The document discusses the concept of "unreasonable" people and progress. It uses quotes from George Bernard Shaw about how progress depends on those who persist in trying to change the world rather than adapt to it. It examines examples like Shaw, Mozart, and others to analyze when being unreasonable can lead to positive or negative outcomes, and the importance of humility, listening to others, and discerning motives when deciding what ideas to promote or ignore.

1. Does this look like a happy man? A
man satisfied with his world?
Not Satisfied With
Some people in the audience might
His World recognize his face. This is George
Bernard Shaw, a very famous Irish
playwright.
He may be more famous, though, for
some remarkable quotes from his
plays, his other writing, and his public
speaking.

2. Possibly the most famous is. "The
reasonable man adapts himself to the
world, the unreasonable one persists
in trying to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore all progress depends on
the unreasonable man."
"Unreasonable" All of these people refused to adapt to
People their worlds and instead changed the
world around them. They were all
"unreasonable".

3. ...but so were these people.
They didn't like their world, either, and
sought to change it, but very few
people wold call their changes
"progress".
So what's the difference? What
makes one group of unreasonable
people "bad" and the other "good"?
So Were These Guys

4. I think of it more as positive and
negative. Good and bad have moral
connotations and, though there is
common ground in most moral codes,
Positive/Negative there are enough differences to make
Is Important things that are "good" in one "bad" in
(or Light/Dark If another.
You Prefer)
My current definition of positive
unreasonableness is adapting the
world for the most benefit to the most
people, but even with that definition,
we have to be careful. Darth here,
after all, argued that he was bringing
peace to the galaxy - the most benefit
to the most people. So there has to
be more to it.

5. Humility is a beginning, although
possibly not the only one.
Humility allows us to understand that
we don't know everything.
Learning Once we realize that, we learn to
To Listen listen to the people around us.
That's all good, but so far seems
pretty "reasonable".

6. The "unreasonable" part comes from
understanding when not to listen.
Reason (logic - which is different from
"being reasonable") leads us to the
understanding that if we don't know
everything, neither does anyone else.
In turn, we realize that if we have a
great idea, we don't have to listen to
other people who say it can't be done.
Learning They might not know what they're
When Not To talking about.
Listen

7. So the key to unreasonableness
seems to be knowing how to weigh
who or what we should listen to
IGNORING against what we should ignore.
LISTENING
This can be a difficult balance to
achieve.
Still, there's more to it.
We want to achieve progress.

8. While looking for examples of
"unreasonable" people, I came across
this guy.
Some people would say he was
"unreasonable" and he certainly
changed the world - most people
Have You would say in a positive way.
Seen This If you don't recognize the face, it's
Man? Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart.
I would argue that he achieved
progress.

9. But maybe this guy was more
unreasonable?
If you weren't a child of the 80's, you
might not recognize him, either.
That's Falco, who sang "Rock Me,
Amadeus".
The song's not the unreasonable part,
though. Falco once claimed the
ghost of Mozart spoke to him and
guided his music. He even claimed
that he had an entire new album
...Or This, Uh... Guy? written, but was waiting for the spirit
of Wolfgang to tell him when to
release it.
That seems more unreasonable, but
I'd argue he contributed a lot less to
the progress of the world, even
though I think, "Rock Me, Amadeus"
is a pretty cool song.
But is it progress?
That brings us to the question -

11. Shaw was the socialist/atheist.
Chesterton was the
capitalist/Christian. Both of them had
ideas that were considered radically
"unreasonable" in their day.
So which ones would lead to
progress? Which of them was
(On Second "positively unreasonable"?
Thought, Ask
Someone Else What is "unreasonable" in the sense
If You Didn't
Understand that Shaw meant?
The Last
Slide) If it seems like I'm coming up with
more questions than answers here,
you should probably go back to the
part about realizing what we don't
know.

15. To figure that out, we have to judge
the motives of the people doing the
talking around us.
Where is the reaction coming from?
When it comes to "unreasonable"
ideas, most negative reactions come
from fear. It may not be obvious fear,
and that person may not even realize
their own fears.
We still have to listen, though - to
everyone - and then choose what to
ignore.
What's The Motive?

16. We have to listen because sometimes
people have a valid point.
They may have solid, logical reasons
that this idea, this path, is not the right
one to pursue.
These are usually not the people
basing their reactions in fear - or any
other emotion - but, somewhat
ironically, in reason - not the copout of
"being reasonable" - but actual
reason - logic - thought.
Highly Illogical

17. Just be careful. Sometimes
arguments can be dressed up to
appear logical, but aren't coming from
reason or logic.
Spot the difference?
And sometimes logic may steer us
away from our course, but every
"unreasonable" thing we do doesn't
have to be logical.
There are great things in this world
that logic would have said, before
they were created, had no reason for
being.
That's Whack

18. So back to Shaw, and what bing
"unreasonable" lead to for him.
G.B. Shaw was a kid who hated
school, the son of an alcoholic father
and a mother who left them when he
was 15.
He overcame stagefright and a
stammer by standing on a soapbox at
Speaker's Corner and telling the
world his unreasonable ideas.
G.B, Shaw, The Early Years

19. He was very nearly tried for treason
during World War I just for stating his
unpopular thoughts about his society
at the time.
He couldn't get his plays produced
anywhere because they were just too
different.
But he didn't stop. He knew when
not to listen.
He recovered - became hugely
famous and wealthy - and respected.
I Haven't Seen One Of These His plays were produced in
on Pawn Stars Yet numerous theaters in the UK and
North America - and he went on to
win the Nobel Prize for literature in
1925.
He was probably glad he didn't listen.