This whole article sounds like a rehash of Zen Buddhism, or Stoisism. The advise overall is sound, but needs more context and leaves a lot out... which is why it's frustrating that the author didn't say "I stole all this from Zen Buddhism" or something.
He does also miss the point (also made in Zen) that while you are nothing, you are also, in fact, everything. Both facts; that you are the center of experience and also one insignificant part of an enormous objective reality are both true at the same time. As Shunryu Suzuki would say "do you understand". To which I say... uhh... I guess?
He does also miss the point (also made in Zen) that while you are nothing, you are also, in fact, everything. Both facts; that you are the center of experience and also one insignificant part of an enormous objective reality are both true at the same time. As Shunryu Suzuki would say "do you understand". To which I say... uhh... I guess?