There are several stages to adopting new philosophies or new ideas or new principles that I think everyone goes through. These stages may be easier or harder, and may take less or more time, but I think they always exist.
- At first, we hear about it. Most of us ignore it at first. It usually takes a few mentions to register.
- We then begin thinking about it. It’s a kind of low-priority thought we give to things like whether we should get the car washed or what’s coming up on TV.
- As the thought intensifies, our natural reaction is usually one of skepticism, especially if the philosophy or idea is contrary to ours or has implications that are in contrast with what we do.
- At some point we get convinced that the philosophy or idea is worth trying out. This is the most important step; most people never get there; it’s fine for most ideas but a lot of the time the new idea is better than what we have been living with. We cautiously approach it, perhaps by observing those more successful than us who we perceive as having internalized the philosophy. Finally we decide to adopt the idea.
- The next step is a deceptive one. We begin to mechanistically apply the philosophy to our lives. We feel good about ourselves because we think we’ve successfully adopted it, but in fact, we lack the deep connection to it. If we never get past this point, we end up failing because we can’t simply continue emulating other people’s actions without the connection to the underlying ideas
- Those of us who realize problems with the mechanistic approach (no results, or difficulty applying the philosophy), and choose not to give up (yes, it’s a choice!), begin struggling understanding what they are missing. They may try slightly different tactics, or they may try to alter the philosophy slightly. These are just superficial fixes because the deep connection is still missing
- For some, the “magical” moment happens. They internalize the philosophy, that is, they begin to truly understand what it is about. This moment may never come; it may also take months to come (in fact, without deep probing it’s difficult to say if one has had a true “aha” moment or whether it’s just one’s perception). The philosophy becomes second nature.
There are some good examples of this, say, working out. It takes a while for the workout routine to become something we do because it feels weird not to do it. We start by ridiculing those who do it, then we realize that we should do it too. For a long time we try something that looks on the surface as the thing but in fact we’re just lying to ourselves. The moment we realize we’re internalized it (usually that moment is actually fairly hard to pinpoint; it passes us by), we’ve gained a clarity of mind that’s as beautiful as it is useful.
elevenseconds.com
blog.elevenseconds is powered by
On working out:
For me, working out falls under a different type of internalization — habit. Humans are creatures of habit, and if you do something enough (drive a route to work, wash your hands after using the bathroom, drink a particular drink in the morning) then after a while your brain goes into autopilot and you don’t really think about it. You may have experienced the adverse effects of this when you start driving towards work and realize, oh wait, that’s not where I’m going.
I’m not sure I would think of this as magical. I think it’s just how your brain works. The laziness of the brain is useful in the same way that forgetting things is useful; the brain can work on more important activities. It can be bad if you’ve developed habits that you think are bad; but likewise I believe you can train yourself into good habits. When you are philosophizing with a friend, reflecting by yourself or maybe watching a TEDTalk then your brain is in this higher order function where you can think through what you want to do. But when you’re sitting on your couch (and what you do on your couch is largely a function of habit) your in a different state.
I’m currently adopting a new habit every week, each for 31 days. Some simple like floss in the morning; take a walk, even if its just around the block; do at least 50 push ups a day. They are linked to things I know are good in the long term but may be associated with pain/inertia in the short term.
I’m not sure I’ve ever ridiculed someone who’s working out. I mean, I ridicule people who are over compensating, but that’s different.
On “deep connections”:
The usage of habits has a pretty narrow focus. You can only really apply it to things that have some sort of ritualized activity, otherwise you can’t cognitively reprogram yourself. It allows you to artificially limit your options, and give yourself a dopamine reward for goal accomplishment.
I think deep connections is really pointing to a different thing, which is valuing something for what it is instead of what it sounds like. Most of the time I want something because it sounds interesting, and I want to be associated with interesting things. Replace interesting with whatever value you particularly adorn (“baller”, “morally good”, “cool”). Short internet articles, the passing mention of friends, the playing with the idea in my head — at the surface level lots of things seem interesting.
On Philosophy:
I’m curious what the concrete example you are considering is. Habit’s don’t concern philosophy; nor do the desire to do specific things. So I’m left wondering if what’s in your mind resembles what’s in mine.
Now, a few months after the comment, which of the habits have you kept?
I think “interesting” is a good proxy for the representative of an equivalence class of my values.
I think philosophies naturally lead to some habits; I think this is what I meant above–thinking about a habit as a consequence (many levels down the line) of a particular philosophy. But, to be honest, I haven’t attached much weight to that term (and so it may be a misnomer)