Discussion Forum > Alternative Approach to Resistance: Do Nothing, Be Bored
Following comes from an old Fast Company article:
Novelist and screenwriter Raymond Chandler understood his own procrastination tendencies and used boundaries to help himself get work done. He used to force himself to write by setting aside writing time every day and ensuring he followed two basic rules:
1. You don’t have to write.
2. You can’t do anything else.
In order to avoid the tedium of sitting idle for four hours per day, he became a highly productive writer.
[I have a novelist friend who, when he had a day job, set aside Mon and Tue evenings from 7-1030pm for writing. he said even when he was so tired he could only stare at the screen, he kept to this schedule.]
Novelist and screenwriter Raymond Chandler understood his own procrastination tendencies and used boundaries to help himself get work done. He used to force himself to write by setting aside writing time every day and ensuring he followed two basic rules:
1. You don’t have to write.
2. You can’t do anything else.
In order to avoid the tedium of sitting idle for four hours per day, he became a highly productive writer.
[I have a novelist friend who, when he had a day job, set aside Mon and Tue evenings from 7-1030pm for writing. he said even when he was so tired he could only stare at the screen, he kept to this schedule.]
January 22, 2022 at 15:51 |
Mike Brown
Mike Brown
Not sure this approach would work for me. I've never found doing nothing boring!
January 22, 2022 at 16:58 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark:
If you weren't allowed to meditate, focus, think about other things, daydream, or the like, would you still find doing nothing in, say, a white padded room something that you wouldn't mind? Keep in mind that in this method you aren't supposed to have *anything* stimulating in your environment. No coffee, drinks, nice view out the window, books, or any other source of ideas or the like but the work that you're trying to work on.
Things like "sitting with your thoughts" or "meditating" would count as doing something else.
If you weren't allowed to meditate, focus, think about other things, daydream, or the like, would you still find doing nothing in, say, a white padded room something that you wouldn't mind? Keep in mind that in this method you aren't supposed to have *anything* stimulating in your environment. No coffee, drinks, nice view out the window, books, or any other source of ideas or the like but the work that you're trying to work on.
Things like "sitting with your thoughts" or "meditating" would count as doing something else.
January 23, 2022 at 7:21 |
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu:
<< If you weren't allowed to meditate, focus, think about other things, daydream, or the like, would you still find doing nothing in, say, a white padded room something that you wouldn't mind? >>
No doubt in a laboratory environment you might be able to achieve that, but in the average office or house...? Or are you supposed to book in to your local white padded room every time you want to do a bit of work?
And to say you're not allowed to meditate, focus, think about other things, daydream or the like... well, isn't that a contradiction? I mean isn't not thinking about other things or daydreaming actually the foundation of meditation?
And if it had to be as boring as you're making it out to be, wouldn't the natural reaction be to fall asleep rather than do any work?
<< If you weren't allowed to meditate, focus, think about other things, daydream, or the like, would you still find doing nothing in, say, a white padded room something that you wouldn't mind? >>
No doubt in a laboratory environment you might be able to achieve that, but in the average office or house...? Or are you supposed to book in to your local white padded room every time you want to do a bit of work?
And to say you're not allowed to meditate, focus, think about other things, daydream or the like... well, isn't that a contradiction? I mean isn't not thinking about other things or daydreaming actually the foundation of meditation?
And if it had to be as boring as you're making it out to be, wouldn't the natural reaction be to fall asleep rather than do any work?
January 23, 2022 at 11:06 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark:
<< Or are you supposed to book in to your local white padded room every time you want to do a bit of work?>>
In the system I first learned this from, actually, yes. Of course, this technique wasn't for the "shallow" work, but for the kind of work that you knew would deliver the biggest win (your "one" thing) and that you needed to make progress on, but were seriously procrastinating for some reason. It wasn't only about being bored, but that was a huge component of the actual engagement after you had done appropriate introspection.
In the large system, the idea was one of mono-purpose environments. You neither worked where you played or played where you worked. You would have two different computers, ideally, for gaming/personal use and for work. You intentionally designed spaces that were triggering for one and only one type of work.
So, when it was time to do your 90 minutes of intense, focused work on this one big thing, you literally did check in to your dedicated asylum. :-)
If you wanted to daydream or meditate, then it needed to be on or around that one thing. And of course, there was quite a lot of discussion in that group about ensuring you got adequate sleep and managing that.
I think there's a difference between the two choices "be bored" and "do your one thing" and the idea of meditation. Meditation is more intentional and focused, while being bored is a state of roaming, exploratory anxiety.
