It was imagined, or predicted, that we would work less and less and gain time for the pleasure of becoming better, wiser and more cultured. Idleness would no longer belong to the lazy and the fortunate, but would be available to all, or at least to many more. None of this happened.

It pains me more and more to live in a world that values the magnetism of those who enchant through their ideological mediocrity, without any respect for truth. The same world where status, often gained by who knows how, lights the way to high-profile stages. Too bad it does not illuminate in the same way the path that goes beyond a sensationalist superficiality.

I was recently talking to two colleagues about a learning experience one of them had conducted for a group of people from a client of ours. I had asked her how it had gone. Her response sparked such a conversation. We were trying to understand and define what would make our learning experiences different from so many others. How had we arrived at this model and style?

Before, when people wanted to become good, they were not as concerned with their skills (know-how) as they are today. They were concerned with their qualities or virtues (know-how). And, in an apparent paradox, the only way they could think of to achieve these virtues and qualities was through their consistent and constant application.

The offence has gone from acute to chronic. It is no longer a reaction to something that hurts us or affects our reputation. We are reactive to everything that is dissonant to us; everything that is different simply backfires.

Political correctness is a theory that supports the idea that it is perfectly possible to take a piece of shit from the clean side. Well, I don't think it's possible. If it's shit, it's shit.

In the world of idiotic work, efficiency is not rewarded. Apparently more value is placed on things like ownership of other people's time and the power that comes with it. Therefore, a smart worker who has a minimal understanding of saving effort will not do his best. He will do just enough to give the idea that he is doing something useful with time that, after all, is not his own.

He is very hard-working" or "he has a great capacity for work"; "he is the first to get in and the last to leave". What are the first ideas that come to your mind when you read these sentences? What do you feel?

Imagine you are in a room with a child. The room has a staircase. He doesn't know how to walk yet, he is learning. You hear a noise and your attention and gaze wander briefly away from the child. When you return to the room, you see that the child has managed to climb up to the fourth step of the stairs. What does he do?

Today, and apparently already in the 40s and 50s of the last century, this is how it was seen or, at least, foreseen: leisure moments only seem to have space and time to take place during work interruptions. Work and leisure, like water and oil, do not mix. Apparently for the same reasons: they are composed of "incompatible" substances.

I confess to being so saturated with corporate bullshit, especially that which is said in English, that every time I hear that someone needs help to develop their soft skills what I hear is that it will probably be someone who resorts to rudeness, lack of respect and lack of common sense as means to achieve their results.

It is important not to forget that everything artificial, including intelligence, is the result of the inventive and creative capacities of our species.

The most successful couples and teams will be those who are able, on an ongoing and constant basis, to talk about the relationship and its maintenance/evolution, who continue to create and explore possibilities and who can coordinate actions effectively.

Facilitating the process of learning and change can often involve accepting difficulties, creating coping strategies and developing qualities and skills that come from negative thinking.

Knowledge and awareness do not invalidate or diminish intuition; perhaps they enhance it. But this will imply ceasing to evoke intuition as a way of camouflaging laziness.

Silence in the relationship with another gains another configuration, another complexity and, therefore, another richness. Listening is not only hearing and deciphering what one receives but, precisely because one deciphers, because one interprets, it implies simultaneously listening to oneself. Listening is therefore a two-way phenomenon with two meanings: it implies listening to the other and "listening to listening".

"Psychologists, psychotherapists or psychiatrists are for people with problems. When I consult a coach I don't have problems but challenges".

In this world in which we live, excited and entertained by technological and scientific advances, which constantly pushes us in the directions of productivity, efficiency and effectiveness, happiness at all costs, permanent balance, forced creativity, etc., the space to think seems to be lacking.