I was watching some Smarter Every Day videos lately and I got this really sudden, strong INTJ-intuition. Is Destin an INTJ? Maybe!

It’s a fun video. Very little poop is involved. Destin is doing a demonstrative variant of taking the manual writing character bonus for INTJs.

(Note: I have been aboard a nuclear submarine myself, walked among the missile tubes, and it was a really neat experience. Also, I did look behind the curtains like any curious person might, and I saw a bunch of statistics that I don’t remember, and yes, the curtains were shut really fast when somebody caught on. They were pros about it though. Thanks US Navy! I won’t forget all the ice cream I ate on ur boat)

Also. IMO Linus from Linus Tech Tips rings my ENTJ bell, and here they are together for people who have asked me about ENTJs on Youtube.

I hope you can see the way Linus’ extraversion energy is effectively L I M I T L E S S by comparison. In contrast, Destin is much more introverted/subjective and incorporates himself at a deeper level, but I think he does it in a really graceful way. He also goes into some really cool little factors in his videos that Linus would probably swat away like annoying flies.

Linus has also been observed doing some risky Ni stuff before, like proclaiming the one-certain-meaning-to-this and calling a product or situation a disaster before he really knows what’s going on with the details. My hope for anybody developing Ni is that they can move beyond this “we’re f***ed” stage as quickly as possible.

I do see Linus’ Te really pushing Destin into the Fi box during that video; anyway it’s no big deal and it’s cool to see them together. Always something to learn…no space for emotional drama here, nope…k back to work and learning everybody…lol

Just to balance things out, here’s an observationally-ESFP I like to watch sometimes.

All clear in sector seven!

Filed in: People /74/ | Interests /111/ | Careers /40/

Jesse writes,

…I had a pretty big life-changer experience. I always wondered where my exhaustion/anxiety and depression came from. I didn’t feel they were inborn; that they were just symptoms of a systemic problem.

Turns out I’m a clinical perfectionist. Learning this has been massively relieving. I gander many INTJs struggles with this. Probably any high-achieving personality type.

This video really opened my eyes. I’m reading Overcoming Perfectionism now. I feel 100 pounds lighter.

Thanks Jesse for sharing your experience and the video. And way to go! I’m really happy for you, you deserve it all and more.

Jesse’s email made me think about where perfectionism fit into my own journey.

Thoughts on Perfectionism

I remembered that for me, perfectionism was by far the worst when I was working in xSTJ business environments where A) rules governing employees were valued over output, and 2) my own subjective values were not appreciated or demonstrated.

It’s been a while since I’ve been in that situation though, so I’m not sure how it would work out these days. I’d like to think I could go back and really push back, but who knows. Groups are powerful and self-protective.

And that’s a circumstantial example. I think circumstances really matter. We humans like to think we can “fix” things but sometimes that’s a really dumb notion.

Getting out of those circumstances (i.e. quitting both positions and moving the f*** on with my life) almost instantly “cured” my perfectionism, including weird things like a speech impediment I was starting to develop! It’s a memory from long ago that still makes me shake my head.

However, there are certainly a lot of strategies that have helped when I get into more of a perfectionist mode. These have helped me from falling into the same old traps over and over, even or especially when working for myself. So here we go!

Other Strategies

Off the top of my head, some things that helped me deal with perfectionism in general:

• Always try to define the minimum amount of work that will satisfy all stakeholders.
  • Even if you’re the only stakeholder.
  • On an ongoing basis, find ways to leverage portions of the work which make the minimum easier, and which allow you to raise the bar a little bit.
  • My theory is that “minimum” is not really going to be a minimum for a perfectionist anyway, so there’s no need to worry about under-doing. There will always be some incidental perfectionism.
• Take the S/N “Do / Don’t Do” model to heart. Someone said, “INTJs are perceiver-thinkers, not so much doers.”
  • Does this mean we can’t do? No way! So don’t let your “I’m so great at doing” ego destroy you—there is a LOT you can accomplish in life by leaning harder into that non-doing stance. The outside world sees much of it as pure artisanal wisdom. (As long as we don’t brag about it)
  • If your perfectionism is in ANY WAY feeding a tendency to brag or even humble-brag, a la the Se-Fi “I’m so great, in fact greatness is what makes me so great” life hack, be careful. This can turn into a huge Fe blindspot issue.
• Take the NiTe-SeFi “Perfectionistic Swings” model to heart.
  • Swings WILL happen. You WILL become a doer, and maybe even a frantic, impassioned doer at that.
  • Some of these swings will incorporate so much bottled-up emotion that you’ll over-commit to a project. This can also be described as perfectionism.
  • Try to keep it loose, don’t bring your introvert side’s depth too far into this one, at least not at first.
  • Try to keep it improvisatory if possible. Loose, improvisatory doing supported by ongoing learning can start to look like style over time—and who doesn’t like that?
  • Time it, don’t expect to go all day. Force breaks.
  • Bring in mood support—good snacks, music to listen to, movies to watch, turn on a fan, whatever it takes.
• Live like a cat. Lazy, lazy, lazy, BOOM focused energy, lazy, lazy, lazy…
• Do some list-making during downtime. I personally prioritize by task momentum, so most-interesting-first is my frequent list-making rule in order to make the ramp-up as quick and easy as possible.
  • God I use dashes a lot. rofl
• Give thoughts and emotions time to balance out the to-do list.
  • Write, then wait. Come back to your list. What looks off? What does it need more of / less of?
• Consider the Task BATL-style focus on measured / quanitifed & balanced productivity
  • You should feel secure in your pursuit of your own skills and interests. Not somebody else’s. And a lot of them should be skills you have mastered and continue to develop. You should be able to demonstrate leverage and control over them (see the end of that post) and this ought to help you understand that these are sustainable skills which you are comfortable building slowly over time. Less spike, and less general concern. You are secure in your pursuit of them. By definition you’ll be less perfectionistic about them.
  • You should know how long stuff will take and what the steps are—minimum. Consider the first point of the productivity triangle.
• Harness the power of subjectivity. Defining yourself by your internal world and various interests brought forward from your own past. Learn deeply about your own values and interests. Work to develop them; long-term interests often define areas of strength. Actively set time and energy boundaries in environments where those values and interests aren’t accepted or used.
  • This will also help you stop comparing yourself so much to other people.
• Don’t let important or deeply-emotional thoughts flit in and out of your mind constantly. Keep an organized system of notes so you can leverage the things you’re thinking or feeling about today, later on.
  • I use markdown and Geany for both note-taking and journaling. Most of my notes on any given topic also include a progress tracker or To-Do list. Forgetting where you’re at with, and learning about, a thing you’re interested in can also look like a driver of perfectionism.
• Keep in mind: “I’m not done yet” — please watch the Mike Lin Webinar Video and while watching, think of yourself as a life-designer.

That’s all I got for now…plus you guys know how this blog works (high-volume slop first, fix later) so you get to see me actively trashing perfectionism with every chance I get. We are FAR from perfect here.

Hope it helps!

Filed in: Procrastination /23/ | Anxiety /32/ | Careers /40/ | Productivity /119/

Get your spy music ready for today’s post…

Just some stuff I’ve been working on lately…let’s do the (kinda?) boring stuff first!

Text Editor Journaling for Productivity

I just published a video showing some of the ways I journal for productivity using Geany:

There’s a ton of stuff in here really, so I think the video maybe looks more boring than it is.

Or…I REALLY hope so.

---

Random Workouts

Here’s an article with a list of random workouts and some methods for selecting one.

I’ve been using it for the last week and it’s been pretty fun.

I usually roll a few and then pick the one I like.

---

Secret Agent Roleplaying: SIFT-CADS

Here’s the skeleton of a new tabletop roleplaying system I’ve been working on. It’s meant for games with that James Bond vibe.

To keep it simple, the mechanic is D100 based, roll-under percentage. So if you are 75% good at something, you try to roll at or under 75. With some modifiers as specified below.

Facets (SIFT)

Assign these scores to your character in any arrangement: 25, 25, 75, 75, higher is better.

(Do these look familiar…?)