Most people didn't have to make the environment as boring as a white room (though some famous people have, I think done something like this), since the combination of the journaling exercises and the removal of primary sources of distractions tended to make the one thing much more desirable and workable than before, so you felt drawn to it, especially in the absence of anything else that would normally have your attention.
<< Or are you supposed to book in to your local white padded room every time you want to do a bit of work?>>
In the system I first learned this from, actually, yes. Of course, this technique wasn't for the "shallow" work, but for the kind of work that you knew would deliver the biggest win (your "one" thing) and that you needed to make progress on, but were seriously procrastinating for some reason. It wasn't only about being bored, but that was a huge component of the actual engagement after you had done appropriate introspection.
In the large system, the idea was one of mono-purpose environments. You neither worked where you played or played where you worked. You would have two different computers, ideally, for gaming/personal use and for work. You intentionally designed spaces that were triggering for one and only one type of work.
So, when it was time to do your 90 minutes of intense, focused work on this one big thing, you literally did check in to your dedicated asylum. :-)
If you wanted to daydream or meditate, then it needed to be on or around that one thing. And of course, there was quite a lot of discussion in that group about ensuring you got adequate sleep and managing that.
I think there's a difference between the two choices "be bored" and "do your one thing" and the idea of meditation. Meditation is more intentional and focused, while being bored is a state of roaming, exploratory anxiety.
Most people didn't have to make the environment as boring as a white room (though some famous people have, I think done something like this), since the combination of the journaling exercises and the removal of primary sources of distractions tended to make the one thing much more desirable and workable than before, so you felt drawn to it, especially in the absence of anything else that would normally have your attention.
January 24, 2022 at 1:15 |
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu
I forget where I read this, but similar to what Mike Brown mentioned, I recall that quite a few writers had dedicated spaces for writing, even going so far as building a separate room by their house only accessible by an exterior door.
Could we maybe generalize/pivot this to the value of having dedicated spaces for different activities? Is it helpful for productivity or is it unnecessary with the proper mechanisms (e.g. long list system, routines)?
Could we maybe generalize/pivot this to the value of having dedicated spaces for different activities? Is it helpful for productivity or is it unnecessary with the proper mechanisms (e.g. long list system, routines)?
January 24, 2022 at 2:08 |
Charles
Charles
Mark:
<< No doubt in a laboratory environment you might be able to achieve that, but in the average office or house...?>>
Many years ago, I took an MBSR (Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction) course for professional development. During the first class, the teacher informed us that we would need to dedicate 45 minutes (minimum) per day to do the prescribed meditations. The readings and course work would require more time throughout the day. We lost four (out of 16) people after that first class. By the end of the course, only two people found the motivation and time to complete the full course. There is a reason why many of the new-fangled meditation apps/courses promise stress reduction in 7 minutes or less.
However, if you observe Jewish law, there is enough legal fences to create conditions that meet some of what Aaron is suggesting above. The catch is being Jewish, and buying into the theological underpinnings of written/oral law. If I've piqued you're interest to convert, I know a few rabbis ;)
<< No doubt in a laboratory environment you might be able to achieve that, but in the average office or house...?>>
Many years ago, I took an MBSR (Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction) course for professional development. During the first class, the teacher informed us that we would need to dedicate 45 minutes (minimum) per day to do the prescribed meditations. The readings and course work would require more time throughout the day. We lost four (out of 16) people after that first class. By the end of the course, only two people found the motivation and time to complete the full course. There is a reason why many of the new-fangled meditation apps/courses promise stress reduction in 7 minutes or less.
However, if you observe Jewish law, there is enough legal fences to create conditions that meet some of what Aaron is suggesting above. The catch is being Jewish, and buying into the theological underpinnings of written/oral law. If I've piqued you're interest to convert, I know a few rabbis ;)
January 24, 2022 at 2:20 |
avrum
avrum
avrum:
That's the problem, isn't it? If you spend enough time on meditation to reduce your stress, your stress comes back as soon as you realise that now you don't have enough time to do your work.
Or alternatively you enjoy the meditation so much that you don't feel the need to do any work!
That's the problem, isn't it? If you spend enough time on meditation to reduce your stress, your stress comes back as soon as you realise that now you don't have enough time to do your work.
Or alternatively you enjoy the meditation so much that you don't feel the need to do any work!
January 24, 2022 at 11:49 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
avrum:
I have come across quite a few Orthodox Jews in my time, and I've also come across quite a few Mennonites. The strange thing is that they dress rather similarly and seem to have many of the same practices. And in both cases they stress separation from the modern world while living in it - or at least that's my understanding of it.
I have come across quite a few Orthodox Jews in my time, and I've also come across quite a few Mennonites. The strange thing is that they dress rather similarly and seem to have many of the same practices. And in both cases they stress separation from the modern world while living in it - or at least that's my understanding of it.
