Everywhere we see a continuous play between forces of creation and those of destruction.
Right inside the cells of our bodies these forces and unceasingly active. Biologically they’re known as “anabolic” and “catabolic” effects. Anabolic functions build and catabolic ones break things down. We need both to be functioning well to be healthy. If they are in complete balance there’s a dynamic status quo – part of what we call “homeostasis” (a complex set of balances). If catabolic processes dominate the system degenerates and degrades. To grow, the anabolic forces have to dominate.
Makes sense, huh? Whilst creativity might involve breaking some things down, we can’t grow anything by reducing it……the building, creative processes have to be predominant. How does this fit for your life? How much energy do you spend pulling things or people down? How much time do give to destruction? And how much energy do you spend creatively building things, helping people to grow?
It’s not hard to find critics, especially cynical, destructive critics, but time spent with them is rarely rewarding. Isn’t it much more life-enhancing to be with creative people, those with positive energy and outlook, who solve problems and are motivated to make things better?
We need the critics. We need those who seem to thrive only by pulling things down. All heroes need challenges. We grow by engaging with the challenges and overcoming them. But it’s also worthwhile being aware of the toxic effects of the nay-sayers.
It strikes me that life is short and is best spent predominantly with creative, positive-minded people. They energise. They support. They help us grow.
Heroes Not Zombies 
I’m interesting in the application of this idea to countries. I can say that Egypt (where I am from and where I live) has a dominance of catabolic effects. And people are pushing it with their destructive criticism.
What an interesting thought! I will confess total ignorance about Egypt sugar mouse, but I suspect there are quite a few countries which seem to in catabolic phases of their history. In fact, isn’t it true that history itself is a continuous cycle of waves of destruction and growth?
My spine chills fro thinking of this idea applied to countries. On the original spirit of the post, I must say I’m pretty confident that I’m as much a cynical destructive critic as a positive and creative individual. Established institutions that no longer serve a purpose are supposed to be brought down, and I’m always willing to help on that. On the other hand, new institutions and Ideas must emerge and do the job. So, do I want stability or revolution? None! I consider myself in the middle, and evolutionary. I want people, ideas, countries, cultures, etc… to evolve, and that demands a lot of work in both the destruction of the old and purposeless and the creation of the new and purposeful!
No wonder I’m always stressed out 😉
Well, I guess we need both, huh? After all no biological organism could function without both catabolism AND anabolism could it?
Do I want stability or revolution?
Good question!
I’m with you on the evolutionary choice – it’s growth I want to see – development and the realisation of unrealised potentials.