• Sensory (Body, sensation, awareness of surroundings, awareness of personal health)
• Intuitive (Inner prediction, brainstorming, profiling people or places)
• Feeling (Charisma, relational thinking & negotiation, emotional prowess, manipulation)
• Thinking (Logic, analysis, definitions / labels knowledge, facts, trivia)

Facets help you determine what kind of character you’ve got on your hands. More mentally prepared, more physically-focused, more charismatic, or cold and logical?

And yeah, one of the lowkey goals of the game design was to see if I could integrate the various personality functions.

Attributes (CADS)

Attributes are like special weapons the character can deploy at any time. To really get the most out of a super spy, a good player-character will use a mix of these in every adventure.

When the player uses these, they are allowed to change the scene, and the GM defers to character prerogative or tries to accomodate the player’s changes. (Some negotiation over this is OK) A player can use each Attribute once per basic adventure, for a scene change and automatic roll-at-or-under 75 to get the result.

• Command (Take charge)
  • Bark orders at people and watch them obey
  • Stare people down and intimidate them into doing what you want
  • Taking opportunities in such a way that others come along
• Anticipate (Work from Concrete Intel)
  • Call up or signalling a source / contact
  • Thank God You’ve Come (a friend arrives to help)
  • You trick your opponent into a trap you set before you entered the scene
• Demonstrate (Gain extra motivation by technical display / peacock)
  • Show off a sick gadget
  • Operate nearby machinery or vehicles
  • Use the scenery or nearby people / animals as a jungle gym
• Sacrifice (Gain motivational energy from great pain or suffering)
  • Soak up extra damage
  • Gain accuracy, strength, flexibility when task involves great pain

Skills

Skills provide an extra 10 or 20 points to the high-end goal of any Facet roll. So if you were rolling under 25, it could be increased to 35 or 45. Distribute 100 points for first adventure.

• Academia (2 higher-education years per 10 points)
• Fighting / Formal Martial Arts
• Fighting / Rough and Tumble
• Shooting, Long Distance
• Shooting, Short Distance
• Acrobatics
• Languages (1 Language per 10 points)
• Military (4 years per 10 points)
• Household and self-care (Cooking, making up a room, cleaning up their attire, calming down with a distraction)
• Medical

Gear

• Players can choose any gear but they use Facets, Attributes, or Skills to use it.
• The difference between a PPK and RPG is in how you describe its effect—this is to emphasize the narrative aspect of the game.

Cocking

• Facets (SIFT, above) can be Cocked or Half-cocked.
  • Cocked Facets give you a boost of 25 to your roll-at-or-under target number. 2 Uses.
  • Half-cocked Facets give you a boost of 25, but instantly add an extra danger factor to the scene. 2 uses per adventure.

Danger Factor

• The GM should specify things that are dangerous about every scene.
  • A good scene needs at least 3.
  • For example a mix of dangerous persons, places/objects (huge lasers; a cliff), animals, or events (natural disasters).
  • GM decides whether they are used, but they are usually available.

Core Mechanic

• When a problem needs to be solved and difficulty is involved
  • Roll at or under Facet + Skill percentage. Add Cocking factor. Subtract difficulty modifiers.
  • Use each Attribute at any time, but only once; describe the change in scene and roll under 75.
  • Facets are reduced by 20 points for every damage taken.
    • Payers determine to which Facet damage is taken.
  • Any Facet reduced to 0 or less results in an incapacitated character.
• When an enemy character does something…
  • Give them 50, 60, or 70 points:
    • Mook, henchman, or agent. Or a group (divide up the points per character)
    • The player’s character generally does 30 points of damage, or 60 points if they roll higher than their Facet
  • Or for enemy super-spies, stat them up like a player’s own character, without Attributes and with no Cocking.
• Other enemies
  • The weather, a damaged vehicle one is trying to control, etc.
  • These modify the roll by subtracting 10 or 20.

---

That’s it for now…enjoy the weekend!

Filed in: Productivity /119/ | Therapeutic Practice /144/ | Interests /111/

I’ve noticed this pattern among my ENTJ friends:

…they sit in a huge recliner to work, like Louis does.