January 24, 2022 at 11:54 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark:
<<If you spend enough time on meditation... >>
Don't get me started. If I share my true thoughts about MBSR, my colleagues will report me for being meditation-phobic.
<< Orthodox Jews in my time [...] few Mennonites. The strange thing is that they dress rather similarly and seem to have many of the same practices >>
I'm close with a family member - through marriage - who dons the black garb and lives amongst the Chassidim in Toronto. We've had discussions about writing a play focusing on two fathers - one Old World Amish, one Chassidic - developing a friendship. There are a lot of similarities, but some striking differences - both in practice (Chassidim do use electricity, drive cars, etc), language (Chassidim - Yiddish, Amish - Pennsylvania Dutch) and (obviously) theology. The insular nature of both communities have similar functions.
<<If you spend enough time on meditation... >>
Don't get me started. If I share my true thoughts about MBSR, my colleagues will report me for being meditation-phobic.
<< Orthodox Jews in my time [...] few Mennonites. The strange thing is that they dress rather similarly and seem to have many of the same practices >>
I'm close with a family member - through marriage - who dons the black garb and lives amongst the Chassidim in Toronto. We've had discussions about writing a play focusing on two fathers - one Old World Amish, one Chassidic - developing a friendship. There are a lot of similarities, but some striking differences - both in practice (Chassidim do use electricity, drive cars, etc), language (Chassidim - Yiddish, Amish - Pennsylvania Dutch) and (obviously) theology. The insular nature of both communities have similar functions.
January 24, 2022 at 12:13 |
avrum
avrum
avrum wrote:
<<MBSR… During the first class, the teacher informed us that we would need to dedicate 45 minutes (minimum) per day to do the prescribed meditations.>>
I just listened to a podcast featuring a psychologist who discussed attention control. According to studies, the only reliable method of increasing ability to focus is mindfulness training, but the minimum effective dose is 13 minutes. 45 minutes was way past the threshold of what study subjects (volunteers) actually do.
<<MBSR… During the first class, the teacher informed us that we would need to dedicate 45 minutes (minimum) per day to do the prescribed meditations.>>
I just listened to a podcast featuring a psychologist who discussed attention control. According to studies, the only reliable method of increasing ability to focus is mindfulness training, but the minimum effective dose is 13 minutes. 45 minutes was way past the threshold of what study subjects (volunteers) actually do.
January 24, 2022 at 13:42 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Alan:
<< the only reliable method of increasing ability to focus is mindfulness training>>
Any clinical who starts a claim with "... the only reliable method" is almost certainly not bias free with respect to whatever book/tool/theory they are promoting. My only recommendation is to dig deep into any quantitive research about CBT, Mindfulness, etc. Conflicts of interest... how robust the study, etc. Generally, research in the social psychology sphere has been abysmal as of late.
On Mindfulness research:
"Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15 prominent psychologists and cognitive scientists caution that despite its popularity and supposed benefits, scientific data on mindfulness are woefully lacking. Many of the studies on mindfulness and meditation, the authors wrote, are poorly designed—compromised by inconsistent definitions of what mindfulness actually is, and often void of a control group to rule out the placebo effect."
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/wheres-the-proof-that-mindfulness-meditation-works1/
https://gizmodo.com/a-lot-of-published-psychology-results-are-bullshit-1727228060
Even the famed "Love Lab" psychologist John Gottman was called out:
https://slate.com/human-interest/2010/03/a-dissection-of-john-gottman-s-love-lab.html
<< the only reliable method of increasing ability to focus is mindfulness training>>
Any clinical who starts a claim with "... the only reliable method" is almost certainly not bias free with respect to whatever book/tool/theory they are promoting. My only recommendation is to dig deep into any quantitive research about CBT, Mindfulness, etc. Conflicts of interest... how robust the study, etc. Generally, research in the social psychology sphere has been abysmal as of late.
On Mindfulness research:
"Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15 prominent psychologists and cognitive scientists caution that despite its popularity and supposed benefits, scientific data on mindfulness are woefully lacking. Many of the studies on mindfulness and meditation, the authors wrote, are poorly designed—compromised by inconsistent definitions of what mindfulness actually is, and often void of a control group to rule out the placebo effect."
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/wheres-the-proof-that-mindfulness-meditation-works1/
https://gizmodo.com/a-lot-of-published-psychology-results-are-bullshit-1727228060
Even the famed "Love Lab" psychologist John Gottman was called out:
https://slate.com/human-interest/2010/03/a-dissection-of-john-gottman-s-love-lab.html
January 24, 2022 at 14:16 |
avrum
avrum
<<Any clinical who starts a claim with "... the only reliable method" is almost certainly not bias free with respect to whatever book/tool/theory they are promoting.>> -- avrum
Given the difficulties with replicating social science papers and results, I think it's a pretty wise practice to look at any factual claim that tries to justify its veracity on the basis of social sciences research with a heavy dose of skepticism.
