How to want what you have -Timothy Miller

[mountainFrugal]

A 1994 gem that I recently saw mentioned in an old post, but did not bookmark it for the shout out (sorry old poster!). Cognitive psych researcher with patient and personal examples along with exercises to develop the follow aspects of your thoughts. $3 used copies abundant.

Compassion- Intention to see each human being as no better or worse than yourself, neither more nor less important, and as fundamentally similar to yourself. (can extend to animals and nature)

Attention- Avoid unnecessary value judgements about your own experience- both internal and external. Attention is the intention to live without reservation in the here and now. (also extended for meditation)

Gratitude- Intention to count your blessings everyday, every minute, while avoiding whenever possible, the belief that you need or deserve different circumstances.

This is a three pronged weapon to attempt to slay the enough dragon that can be practiced at any time of day. The enough dragon cannot be slayed without a lifetime of practice.

My personal struggle is excessive striving (much more tame in recent years). For this... "Striving is excessive when it interferes with C, A, G....Want what you have or mortgage the precious present in favor of a hypothetical future?"

Basically many of these techniques have been recently written about in pop sci/self help. This book integrates the three and has exercises towards integration. Worth a read.

[C40]

thanks for the notes

[7Wannabe5]

What if you have fleas in your carpet, an abusive boyfriend, and physiological depression?

[candide]

I haven't read the book, but I'll try to give it a bit of steelman:

Act on the first two, the carpet and the boyfriend, perhaps in one step, and then try the 3 CAB prongs on the steps that are being taken -- compassion for oneself rather than the boyfriend seems like it would be important. While it is true that someone would need and deserve different circumstances than the ones you outline, it could be reframed as thinking this is now the work that has to be done. . Self-compassion would be a necessary check on gratitude being used Just-World-Hypothesis-style to prevent action. If you saw an outsider in these circumstances, you would both want better things for her, and you'd know she'd need to act rather than be broken by a belief the world shouldn't be this way. So, for the downtrodden maybe "Acceptance" is better than "Gratitude," though again we are trying avoid some word traps, so it's "acceptance of how an imperfect world creates work." . . . "I want you to feel loved by the Universe, but the work must be done."

====

Okay, enough with the steelman. I believe these new-agey, monistically framed ideas (I'd just write meme, but that word has been memetically (ah, meta-memetically) soiled) can only be tools in a tool-belt. Others tools are necessary. I'm reminded of "you can only wash one dish" which I heard from Alan Watts. And while there is a truth that you only do one at time, and there are ways to tinker with the vividness or even distractedness of the experience in ways that impact doing the one current dish, the whole idea ignores the cumulative effective of previous dishes. You body can start hurting all sorts of ways. The actual impact of the dishes physically shows up: with no gloves, your skin prunes, with gloves oils and chalkiness from the material can build up. Dish 1,000 is different than dish 1. And I will have to stop at some point. Sorry monism. Sorry privileged people who would like to extend aesthetically pleasing ideas to a further dream of perfect workers whose manual labor can go forever -- or even ideas that they themselves can do endless work once they hit the Source.

[mountainFrugal]

The author was a practicing Psychologist using CBT techniques. He would likely deal with the abusive partner situation using other techniques than C, A, G only. Although the title is very New-Agey sounding, I picked it up after reading a few excerpts because the content was written in a more scientific tone (as much as these types of books can be). This book is for treating wants in excess. He discusses the evolutionary drive towards those ends to secure access to mates through trophies/proxies of fitness (wealth, status, etc.) and without cultural controls as guard rails these "excessive wants" become pathological. A majority of his clients and thus who the book is written for are middle to upper-middle class people who already have most of things deemed necessary in life and then some. This is not a book that is trying to convince people to hear the clank of the chains of their servitude as music. The author has specific definitions for each of the C, A, G, terms that he spends an entire chapter on each explaining with common examples from his practice and where these might be limited. I phrased these as weapons, but these are tools one could use to recognize that without anti-cultural programming there is basically no such thing as enough money, security (one more year syndrome), publications, friends, faster race times, years to live, WLs, etc. unless you work actively against this programming. He offers three tools/weapons that integrate to slay the enough dragon that have worked for him personally and many of his clients, but it is continual work to apply these thought tools over different parts of your day and across a lifespan. I apologize for such Mickey Mouse notes to start with (lesson learned), but it was more of a quick abstract than a book report. This is a relevant book for ERE issues (especially at lower WLs for excessive money/ one more year specifically) or I would not waste peoples time posting.