(I have to admit it makes me laugh, sorry but that huge friggin’ recliner is straight out of my grandma’s house, not that I’m some exemplary furniture guy, but there we are)

Now, we could call this the cringe-inducing influence of tertiary Se, for example. And there are some funny things that jive well with the child-like Se-positioning framework. I mean, some of those same friends also eat kids’ breakfast cereal in the morning, their diets are absolute crap, and it’s hard to take somebody serious when they’re inviting you to conquer the galaxy with them while spilling milk on themselves as they try to reach the recliner adjustment on the side of the friggin’ huge chair.

However I have to admit I am kind of coming around to this recliner thing.

First, laying down for work is admittedly pretty damn nice. I do this all the time and end up laying in bed and getting WAY more work done than I thought I would.

(I always have to straighten up the room when I do this, I need at least a three-star museum-quality bed setup, pick things up and straighten out the blankets, or it all just feels so wrong)

But reclining is also really, really comfortable for long periods. It doesn’t require as much bed-pillow adjustment for example. I do use a lumbar pillow now, because I hate being slumped over when I sit up.

I’m browsing around online, considering all options, including a “gaming recliner” which is somehow just a hilarious combination of words to me today.

And I’m tagging this under Fitness, because I get this funny intuition-itch that tells me that sitting in a lazy position all day at work could support a psychological craving for athletic activity later! You never know about this yin-yang stuff.

Anyway. Tune in next time, as I live-blog from one of those hot new custom gaming caskets!

Filed in: Therapeutic Practice /144/ | Se /25/ | Fitness /31/ | Productivity /119/

I added Stephen Wolfram to my list of people I would say are, observationally, INTJs.

I thought a lot about this one. But as of now, I have to conclude that the nature of his thinking is extremely subjective-intuition-driven (Ni) and even stubbornly so. His language is fundamentally visual-metaphorical (watch his gestures and descriptions), which is also an important sign of Ni-basing. And his career keeps coming back to patterns where this intuitive foundation mixes with utter pragmatism and business logic (Te).

There were also some early life & career missteps that seemed more fundamentally INTJ than any other type.

I think that’s the best way I can put it, for now.

Other candidate personality types were: ENTP (I’d say maybe 15% chance based on the reading / watching I’ve done so far), and INTP (5%).

There are some aspects of his use of experiential recall, Te-constructive work over long periods of time, and extraverted intuition that intrigue me. But not enough to distract from my main conclusion. These could easily be family- or environmentally-influenced, for example. Even the fact that one has an audience, or a “social persona,” could be enough to virtually mandate the use of various extraverted personality aspects.

To some degree there’s a bit of a vulnerability or weakness involved in admitting one can be wrong about guessing someone else’s personality type. But I like to lean into that. I have been wrong before, and being wrong about stuff is an important key to learning about personality, and many other things.

The Why

Why do this list-making with personality types?

One reason is that it helps me explore my own interests at a deeply effective level. For example, if I’m interested in math, science, or physics, it may be easier for me to learn Wolfram-the-INTJ’s theories first, and add other challenges later, than it is to learn Einstein-the-INTP’s theories first.

With an INTJ’s “unification-style” theorizing done up front, it would tend to be much easier for me to dive into the “separation-style” theorizing done by an INTP, because I can better see where their discrete, separated-style works fit into the big picture of the theory.

I can test this in a simple way by reading through their materials, and in many cases this has proven a very helpful method for picking up new skills, or just learning new things.

Filed in: People /74/ | Careers /40/ | Interests /111/

So today the Productivity tag on the blog hit 100 articles. I’m pretty happy about that. If you are interested in being more productive, there’s probably something on that list that will help you out.

Writing about productivity is pretty easy for me, because personally, my psychology is continually showing me future-stuff that needs things done about it. It’s the contingency planner psychology, and I’m stuck with it.

For example, a thought comes in: “Hey, it’s been a rainy month so far, and this means the locks around the house will probably start to corrode like they did before, and that totally sucked, so probably get the WD-40 and spray them out.” So you make a plan to find the WD-40, or to buy electronic locks, or whatever.

