This sounds good in theory. But in my experience, WorthIt-Bob doesn’t usually argue rationally.
He acknowledges the existence of rational arguments of not fulfilling the wish in question (be it eating a cake, delaying work, whatever). He just doesn’t care about these rational arguments.
An internal dialogue, as I’ve had it (slightly paraphrased, of course):
NWI-Bob feels the wish to delay work arise. Thought: I acknowledge that delaying work right now would be more fun than not delaying work, but the deadline of the project I’m working on is approaching and if I delay my work now, I will have problems meeting this deadline. Therefor, I should work now and do some leisure activity later on.
WI-Bob: Yeah, these arguments are pretty good, and I know it will be bad. However, that lies in the future, and I want to have fun right now.
NWI-Bob: That’s not a very smart approach. Just continuing to work for 2 more hours will make me happy, and you will achieve happiness in the free time afterwards.
WI-Bob: Yes, that sure is an intelligent idea, but I still want to have fun right now.
The dialogue continues in the same vein. Most of the time, it ends with NWI-Bob making a last argument, and WI-Bob not responding because he just doesn’t have any arguments besides “I want that right now.” However, despite his lack of response, his will often perseveres.
Maybe, but you should consider the possibility that WI-Bob has other reasons that he doesn’t articulate consciously: for example, “it’s not just that I want to have fun right now, it’s that I’m anxious about this particular task, I know I’ll feel that anxiety when I’m working on it, and I don’t want to face that right now” (to take one example). Bring this into the open, and the negotiation might look quite different. (E.g. are there ways to assuage the anxiety in advance? That might help.)
This sounds good in theory. But in my experience, WorthIt-Bob doesn’t usually argue rationally.
I didn’t say anything about WorthIt-Bob having to be rational… you’ve dealt with irrational people before, and you can deal with irrational sub-agents, too. Heck, you can even train your pets, right?
In particular, Orthonomal has some great advice for dealing with people and sub-agents alike: figure out all their feelings on the issue, even the ones they didn’t know they had. Then they might turn out more rational than you thought, or you might gain access to the root of their irrationality. Either way, you get a better model for them, and you probably need it.
Actually, I haven’t consciously modelled other people or myself. The feelings of other people usually seem rather clear to me, and for myself, I dealt with these problems on a case-by-case basis until recently. However, I am not content with the success of this case-by-case approach anymore, so I’m interested in changing that.
Concerning modelling people: How would one go about to do that? Are there any sequences on this topic, or could you recommend a book or something?
Exactly. A prerequisite skill here is sufficient introspection to surface the real motivations for a behavior or impulse (where “real” means the motivations that are cruxy, the ones that change based on the circumstances), instead of your confabulations or your self-model.
This sounds good in theory. But in my experience, WorthIt-Bob doesn’t usually argue rationally.
He acknowledges the existence of rational arguments of not fulfilling the wish in question (be it eating a cake, delaying work, whatever). He just doesn’t care about these rational arguments.
An internal dialogue, as I’ve had it (slightly paraphrased, of course): NWI-Bob feels the wish to delay work arise. Thought: I acknowledge that delaying work right now would be more fun than not delaying work, but the deadline of the project I’m working on is approaching and if I delay my work now, I will have problems meeting this deadline. Therefor, I should work now and do some leisure activity later on. WI-Bob: Yeah, these arguments are pretty good, and I know it will be bad. However, that lies in the future, and I want to have fun right now. NWI-Bob: That’s not a very smart approach. Just continuing to work for 2 more hours will make me happy, and you will achieve happiness in the free time afterwards. WI-Bob: Yes, that sure is an intelligent idea, but I still want to have fun right now.
The dialogue continues in the same vein. Most of the time, it ends with NWI-Bob making a last argument, and WI-Bob not responding because he just doesn’t have any arguments besides “I want that right now.” However, despite his lack of response, his will often perseveres.
Maybe, but you should consider the possibility that WI-Bob has other reasons that he doesn’t articulate consciously: for example, “it’s not just that I want to have fun right now, it’s that I’m anxious about this particular task, I know I’ll feel that anxiety when I’m working on it, and I don’t want to face that right now” (to take one example). Bring this into the open, and the negotiation might look quite different. (E.g. are there ways to assuage the anxiety in advance? That might help.)
I didn’t say anything about WorthIt-Bob having to be rational… you’ve dealt with irrational people before, and you can deal with irrational sub-agents, too. Heck, you can even train your pets, right?
In particular, Orthonomal has some great advice for dealing with people and sub-agents alike: figure out all their feelings on the issue, even the ones they didn’t know they had. Then they might turn out more rational than you thought, or you might gain access to the root of their irrationality. Either way, you get a better model for them, and you probably need it.
Thank you both for this advice.
Actually, I haven’t consciously modelled other people or myself. The feelings of other people usually seem rather clear to me, and for myself, I dealt with these problems on a case-by-case basis until recently. However, I am not content with the success of this case-by-case approach anymore, so I’m interested in changing that.
Concerning modelling people: How would one go about to do that? Are there any sequences on this topic, or could you recommend a book or something?
Exactly. A prerequisite skill here is sufficient introspection to surface the real motivations for a behavior or impulse (where “real” means the motivations that are cruxy, the ones that change based on the circumstances), instead of your confabulations or your self-model.