How to increase your will power? Make a Ulysses pact with yourself
The only thing between you and your better self is your brain. Programmed to maximize short term reward, we often find ourselves struggling between what we want and what we want to want.
David Eagleman is a neuroscientist and a New York Times bestselling author. He directs the Laboratory for Perception and Action at the Baylor College of Medicine, where he also directs the Initiative on Neuroscience and Law. He is best known for his work on time perception, brain plasticity, synesthesia, and neurolaw.
Beyond his 100+ academic publications, he has published many popular books. His bestselling book Incognito: The Secret Lives of the Brain, explores the neuroscience "under the hood" of the conscious mind: all the aspects of neural function to which we have no awareness or access. His work of fiction, SUM, is an international bestseller published in 28 languages and turned into two operas. Why the Net Matters examines what the advent of the internet means on the timescale of civilizations. The award-winning Wednesday is Indigo Blue explores the neurological condition of synesthesia, in which the senses are blended.
Eagleman is a TED speaker, a Guggenheim Fellow, a winner of the McGovern Award for Excellence in Biomedical Communication, a Next Generation Texas Fellow, Vice-Chair on the World Economic Forum's Global Agenda Council on Neuroscience & Behaviour, a research fellow in the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, Chief Scientific Advisor for the Mind Science Foundation, and a board member of The Long Now Foundation. He has served as an academic editor for several scientific journals. He was named Science Educator of the Year by the Society for Neuroscience, and was featured as one of the Brightest Idea Guys by Italy's Style magazine. He is founder of the company BrainCheck and the cofounder of the company NeoSensory. He was the scientific advisor for the television drama Perception, and has been profiled on the Colbert Report, NOVA Science Now, the New Yorker, CNN's Next List, and many other venues. He appears regularly on radio and television to discuss literature and science.
DAVID EAGLEMAN: Go back 3,000 years to Ulysses, who fought in the Trojan War and was coming home to his island of Ithaca on his ships with his men, and he realized that he had this amazing opportunity, which is he was going to pass the Island of the Sirens. And he knew that the sirens sang so beautifully and were so seductive that mortal men would crash their ships into the rocks, and they’d all die every time. If you heard the song of the sirens you were going to die.
He wanted to hear the song of the sirens, so what did he do? The Ulysses of present sound mind made a contract with the future Ulysses. He said, “I know that guy is going to behave badly when he hears the siren’s song.” So what did he do? He lashed himself to the mast, exactly, and he filled his men’s ears with beeswax, and he said, "No matter what I do, keep on rowing." Just ignore everything, keep on going. And that way he got to hear the siren’s song but he didn’t crash in the rocks because he was lashed to the mast. And so this is what is known as a “Ulysses contract”, which is your present self making a contract with your future self. Penning in, constraining the behavior of your future self so that it has to do the right thing given your long-term thinking that you’re doing now. And so when it comes to something like the cookies, the Ulysses contract, it’s more than “I’m going to eat it or not eat it.” It can be something like, “Okay, look, if I eat cookies, I’m going to promise my spouse that I’ll go to the gym tonight.” That’s the kind of way that we can bring these sorts of things into our own life.
And so I'll give you several examples. I want to say is so what we’ve seen so far is that there’s this great seduction in the now.
And so if we want to do something where we actually are navigating our future selves in a better way we have to establish these kinds of contracts with ourselves. This is one of the most important sort of life lessons that I’ve got. I mean take something like New Year’s resolutions. Everybody has really good New Year’s resolutions and believes they’re going to do it. And by the end of January for almost everybody these things have fallen away. Why? It’s not because you didn’t mean it in January. It’s because you didn’t set up the structures in your life, the Ulysses contracts to make sure that that went through. It’s not enough to make a promise and a resolution with good intention. You need to understand what’s actually happening so that you can do something about it.
So what I want to do is suggest actionable steps by which we can actually keep our resolutions to ourselves a little bit longer.
So the first one is building fences around yourself by minimizing temptation. So, for example, in Alcoholics Anonymous the very first thing they tell you is you’ve got to clear all the alcohol out of your house. Why? It’s because on a festive Friday night or a lonely Sunday night you’re going to go and drink. Even if you think, “No, I’m done. I’m not going to drink but I’m going to keep those in there.”
With smokers the first thing they’re told in these rehab programs is: don’t hang out with other smokers. With drug addicts who are trying to quit the first thing they’re told in drug rehab programs is: make sure you never carry more than 20 bucks of cash with you.
Because if you have the cash, no matter what your resolution is, you meet somebody in the alley who offers you drugs and you feel like, “Oh yeah, I’ve got this money anyway,” and so you do it.
So the issue is not-tempting temptation.
I was recently on a college campus giving a talk and I met these kids afterwards who during finals week what they do is they swap Facebook passwords with each other and they change those passwords so they can’t log into Facebook when they’re supposed to be studying. And then at the end of finals when it’s all over they give each other’s passwords back. It was very clever and that’s a beautiful sort of Ulysses contract where a week before finals you’re knowing about the temptations that you’re going to give into and you’re doing something to take care of those. By now a lot has been said about the marshmallow test. You guys probably know about this where children are asked you can eat this one marshmallow now or if you wait until I come back you can get two marshmallows.
People talk about this in terms of the resolution that little kids have and how good they are at resisting temptation and stuff but there’s something that’s often overlooked here which is that one of the most common strategies that kids use was simply covering their eyes. Just clapping their hands over their eyes so they’re not looking at the marshmallow. And it turns out that’s a very effective strategy. And so when we think about minimizing temptations whatever your temptations are in life just think about the ways that you can actually contractually minimize that temptation so it’s not there. Not a fake thing or anything. Oh yeah, if it’s in the back of the cabinet I won’t do it but like actually get rid of the temptation.
