Laziness is not equivalent to the Theorem of Minimum Potential Energy

I’ve been writing about my Theorem of Minimum Potential Energy the last couple of days. I’d like to be clear about one thing on it, it’s not necessarily the same as laziness. Sure, a person who is having all of their needs met by being provided for and living in their mom’s basement may not seek out more work because he is minimizing his efforts and still getting the goals he wants to achieve, but that is only one form.

For different people the goals can be eating, a house, a certain car, toys, status or any other thing that people desire. The Theorem of Minimum Potential Energy as I describe it isn’t saying the people don’t want to do more than the minimum, it’s that in order to get the things they want, they will choose that path that minimizes their energy. In that regard, if someone is a skilled writer and can craft compelling copy to sell products quickly, they will likely leverage that in order to reach the goals they have if it is possible to do so in that manner. It wouldn’t make sense for them to leverage phone skills as a salesperson to reach them if those skills were weak in comparison to the writing.

This makes sense since motivation is essentially understanding that if we do this it moves closer to our goals, and that by working this way we will make progress.

Generally, what we call laziness in regards to this theorem would be having goals that are really low, not much more than survival. That’s entirely different than taking the path that minimizes the effort required to reach your goals by finding the maximum leverage of your personality, skillset, and experiences.