It’s Never Enough to Be Against Something - You Must Also Be For Something Else
A common source of resistance to change, even good change, is that generally starts out as resistance to something but that will never be enough to carry out change. A better way of thinking about change can ease and speed up the process
A common problem with the desire to change something is that we often become focused on what we don’t like about a behavior or system and choose to be opposed to it. Unfortunately this approach ends up ignoring that the behavior or system came about for some kind of beneficial reason in the first place. It also continues because it gives some kind of benefit. Often we get side-effects that we dislike and want to eradicate and we can easily end up being against the side-effect symptoms and yet we do nothing to remove or change the root cause of those symptoms.
For example, someone who has a lot of emotional pain in their life and does not know how to solve or remove that pain will seek relief and escape from that pain. One option could be to escape by getting high on heroin. Thus begins a behavior that solves a certain kind of problem - the relief from the pain of emotional turmoil. It might well turn out that this person gets addicted and becomes physically sick as a result or even gets into a worse state of affairs through carrying out illegal activities either to get the heroin or to fund the addiction. In this case, to be against heroin doesn’t really solve the problem. A forced restriction of intake doesn’t remove the emotional pain and resorting to willpower and discipline to maintain control will also not work if the underlying cause remains. The real answer to cure the addiction is not to be against heroin, drugs or addiction but to be for good mental health. A person who is stable of mind and emotion and who can deal with life’s upsets and who can develop sufficient competency to fulfill personal desires will ordinarily not resort to artificial stimulants for escapism.
We create personal behaviors and societal systems because these responses happen to fulfill desires and needs. If they prove rapidly successful then they get repeated and repeated. This gives them massive momentum and that in turn gives them a lot of staying power. Only in exceptional cases where to continue to get quick fixes will eventually bring annihilation or will prove unsustainable will survival instincts lead us to favor other solutions, even though they might initially prove painful and difficult, i.e. the pain of not changing must become greater and more acute than continuing with destructive behaviors.
If we remove a behavior or system (i.e. a tangible solution to something) without fulfilling desires and needs in an alternative fashion, then people become unhappy and they will return to the old options to fulfill those immediate desires, especially if the eventual pain is far off, if ever. This is a reason why smoking proves hard to quit. It fulfills some immediate desires for relaxation, distraction and reward but the payment for that quick and unhealthy fix usually doesn’t come for many, many years down the line and so it is easy to ignore.
To create change we must be for something else that fulfills the desires or needs. The reason why a lot of personal and societal change fails is that we don’t replace the benefits with something better. Thus we can never expect change to succeed unless we specify what we are now for as much as what we are against. (See the article negative and positive thinking).
Let’s take a look at some examples:
Against global warming - For technologies and economic systems that reduce greenhouse gases
Against war - For peace
Against addiction - For robust mental health
Against smoking - For a healthy and fit body
Against procrastination - For productivity and getting things done
Against globalization - For? Answers in the comments section please as I don’t know what benefits anti-globalizers are for
The best solution is always to remove the cause of the symptoms that warrant such poor solutions but when that proves impossible, unfeasible or undesirable then promote better alternatives. Without those alternatives there will be no change. If you create better alternatives with enough benefits to replace those that currently exist, then eventually you reach the tipping point where those benefits will transfer to the whole system and the majority within it benefits or, in the case of personal change, a better habit develops.
If you currently have some difficulty in your life that defies change then examine what benefits that you get from your current behavior. What desires does it fulfill on a moment-to-moment instant gratification level? What immediate benefit does that convey? Forget analyzing the long-term negatives for now because you’ll struggle if you don’t overcome the instant gratification aspects. Think long and hard about what better and immediate instant gratification that you can get to replace the existing reward and benefit. Think laterally and intangibly. Think in terms of benefits to be gotten and instantaneous pain to move away from.
I once knew a man who was a heavy smoker and he gave up overnight. Everybody that worked with him was shocked and surprised. I asked him how he managed it because he had always been resistant to quitting and he told me what made the difference. He was sat at home in his armchair watching TV and smoking and his seven year old daughter came up to him crying and she burst out, “Daddy! I don’t want you to die! I want you to be there at my wedding! Please stop smoking!” That was the replacement he needed. His desire not to hurt his daughter and not to disappoint her was so powerful that he changed in an instant. From then on, whenever he got the urge to smoke he remembered his daughter and the pain of hurting her and the pleasure of doing something for her provided the two things that he needed: something to be against and something to be for.
For more insight about the psychology behind this idea then read negative and positive focus and for more insight on how to change instant gratification read overcome a craving
If you have enjoyed this article then please comment or recommend it to one of the social bookmarking sites below. To ensure that you receive all future posts please subscribe to the RSS feed (use the button in the header bar above)
#1 - Permalink Chris February 25th, 2008 at 9:01 pmThanks Nick for a great article. I have a question for you… why is it that some people like to wallow in self-pity? What do you think about that?