There’s a constant stream of this stuff, and it feels good to be able to address at least some of that in a timely manner. You can’t do it all, but you can do some—and there’s the trick! Which items do you do, and how much, and how well? And how do you generally do a good enough job at keeping up with this stuff? Is there a system that can be used, to make everything a little bit easier?

Upon reflection, a few secrets:

First, one big secret of productivity systems is that you gotta have a next thing. Something else to try. Your current system has a countdown timer attached, in a way. It won’t work forever.

Maybe you’ll come back to it again someday, but sometime soon, your current system will probably start to feel much less effective.

This is why I designed my own system, Task BATL, to be modular and theory-based, rather than monolithic and routine-based. You can rearrange it and the way it works. You can use it backwards and make it look more like play than work, and sometimes that’s what you need…

So my Second secret is that productivity has a deep and dark shadow. There is a yin to its yang, so to speak.

If you want to be productive, you need to master this shadow. You need to be able to be lazy, motionless, and relatively unaffected by time pressure.

This is always easier at some times than others, but I find it works best when you’ve got something to watch, or listen to, or feel (like floating in a pool).

Doing this builds up important energy capacity that you’ll need later, when you are checking things off your list left and right.

Finally, my Third productivity secret is that productivity should be relatively shallow, if it is going to be frequent. You should establish a “maximum dive depth” on a project, and have an idea of just how much work you have to do.

If you find yourself getting deeper and deeper into a project, and the project will last for more than a day or so, make plans to pause your work ASAP. Use the rest of your energy to “put a handle on the work for next time” (write down what you were doing, and how to pick up the work again), before you burn out!

Ideally, you’ll be able to make plans to pause your work before you get started. I find this (bonus tip) is really helpful in a lot of cases.

Speaking of which…that’s enough blogging for today. Take care everybody! :-)

Filed in: Control /110/ | Productivity /119/

I just added two new modules to Task BATL, the flexible, modular productivity system:

1. TIMES, the Task Infiltration / Medium Exploitation System
2. The Rangefinder Module, for measuring temporal (and also usually psychological) distance from project activity.

Both of these modules can help with aspects like procrastination or getting re-involved in a project workflow.

Filed in: Publications /44/ | Productivity /119/

I have been playing and studying role-playing games (TTRPGs, the tabletop variety) a lot lately.

Part of this is because hey, they’re fascinating. Who wouldn’t want to simulate a really deep fantasy world and equip themselves with a favorite persona AND all their gear, AND some good friends, AND fascinating super-bases AND incredible adversaries? It’s great fun.

But also, part of this interest emerges due to the amount of role-thinking I do lately.

As a professional coach, I am always thinking about roles. Not only for my clients, but for myself (this is part of the trick of any career position. Learning to do that thing-of-your-role, for yourself, and by yourself, so you can move on to the next lesson in life).

What Role-playing Games Are Really Talking About

Here is one of my takeaways from studying role-playing games: In a big way, it’s about giving yourself permission to consciously act on a given role, from a different personality-perspective.

And this is really powerful: To consciously do that. That is power.

Most of us only do it unconsciously. For example, suddenly we feel a great interest in a thing, so we start acting like we know all about it, or whatever. Or we excitedly plan a time to watch a new movie about an astronaut or something, and we think, “I can’t get enough of this! How can I get more of this?” (And then maybe we end up hoarding space movies? That’s the less-conscious side of all this, and of course it’s fine to some extent)

But to lean into the role with this role-awareness is really something else! It’s amazing, in that you can get really meta, and think of your role, and separate that from yourself.

(Role-ego separation is what I’ll call that, I guess)

Once you can do that little trick, you can solve any problem, with any tool.

Even tools that aren’t your own!

So I find it really therapeutic to stat up a character, as opposed to just imagining one. Role-playing games have a thing called a mechanic, which is where you have to consciously identify your character’s various levers: Skills, powers, themes, or whatever.

If you can do that, you can start to identify the exact tools you probably need in your own life situation. Where you previously only had an “astronaut-like” interest/feeling, all of a sudden you’re going,

OK. So my astronaut is really charismatic and he lives to get to the bottom of things. He wants to get the people around him to tell him in really clear terms—WHAT is going on—so he can make decisions! That’s how you solve problems!

