It sounds like you answered your own question when you pointed out the difference between operating from a zero-sum framework (scarcity) and a non-zero-sum framework (abundance). As Derek implied, confidence comes from pursuing authenticity (what Murray Bowen would call the "differentiation of self"), not by modeling exaggerated extroversion.

It might be better to find people in real life who exemplify the qualities and characteristics we want to model, as opposed to public heroes, so that we can develop a more accurate sense of our values by paying attention to what attracts us to them. For instance, a personal friend might have a very smooth conversational style that just strikes you as "real" in a way that an abstract account of "confidence" in a book doesn't capture. (He said, laughing at the irony of putting "real" in quotes ;-)

@Vince: A great reminder that being isn't necessarily inactivity. When David made the "just be" comment, he was mocking the dropout mentality that results from the false dichotomy between being and doing. In other words, David was actually critiquing the assumption that being and doing are mutually exclusive.

It makes more sense to position GTD in the marketplace as a productivity system, but what David is really teaching is a methodology for freeing up your attention by focusing on each thing that has your attention, one thing at a time. The effect of getting to zero -- having thought about every last thing that's in your sphere at attention -- is far more profound than the resulting widgets to crank, which are a by-product of reconciling incomplete agreements with yourself and others. It just so happens that the people who are most willing and able to pay for that methodology are in the corporate milieu.

@Duff: I think the dissatisfaction with "productivity" is that the word is increasingly being infused with connotations far beyond its colloquial usage. It's become, as Clay put it, "this stand-in for personal development." No one is really arguing that we don't need to streamline our work. The problem is that as the scope of the word expands, the scope of conversation narrows. We need more peripheral visions.

I love the mix of thinkers and provocateurs you've managed to corral here.

"And it's not just 'dreams' that are being put off. It's life itself. We put off living life, living our own lives."

Great insight. Maybe it's time to stop using loaded words like "dreams" to express what makes us come alive. There's a thin line between dreams and fantasy; but what we really need for an authentic life might be much more earthbound, even more so than what's assumed by "realists" (prestige, affluence, etc.)

@Duff: Awesome podcast. I love Clay's perspective on the lifehack misnomer. People confuse streamlining and automation with gaining more time, but eventually they have to address the anxieties that surface when they open up that time; otherwise they're compelling to fill the void with more life hacks.

And your Tony Robbins impersonation was great. You should do a Power Up tip with a Tony Robbins persona. It could be the new Stuart Smalley.

I love the comment (paraphrasing), "If your boat is sinking, the direction doesn't matter." It's so tempting to look for one top priority to latch onto when you're overwhelmed, and so counterintuitive to take a step back and block out enough time to capture everything that has your attention. Congratulations on getting The David!

I tried posting this last night, and it showed up. I looked this morning, and my comment vanished, so I'm trying this again.

My dream debate would be Nicholas Carr and Clay Shirky on technology's prospects for social transformation. In the meantime, it's great to hear that you scored an interview with Clay Collins -- lookin' forward to it as well.