There’s a great story in John Bunyan’s book, Pilgrim’s Progress. It goes something like this: the main character experiences all kinds of challenges and tough situations on his metaphorical spiritual quest in life. The cool part is that he’s blessed with a shield. This shield miraculously protects him against everything in front of him. NOTHING can harm him as long as he approaches it head on. That magic shield works wonders—provided he goes straight at the challenge. If he runs away, he loses its magical powers.

That’s amazing. And, so true.

Have you ever noticed that those “huge” problems you’ve had seemed to vanish the moment you took em head on? (I mean really head on not vacillating kinda sorta head on!)

The things that really kick our ass are the ones we avoid. Lesson: don’t show em our ass!

What problem have you been running away from? Trust in the powers of your shield. Take it head on.

What if one’s problem can be metaphorically likened to being faced with the limitation of not being about to break brick walls with the head because the flesh will physically not withstand such a “bold” act. Should one, then, still face the problem just in case it works? Or is this “big idea” a bit too general to express the way one ought to face the complex dynamics of the world and the problems that reside in it and one’s self? Avoidance may not always be the best answer, though certain situations may even find this as an adequate dealing – avoidance of unnecessary confrontation, for example (Gandhi anyone?). Thus, (1) taking something “head on” is not necessarily the best answer to dealing with something and itself is platitudinous in not saying anything that has functional use (e.g., to say that one should face his/her problems head on says nothing about the enormous amount of gradation – one that is, ironically, ever more vast than the number of possibilities between taking something on or not: ghm, two!) that is involved in the specific way one might take something on and (2) who was it that said something along the lines of “big ideas cannot be captured in a paragraph”? ...I might add, “they cannot be captured adequately when the aim is to express the idea AND its content rather than capture it in a form that is familiar to those who are adequately versed in its backgrounds (e.g., a formula that expressed a proof in physics or mathematics).