« Back to Philosophy in Practice
SOURCES OF INEFFICACY
Contents:
Evasion is the fundamental destroyer of rationality, since it is an implicit or explicit but unequivocal rejection of reality in some form. Given that reality is interconnected, and given that evasion blinds you to your knowledge of reality, evasion degrades and ultimately destroys your mental efficacy and — by extension — your efficacy in life and the pursuit of values. Evasion makes reality your antagonist, and once reality is your antagonist, you can only lose. Hence, a key necessity in achieving and maintaining efficacy in life is self-honesty in every sense: truth, values and the responsibilities that arise from the pursuit of values (note that values are a form of truth; the distinction is for clarity). An analogy for evasive living is choosing to drive while drunk; you may turn out fine in the end, but (1) it is still reckless, irresponsible and immoral, and (2) it ruins your capacity to achieve more or achieve what you can to the fullest in your life.
Overload as such refers to the event wherein one’s attempts exceed one’s capacity. The capacity in question may be cognitive, psychological, physical, etc. I shall now expand on key forms of mental overload that can degrade or destroy one’s capacity to be rational in a given context.
The mind has an identity, and can only function according to that identity; trying to operate one’s mind outside its range leads to cognitive failure. If you want to use your mind properly, i.e. to use it rationally and be rational, you must use it according to its capacity and capability. This means saying no to mental overload whenever you recognise it; when overloaded, it is always possible and practical to reduce the load. There are many ways to achieve this, such as: (1) shifting your goals appropriately, (2) resting your mind, (3) offloading ideas onto paper (e.g. listing possible solutions, elucidating the aspects of the problem, etc.), (4) shifting your perspective (e.g. thinking in broader terms or abstractions, concretising the problem (i.e. thinking in specifics), etc.).
NOTE: For point (4), what you do depends on what is established in your mind already. If you have established a rational framework of abstractions, then dealing with particulars is easier using the broader framework where applicable. If not, you only have floating abstractions and instead must build up from concretes or specifics.
How is cognitive overload recognised?
Cognitive overload happens when you are unable to focus on the essentials. If you find that whenever you shift your focus mentally, you are inevitably losing sight of the essentials (e.g. the purpose, the key facts, the relevant context, etc.), then you can know that you are experiencing cognitive overload. Remember that the ability to focus varies with the context: a high-pressure situation tends to narrow one’s focus to the barest level, whereas a relaxed situation may allow a broader scope than even normal circumstances.
This is an extension of Rational Application of Volition from Rationality in Practice from Epistemology.
This follows from the same basic premise as cognitive overload: the mind — and thus, one’s volitional mechanism — has an identity, and can only function according to that identity; trying to operate one’s volition outside its range leads to motivational failure, i.e. the failure to concretely (i.e. through action) value something.
Lacking motivation or capacity in general…
When you lack the motivation or capacity to do X in a given context, you literally — in fact — cannot do it of your own volition in that context. However, this need not incapacitate you; while you may lack the motivation or capacity to do X in the given context, you can shift your focus to improve your ability (e.g. by addressing more basic existential needs, mental or physical) or pursue something else (according to what you judge to be the most important or valuable in a broader context). Note that motivation can persevere in the hardest, most severe of conditions, and it can falter even in relative comfort; in general, it is not primarily a question of “what is going on outside” but “what is going on inside” (although, of course, both questions are important and potentially relevant to each other). Why is the motivation present or absent? Ask to understand its roots: what are its essential causes, what are the relevant factors in dealing with it, etc.? Understanding this is a part of understanding reality objectively so you can deal with it effectively. It is ineffective to try to brute-force your way through your lack of motivation because the facts about your consciousness (e.g. the nature of volition, finiteness of willpower, etc.) and its relationship to reality (e.g. how emotions and motives arise, what is the nature and role of values, how can and must a mind grasp the facts effectively, etc.) will not sustain it.
Motivational overload in particular…
Motivational overload in particular refers to the case wherein there is a lack of motivation or capacity to do X (either as such or beyond a certain point or extent) without any relevant deficiency (i.e. there may be a deficiency that needs to be addressed in a broader or separate context, but not in the current one). This is why the term “overload” is used: you are pushing yourself beyond the proper, rational range of your capacity within the given context in some respect. Note again that here, I take the case to be such one wherein it may be possible to improve your capacity in a broader context but is practically impossible and/or unnecessary to do so in the current one.
How to recognise motivational overload?
When you experience no concrete value in a pursuit you are trying to act toward, you are motivationally overloaded with respect to that pursuit. Note that this is not the same as “not feeling like doing something”, at least not in the usual sense of the phrase (the usual sense being something akin to “it is unpleasant”, “it is painful”, etc.). Remember, you can be very motivated to do something hard or painful. Hence, by “experiencing no concrete value”, I mean the case wherein you cannot see the concretisable link between the pursuit and your value for life (of course, if you lack value for life, you need to address that first, since that is the source of value (see: The Standard of Value from Ethics) and thus the root of motivation). Note that here, overload may be either for the pursuit itself or for the extent of engagement or effort in the pursuit, i.e. you may find concrete value in the pursuit but only to a certain point and/or in certain respects.
