted. But forever, I would prefer a life of intensity and discovery to a banal life that is in reality brutally unjust and freedom-destroying.