[candide]

I think I got this side-tracked by writing "new agey". I didn't mean it as insult that I guess it tracks as. Rather, I have been on a kick about dualism and monism as rhetorical structures, and tracing how they've been used historically [1].

So while I appreciate that the author is basing his book on empirical practice and would know when to switch tools, when he is trying to explain his ideas he is drawing on a rhetorical tradition. I respect the project, and heck, I thought my steel man was an earnest attempt to extend the ideas to another context, but I still wanted to work in my tangential thoughts on the limitations of monism -- which I am psychologically heavily disposed to leaning toward.

[1] I'm trying to respect the politics ban here. And while I feel what I am interested in is more properly meta-political, I don't think there is any way that posting it won't invite in real politics as a response. The excess thoughts I have on this topic are going elsewhere, as this monist-leaning person respects boundaries.

I apologize for such Mickey Mouse notes to start with (lesson learned), but it was more of a quick abstract than a book report. This is a relevant book for ERE issues (especially at lower WLs for excessive money/ one more year specifically) or I would not waste peoples time posting.

I think your notes were cogent and very good. They generated enough interest that they were tested, and while this kind of discussion is not a substitute for reading the book, it is better to have this kind of clarifying back and forth than you having written a document that completely preempted any questions. . . And doing so probably would have started drifting toward book length, anyway -- or at least been an undue burden on you.

I agree these ideas could be very useful to many ERE and FI types. If physical and safety needs are being met, people *should* be looking for ways to be happier about it. And it is difficult in its own way.

There is no need for you apologize. It is I who should if I made you feel that these ideas weren't valuable.

[7Wannabe5]

I grok the purpose of the book, and I know humans who could benefit from it. I guess I’m just wondering if doing the opposite would work for somebody who is generally oblivious, easy-going, rose-colored glasses wearing, likely to be half-way up to her ears in boiling water before she looks up from her book and bowl of pudding types?

Also, I had a bad experience when I was assigned to keep a gratitude journal during relationship therapy, because I chose to add an overall 1-10 rating for each day along with my notes about good things that happened. My “ex” and the therapist ganged up on me for doing it wrong.

[Western Red Cedar]

Sounds like a shitty therapist...

[7Wannabe5]

Yeah, he was also my “ex’s” personal therapist which is supposed to be verboten , but was going to be less expensive on the insurance billing. Which is one good reason not to date cheap-azz millionaire next door types.

[candide]

Also, I had a bad experience when I was assigned to keep a gratitude journal during relationship therapy, because I chose to add an overall 1-10 rating for each day along with my notes about good things that happened. My “ex” and the therapist ganged up on me for doing it wrong.

Oof. Now that would be the cult of toxic positivity. I think a key malfunction that example shows is how your positivity was forced into a performance.

[mountainFrugal]

Shitty therapist indeed. Should excuse themselves and recommend colleague that might be covered by same insurance. It would be very hard to not be swayed by your ex's portrait of you from the other sessions.

edit: @candide apology accepted although also not needed.

[AnalyticalEngine]

Sounds like a useful book. I'll pick up a copy and give it a read.

[theanimal]

Reading this now. This quote reminded me of the semiERE discussions on here of whether pursuing 25x or 33x expenses is really worthwhile as well as one more year syndrome and the FI trap of seeing FIRE as a panacea.

It is human nature always to want just a little More. People spend their lives honestly believing that they have almost enough of whatever they want. Just a little More will put them over the top; then they will be contented forever. The trouble is, wanting just a little More is the opposite of wanting what you have. People seek after More under the delusion that they will be happy when they get More. In fact, if and when they get More, they are not any happier than they were before, and they still want More. When almost all people want more all the time, hatred, regret, resentment, despair, crime, war, and planetary destruction are inevitable. That people want More is an "obvious secret." We all implicitly understand that people spend their lives wanting what they don't have, but the fact is rarely acknowledged in routine human interaction that it becomes invisible.

How to Want What You Have. Page 11

[Smashter]

I wrote my own review in a new thread by accident, having somehow missed this thread when searching the book title before posting.

I am not sure if it's protocol to delete my other post and copy it here, or just link. I'll just link for now.

And like a good reader of How to Want What You Have, I will practice compassion toward myself for making an innocent mistake, I'll feel gratitude that this forum put this book on my radar to begin with, and I'll sign off now so I can spend the rest of night immersed in the beauty of the present moment with DW and the dogs

[sodatrain]

I read the book after a couple people mentioned it at EREFest. Great stuff. A few friends have read it based on my recommendation. I feel like I should read it again!