Conscious states (including emotional states) are or can be indicators of one’s efficacy in life. For example, pleasure (in some contexts) and happiness are indicators of success or efficacy in the pursuit of life. On the other hand, pain (in some contexts) and suffering are indicators of failure, inefficacy or frustration in the pursuit of life. However, there are more kinds of indicators and not every indication of success or failure can be taken as such without reason in a given context (e.g. pain in the context of muscle training is a part of a value-seeking process and not a sign of failure in the broader context). Here, I shall explore the states that are clear, unequivocal indications of failure in some form that point to an unsustainable state of existence that must be overcome.
Note that a state of suffering is the indication of failure in one’s life and/or one’s pursuit of values, which means each failure state is a form of suffering. It is also important to note that any state of suffering is not primarily subjective, even though it is indicated and experienced by one or more emotions. The source of the states and emotions in question is either a value judgement or a metaphysical judgement (i.e. a way of regarding the world), which means such states are objective (factual) indications about the state of one’s volitional mechanism (which includes all aspects of the self that one’s volition depends on or is affected by to varying degrees, including intellectual aspects, psychological aspects, neurological aspects, physiological aspects, etc.). Note that one’s volitional mechanism is what enables the pursuit of values. Hence, overcoming failure states is not a matter of sheer willpower but a rational approach to the facts about one’s volitional mechanism.
NOTE: It is not the fact of suffering but what you do with that fact (e.g. understand the source of the suffering and overcome the suffering) that is morally relevant. In other words, there is value not in suffering but in overcoming it.
Despair is, in essence, the view that one has no efficacy in pursuing one’s values, neither in the actual nor the potential; i.e. it is the lack of both confidence and hope. Such a state by itself literally deprives you of or at least diminishes your motive to act toward your values effectively, since the basis of motive — the recognition of potential — is lost. Hence, it is a failure state of being that must be overcome.
Guilt and regret are, in essence, constructive emotions, since they instil in oneself the inclination to correct or learn from something that went wrong on one’s own account. Shame, on the other hand, is a potentially accompanying emotion that by itself offers no constructive inclinations; it is similar to pain, which can be a part of a worthy, constructive struggle, but which by itself is weakening or even debilitating. The way I understand it, shame by itself is the result of viewing oneself as lacking efficacy in both the actual and the potential; it is, in my view, a form of despair directed inward, toward one’s own character. Such a state by itself also literally deprives you of or at least diminishes your self-value and thus your motive to act toward your own benefit effectively, and hence, it is a failure state of being that must be overcome.
To conclude on the nature of despair and shame, note that these are not constructive emotions. Of course, they are natural and can be a natural accompaniment to more constructive emotions. Furthermore, as indicators of failure, they are helpful in letting us know about the state of our own consciousness. But if on their own, unaccompanied by any constructive emotion, they must not be indulged but overcome as quickly and effectively as possible, because as failure states, they indicate an unsustainable, potentially unlivable state of existence.
NOTE: Of course, a key aspect of being able to overcome such states in general is understanding their causes.
A baseline of serenity…
The essence of a failure state is the view of lacking efficacy in the pursuit of one’s own values. Evidently, then, to overcome them involves acquiring and recognising one’s own efficacy in this regard. But how is one to do it? At the most basic level, since facts are the material of cognition, i.e. the material needed for reason to operate and for effective, rational action to take place, efficacy at a basic level is derived from the recognition and acceptance of the facts, i.e. from a baseline of serenity. Note that recognition of the facts involves the recognition of all the facts involved, including one’s own emotions, faults and/or merits, the good and/or the bad in one’s own character, etc. In other words, serenity is (epistemologically) the result of one’s pursuit of objectivity to one’s fullest capacity and is the basis for cognitive and moral efficacy.
Fueling oneself in the moment…
On top of this, acquiring concrete values that you can — e.g. rest, relaxation, enjoyment in the moment, other more obviously valuable pursuits, more obvious short-term ways of improving efficacy on some level, etc. — are ways to directly fuel your consciousness and its recognition of one’s own efficacy in life. However, note that such a fuel needs a practical mechanism in place to actually improve on one’s efficacy beyond the range-of-the-moment, and such a mechanism would be at least in part established by a baseline of serenity.
Observations:
Why have I often failed at overcoming the lack of efficacy? In short, it is because I separated the pursuit of efficacy from the pursuit of life-affirmation (especially in the form of enjoyment), i.e. from the pursuit of seeking and experiencing concrete values (i.e. in the moment). I often thought of the “necessary” or “maintenance” aspects of my life as duties or responsibilities detached from my pursuit of values concretely (in “The basis of motivation and willpower” from Integrating the Actual and the Potential from Philosophy in Practice, I have explained why the concrete pursuit of values is essential in fueling oneself and driving one’s volitional mechanism). Hence, my pursuit of efficacy had served only to drain me, demotivate me in the short-term, deprive me of the will or the ability to keep going and destroy or make me lose my value for the long-term. On the other hand, my pursuit of life-affirmation being separated from my pursuit of efficacy meant that doing the things that I thought or felt affirmed my life (at least more than my “duties” or “responsibilities”) were not ultimately constructive or value-seeking (at least not sufficiently) in any broader context beyond the range-of-the-moment or some isolated/disconnected short-term period, and limited to such a context, no human values (i.e. values with respect to the standard of value that is life as a volitional being) are really possible since one’s ability to live effectively and one’s potential for life are ignored. Only by uniting them can I in fact achieve my pursuit of values consistently and sustainably.
Hence, never separate your pursuit of efficacy from your pursuit of life-affirmation; know that they are and must be integrated. If they are not, both ultimately become and feel pointless.