#2 - Permalink Nick Pagan February 26th, 2008 at 3:03 pmI would attribute wallowing in self-pity as a person’s denial that they don’t have what it takes to fulfill their greater desires. If someone has high ambition but does not have the aptitude of intelligence, skill, and character to fulfill that ambition then it becomes easier (and more preferable) to attribute difficulty to external factors, such as a lack of luck, the wrong parents, the wrong school, not having a gift for this that and the other etc etc. By doing this a person can make excuses for a lack of success and deny that it is actually down to personal responsibility to make life work well, despite whatever hard knocks might come along.
As long a person can still provide for immediate needs and doesn’t ever get too desperate then they can sustain wallowing in self-pity for decades and use it as a crutch for explaining an impoverished life.
To get out of wallowing in self-pity a person has to face up to the truth of personal deficiencies (not an easy or popular thing to do) and admit that he or she is not as great as they might like to think. After that it is necessary to readjust desires to more immediately manageable and possible objectives and accept total responsibility for fulfilling and/or the consequences of not fulfilling them.
Only in taking personal responsibility for managing our desires and our actions sensibly can we hope to become better and to live better. It’s tough in the beginning but it does get easier.
What’s your take on wallowing in self-pity?
#3 - Permalink Chris February 26th, 2008 at 3:34 pmYes I do agree… As of about 2 months ago, I fully understand where negative emotion comes from. I remember seeing a sibling of mine that used to wallow for an extended period of time - like 3 hours, just lying in bed, wallowing. I’m trying to remember how I explained that back before I converted to “Paganism.” This is what I think currently:
It’s interesting that a person will purposefully create negative emotion for an extended period of time. It’s like they’re trying to punish their “innocent” self. I can understand brief moments of negative emotion… But to purposefully create it for hours on end baffles me.
Anyway, I agree with you, it is all about personal responsibility, being realistic, getting at the root, etc.
#4 - Permalink Nick Pagan February 27th, 2008 at 1:21 amYou converted to “Paganism” - that put a smile on my face
#5 - Permalink Bart February 27th, 2008 at 3:34 pmNice post - I can personally relate.
I hold the belief that if you tear something down, you have a moral responsibility to put something up in it’s place of equal or greater value. In regards to addiction of all kinds, it is not good enough to stop it. You need to replace the hole it leaves or you’ll end up falling in it again.
Also, your article reminded me of two quotes from men who I respect. I came into the first when I was reading an excerpt from Walden yesterday. The second is just one of those quotes I keep on mental tap.
“Be not simply good; be good for something.”
Henry David Thoreau
“You are good. But it is not enough just to be good. You must be good for something. You must contribute good to the world. The world must be a better place for your presence. And the good that is in you must be spread to others.”
Gordon B. Hinckley, 15th president of the LDS church
Anyway, excellent thoughts.
#6 - Permalink will anderson February 28th, 2008 at 5:23 amanti-globalizers would say globalization removes regional cultural identity, which is bad, because local culture is often best equipped to deal with local problems.
#7 - Permalink admin February 28th, 2008 at 3:44 pmBart,
Thanks for those quotations. They encapsulate nicely the idea that we do best to keep moving toward better things. Stasis leads to stagnation.
Will,
Thanks for that contribution. I’m still puzzled about what anti-globalizers are for. If it is merely that they are for a lack of change, or resistance to change then I doubt that they will succeed. New technologies and changes in economic systems tend to confer greater wealth overall. The local culture must change to accommodate change. If they accept the benefits of greater economic prosperity then they have to accept the transition and turmoil that is bound to come initially.
If these people instead were for balanced and fair introductions of changes that seek to learn from the mistakes of other cultures and to make the transition maximally beneficial and minimally disruptive (if that’s actually possible) then they might fare better in helping those who might otherwise be disadvantaged.
#8 - Permalink Jes February 28th, 2008 at 3:55 pmAnti-globalization is a term coined in the media which caught on like crazy during the Seattle protests and has stuck ever since. As popular as the term is, I’ve never once heard someone describe themselves as anti-globalization. The majority of those concerned with the negative effects of globalization don’t have some blanket view that ‘Globalization is bad. Period.’ Its much more about looking for ways to approach trade and trade laws that don’t marginalize and exploit the underprivileged, than it is about doing away with the whole concept. In fact, I think most of those that are (somewhat ignorantly) labeled anti-globalization are very much in support of fair trade and other ‘globalization’ practices that simply put people before corporate profits.
#9 - Permalink admin February 28th, 2008 at 4:07 pmThanks for that detailed description, Jes. On that basis, I agree in principle with what the demonstrators are for - fair trade and fair treatment of people. It’s too bad that they got daubed with an inaccurate label as it doesn’t do them many favors.