And then you realize—oh, in waking life, I don’t even know what’s going on. I haven’t even identified how I’m feeling, or what might be happening. So how can I expect myself to solve problems effectively?

Or something like that.

And voila—you were just that astronaut. You were your not-self, during that very important moment, and it helped you out.

Oh and By the Way

As an aside, but also related to taking on roles…

I would expect VR to be extremely important in the future. Wearing VR gear will be better than just using your eyes.

What we now consider Virtual Reality gear will be able to mediate your role-perception facilities, allowing you to take on roles that you couldn’t before.

For one, VR will probably just be handy in sensory terms. Maybe you can see behind you through an additional camera, for example, and this by itself makes your solo wilderness trek less stressful.

But also, roles are really stressful when they require interactions, and sometimes we need crucial mood or energy support in order to continue a role. Perhaps the effects of beneficial medications can be mimicked by mediating the sensory inputs from the outside world through VR.

As an extreme example, let’s say you are in an extraverted environment like a park where there are lots of people, and you had all this energy to come to a family gathering, yet you are feeling unwell. Or maybe you’re even feeling grumpy and angry and anti-social and you feel like you could really use an anti-inflammatory or some alcohol, or both.

But instead of needing those chemicals, as a simple measure, your VR system kicks in with a bit of calming background music, it adds a rose-colored tint to everything you see, and then it filters out or basically turns anybody you want into a generic outline instead of showing their face or body—these are powerful emotional cue-systems being disabled, reducing the likelihood of a negative or triggering sensory perception—and then it does the same for you on those other peoples’ VR systems, effectively introverting you even more from their perspective, too.

And then maybe at the same time, you can watch a bit of a favorite movie or something.

And then you switch your audio feeds off and noise-canceling off, and you get your favorite music, plus a text-only feed of what’s going on around you.

And then you can essentially type to chat with your environment.

You see where I’m going with this? It’s hardly even “VR” anymore; it’s more like dial-an-experience, stretching each experience to what you want it to be, to the degree possible.

Some would ask—is this real? I personally think our models of reality are way more plastic and flexible than we give them credit for, and this flexibility is a REALLY amazing aspect that we humans haven’t taken advantage of yet.

This is pretty conceptual of course, but eventually perhaps we’ll have this socially-approved method of time-outing yourself to manage your personal energy and wellness. But without needing to leave, without even needing a time-out, just an adjusted perception filter.

I think that would be good for society. It’s not just INTJs that want to be, or need to be, introverts. Introversion is really at its core a question of the quality of attention to subjective experience.

At some point everybody needs to be introverted, or they need to at least partially manage their real-time life experience in a conscious way. By encouraging the use of tools that moderate our subjective experience, we can understand the subjective world better, appreciate the objective world more, and learn to live a more integrative experience within both.

(As I finished writing this, I slipped on these big yellow goggles that somehow seem to make the text on my screen so much nicer to read…)

Filed in: Essays /52/ | Relationships /78/ | Interests /111/

I find that I do this a lot these days:

• Read content online, for example a question in an online community forum or group
• Read comments or answers about it
• Mentally filter all the comments by likely personality type, using a lot of intuition (Ni) based on the writing style, approach to the topic, psychological distance control with the topic, what the topic is, who typically flocks to these topics, etc. (Se)
• Mentally filter all the comments by how much leverage / control the commenter has in this topic / area (See Relevant Notes below)
• Mentally filter all the comments by how projection-y / blustery / braggy / whatever they are
• If it’s an INTJ and they have a lot of leverage / control and the projection level is appropriate…

At that point I am paying a lot of attention to that commenter, based on the theory that in these ways, their psychology is at least a rough match for mine:

• The various cognitive function models (huge)
• Specific personality traits, outside of type (huge)
• Interaction styles and DISC (huge)
• Temperament (depends on the topic but often a big deal)
• General function attitude (surprisingly relevant if you get into what I/E can really mean)
• The usual four-letter type stuff (less useful in a lot of cases)

