At the urging of a man wiser than me, I picked up Stephen R. Covey's "7 Habits of Highly Effective People." This book hardly needs a plug, as it is already famous. So rather than simply praising the book, I thought that I should offer a philosopher's spin on the subject. The first habit, being proactive, is remarkably similar to part of a philosophical school commonly called "existentialism" specifically that of Jean Paul Sartre. If you read on, you'll see why.

Being proactive, as Covey explains it, begins with choosing in areas when we normally do not think we choose. Humans are reactive animals, so much so that many think that is all we are. There is stimulus that happens to us and then -like a rat pulling a lever- we predictably react out of habit and instinct. Most of these habits were ingrained us by our cultures and our upbringings. Because of that, it seems we are determined by them.

But Covey explains this is not true. Between "stimulus" and "response" there is a choice of how to react. To illustrate this point, Covey relates the story of Viktor Frankl. Frankl was a Jewish psychologist imprisoned by the Nazis during WWII. While imprisoned, he realized that though the Nazis had power over him, they still could not take away his freedom. Yes, the Nazis could control his environment, but they could never control how he would react or the choices he could make. Yes, they could limit his power to do things (move around, sleep in a bed, eat etc), but they still could not take away his freedom to choose his reactions.

Jean-Paul Sartre also makes this point equally dramatically. (Interestingly enough, he was also imprisoned by the Nazis). One of Sartre's most controversial statements was that the French people never knew their freedom more than when they were occupied by the Nazis. He also dramatized this theme in a play called "The Wall" in which a group of prisoners await execution, but discover how much freedom they have in the process.

Both Covey and Sartre both draw out one other important consequence of our freedom: there is no such thing as a must do or a have to. Think about going to work on a particular day. When you go to work you act a certain way (say, like a friendly but perhaps reluctant, barista), and the human tendency is it say, "well I have to do this."

"No!" reply people like Sartre. What is really going on is that the consequences of not going to work are worse (to you) than going to work. However, this is still a free choice. To believe otherwise --to use the must do and have to-- language is what Sartre called "bad faith." It is an intentional self-deception. We try to convince ourselves that we do not choose.
The connection between existentialism and Stephen Covey's first habit are hopefully clear. If not, I am sure that it is because I chose to make them unclear, and not the result of my upbringing, parents etc. I do not know if Covey was directly influenced by Sartre on this point, but I suspect he may have been. In any case, Sartre's influence is likely in there somewhere.

For my own part, I can only agree strongly with both Covey and Sartre. The beginning of good life, of pursuing excellence, and effectiveness and productivity, begins with recognizing our freedom to choose. True though, this "freedom to choose" is only the beginning of "freedom for excellence."
But that's another article entirely.
Thanks for reading.