I think at the moment we are just not good enough scientists with sufficient skillsets and tools to be able to adequately control for confounding variables and other environmental factors within most of our "soft" science research, making really strong inferences almost impossible. I see these findings more along the lines of helping to clarify and identify patterns that appear to have a little more success than failure on the whole, and therefore make them worth checking out and potentially using, provided that a healthy dose of common sense and other types of reason are applied as well.
I do think that there is something to be said for longstanding human traditions and practices that have managed to not only exist but proliferate across multiple cultures and time periods when it comes to mental conditioning. The problem is that often, individual mentorship coupled with some "big picture goal" are involved in these traditional practices, so taking a particular practice out of that context and trying to use it to hack your life in some way (such as with meditation) might work, but it's also increasing the chances of it not doing what it was intended to do.
Mindfulness is, IMO, one of those things that is a derivative of a derivative of a holistic practice that people are now trying to use like medicine without actually understanding it. It's hard enough for people who are hacking themselves with little tricks like Inbox Zero or AF to even understand the implications of those systems and use the appropriately (with many people actually creating more trouble than help for themselves because of it), and things like inner introspective meditation is *way* more subtle than that.
Given the difficulties with replicating social science papers and results, I think it's a pretty wise practice to look at any factual claim that tries to justify its veracity on the basis of social sciences research with a heavy dose of skepticism.
I think at the moment we are just not good enough scientists with sufficient skillsets and tools to be able to adequately control for confounding variables and other environmental factors within most of our "soft" science research, making really strong inferences almost impossible. I see these findings more along the lines of helping to clarify and identify patterns that appear to have a little more success than failure on the whole, and therefore make them worth checking out and potentially using, provided that a healthy dose of common sense and other types of reason are applied as well.
I do think that there is something to be said for longstanding human traditions and practices that have managed to not only exist but proliferate across multiple cultures and time periods when it comes to mental conditioning. The problem is that often, individual mentorship coupled with some "big picture goal" are involved in these traditional practices, so taking a particular practice out of that context and trying to use it to hack your life in some way (such as with meditation) might work, but it's also increasing the chances of it not doing what it was intended to do.
Mindfulness is, IMO, one of those things that is a derivative of a derivative of a holistic practice that people are now trying to use like medicine without actually understanding it. It's hard enough for people who are hacking themselves with little tricks like Inbox Zero or AF to even understand the implications of those systems and use the appropriately (with many people actually creating more trouble than help for themselves because of it), and things like inner introspective meditation is *way* more subtle than that.
January 25, 2022 at 0:57 |
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu:
<< Given the difficulties with replicating social science papers and results >>
Not just the social sciences:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis
<< Given the difficulties with replicating social science papers and results >>
Not just the social sciences:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis
January 25, 2022 at 12:12 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
I should clarify a bit as I am just interpreting a talk. The researcher was contrasting various approaches and claimed medical and chemical and electronic “app” interventions were not effective; only practicing. And the kind of attention in question is the ability to perform relatively well at standardly tested games like numbers flashing on a screen and notice when another thing comes up. Applications of such are e.g. in the military in a situation where you should shoot enemy combatants but not allies nor civilians.
January 25, 2022 at 20:16 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu:
<< medical and chemical and electronic “app” interventions were not effective; only practicing >>
When it comes down to it, repettion is the foundation of just about everything.
<< medical and chemical and electronic “app” interventions were not effective; only practicing >>
When it comes down to it, repettion is the foundation of just about everything.
January 25, 2022 at 23:41 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
In essence, if there's a task you really need to do, but you're resistant to it, assuming you've already done some thinking, possibly journaling, on why it matters, why you care, what your outcomes are, and so forth, the following method seems to be effective for removing resistance for me, which are inspired by the Ikario Focus and Action course principles:
1. Make the environment boring: Put yourself in the place where you can do the work but remove all non-essential items from the area (make the area as boring an unstimulating as possible except for the thing you are working on).
2. You have a choice: now, with all distractions and exciting things removed, in an austere environment, you have a choice. You don't have to do the thing you're resisting at all, but if you don't, all you do is nothing. Either be bored or do the thing you are resisting.
I wasn't sure what to make of this when I first saw it, but after spending time with it, I've been amazing at how much of an effect just sitting down and letting myself "be" with a task without the pressure to do it, but without the freedom to do anything else, as allowed for some sort of intuitive processing of resistance into action.