If it’s not an INTJ, of course that’s totally fine. I do the same thing but filter by cognitive functionality, function attitudes, interaction style, temperament, etc. (This doesn’t take long now that I’ve spent years and years coaching using these tools)

Some outcomes:

• I was able to manage risk better by confirming that my psychology was suited for specific approaches to things. For example, when I wondered if coaching was a good fit for me, I paid extra attention to introverts and particularly experienced introverts who were Thinking-preferent. This paid off later when I was able to recognize similar patterns and remember their advice.
• I was able to contextualize the whole group of helpful comments, for example if you filter an entire thread of comments and realize you are dealing with people who are projecting tons of experience, and yet there is zero depth to the conversation—OK, maybe find a different topic. If INTJs are doing this though, there’s a chance you are really onto something, because their intuition is lighting up but their experience level isn’t there yet.
• I found some “quacks” (e.g. downvoted to hell, or literally called quacks in the thread, or whatever) who my filters told me were probably really trustworthy, or at least worth listening to. I followed up and learned a lot of specific career and research secrets that I didn’t understand before.

Relevant Notes

To estimate whether someone has a lot of leverage and control over their interaction with a topic or area of interst, I might look for these factors:

• The topic is not particularly emotionally charged for them
• They seem to be able to work with the topic in a positive way (not so much emotionally positive, rather they are persistently solving problems and working through them when they come up, for example)
• They seem to be able to do this over a long period of time
• They seem to be able to set normative time and schedule boundaries with the activity; it doesn’t consume their life
• They seem to be satisfied with the results they get
• They seem to plan to continue down this route

Filed in: Productivity /119/ | Interests /111/

This is kind of a fun one for me lately: Systems Improv, or the design of ad hoc systems. Throwaway systems, even.

Premise: Each new and important moment gets a new micro-system, designed to fit the needs of the moment.

Nothing is assumed about the needs of the moment. No old or existing systems are brought forward unless they seem to meet the needs of the moment. (This is a huge difference—I used to drag these bulky existing systems along with me into everything, and try to force them to fit. Like, hey, let’s make this moment fit into bullet journaling. Or hey, let’s make this moment fit into this productivity system I learned last year.)

All systems and designs which are to be integrated right now are logically, intuitively, or emotionally weighed.

Defined in the New Moment

I start with a definition of the system needed. This becomes the temporary name of the system.

Example: Today I needed a system called the…

“I meant to take a nap, but couldn’t fall asleep thanks to this Soviet super-drug, so now my head is fuzzy and what do I do about it”-System.

(Yeah, you read that right!)

I was pretty convinced the day was going to suck at this point. You know what I mean if you think sleep is super important and then you can’t get any. But I wanted to try something.

1. I started simple—I wrote a list of things that I could probably do to get the day back on the rails.
2. Then I started to organize the list. From five items to three main items, with some indented sub-items.
3. Then some higher-level concepts came to mind, intuitively. First, a meta-system-design concept came to mind, so I put that in as its own list to refer to later. Second, I thought this improvised system needed a loop, so I used a two-part timer from Task BATL to drive the loop. In this case, 30 minutes of comfort, 10 minutes of focused try-harding, and repeat. This kind of backward productivity timer loop is one of my favorites.
4. I added on some other portions of Task BATL as well. For example I added a ton of circle items to get me started: Get hydrated, go to the bathroom, eat a snack, turn on some music, take a couple of these supplements and one of those, and start a couple movies quietly playing in the background. Gotta take care of yourself! This stuff is important.

From there, the day got WAY better.

Organized by Need

If the system is unique in some way, or seems a pain to re-design later, I file it for later use.

Lossy by Design

If not—no big deal, it’s like journaling (and the system is designed inside my daily log / journal). I don’t mind losing a lot of what I write, because it’s the exercise of writing that does most of what I need. If you can improvise your systems, then I think losing some here or there will just happen naturally. Did you lose one? Oh, sorry, I guess you get to flex your improv muscle again…that’s the idea anyway.

Filed in: Control /110/ | Therapeutic Practice /144/ | Productivity /119/