The only thing between you and your better self is your brain. Programmed to maximize short term reward, we often find ourselves struggling between what we want in the moment and what we'll gain in the long term if we forgo immediate gratification. As neuroscientist David Eagleman reveals, the ancient wisdom of Ulysses remains useful today as a way to contextualize current scientific research. Before temptation strikes, it pays to have a plan for when it arrives. By making a contract with your future self—as Ulysses did with his crew—you can avoid occasions of indulgence. And when you do give into immediate satisfaction, you can build in supports to keep it from wreaking havoc on your life.
This video is part of a collaborative series with the Hope & Optimism initiative, which supports interdisciplinary academic research into significant questions that remain under-explored. The three-year initiative will provide over $2 million for philosophers, philosophers of religion, and social scientists to generate original, high-quality, collaborative research on topics related to optimism and hopefulness. Discover the public components of the Hope & Optimism project, and how you can contribute, at hopeoptimism.com.
"They" has taken on a not-so-new meaning lately. This earned it the scrutiny it needed to win.
- Merriam-Webster has announced "they" as the word of the year.
- The selection was based on a marked increase in traffic to the online dictionary page.
- Runners up included "quid pro quo" and "crawdad."
A review of the global "wall" that divides rich from poor.
- Trump's border wall is only one puzzle piece of a global picture.
- Similar anxieties are raising similar border defenses elsewhere.
- This map shows how, as a result, "the West" is in fact one large gated community.
Facebook's misinformation isn't just a threat to democracy. It's endangering lives.
- Facebook and Instagram users have been inundated with misleading ads about medication that prevents the transmission of HIV (PrEP), such as Truvada.
- Over the years, Facebook's hands-off ad policy has faced scrutiny when it comes to false or ambiguous information in its political ads.
- Unregulated "surveillance capitalism" commodifies people's personal information and makes them vulnerable to sometimes misleading ads.
LGBT groups are saying that Facebook is endangering lives by advertising misleading medical information pertaining to HIV patients.
The tech giant's laissez-faire ad policy has already been accused of threatening democracy by providing a platform for false political ads, and now policy could be fostering a major public-health concern.
LGBT groups take on Facebook’s ad policy
According to LGBT advocates, for the past six months Facebook and Instagram users have been inundated with misleading ads about medication that prevents the transmission of HIV (PrEP), such as Truvada. The ads, which The Washington Post reports appear to have been purchased by personal-injury lawyers, claim that these medications threaten patients with serious side effects. According to LGBT organizations led by GLAAD, the ads have left some patients who are potentially at risk of contracting HIV scared to take preventative drugs, even though health officials and federal regulators say the drugs are safe.
LGBT groups like GLAAD, which regularly advises Facebook on LGBT issues, reached out to the company to have the ads taken down, saying they are false. Yet, the tech titan has refused to remove the content claiming that the ads fall within the parameters of its policy. Facebook spokeswoman Devon Kearns told The Post that the ads had not been rated false by independent fact-checkers, which include the Associated Press. But others are saying that Facebook's controversial approach to ads is creating a public-health crisis.
In an open letter to Facebook sent on Monday, GLAAD joined over 50 well-known LGBTQ groups including the Human Rights Campaign, the American Academy of HIV Medicine and the National Coalition for LGBT Health to publicly condemn the company for putting "real people's lives in imminent danger" by "convincing at-risk individuals to avoid PrEP, invariably leading to avoidable HIV infections."
What Facebook’s policy risks
Of course, this is not the first time Facebook's policy has faced scrutiny when it comes to false or ambiguous information in its ads. Social media has been both a catalyst and conduit for the rapid-fire spread of misinformation to the world wide web. As lawmakers struggle to enforce order to cyberspace and its creations, Facebook has become a symbol of the threat the internet poses to our institutions and to public safety. For example, the company has refused to take down 2020 election ads, largely funded by the Trump campaign, that spew false information. For this reason, Facebook and other social media platforms present a serious risk to a fundamental necessity of American democracy, public access to truth.
But this latest scandal underlines how the misconstrued information that plagues the web can infect other, more intimate aspects of American lives. Facebook's handling of paid-for claims about the potential health risks of taking Truvada and other HIV medications threatens lives.
"Almost immediately we started hearing reports from front-line PrEP prescribers, clinics and public health officials around the country, saying we're beginning to hear from potential clients that they're scared of trying Truvada because they're seeing all these ads on their Facebook and Instagram feeds," said Peter Staley, a long-time AIDS activist who works with the PrEP4All Collaboration, to The Post.
Unregulated Surveillance Capitalism
To be fair, the distinction between true and false information can be muddy territory. Personal injury lawyers who represent HIV patients claim that the numbers show that the potential risks of medications such as Turvada and others that contain the ingredient antiretroviral tenofovir may exist. This is particularly of note when the medication is used as a treatment for those that already have HIV rather than prevention for those that do not. But the life-saving potential of the HIV medications are unequivocally real. The problem, as some LGBT advocates are claiming, is that the ads lacked vital nuance.
It also should be pointed out that Facebook has taken action against anti-vaccine content and other ads that pose threats to users. Still, the company's dubious policies clearly pose a big problem, and it has shown no signs of adjusting. But perhaps the underlying issue is the failure to regulate what social psychologist Shoshana Zuboff calls "surveillance capitalism" by which people's experiences, personal information, and characteristics become commodities. In this case, paid-for personal-injury legal ads that target users with certain, undisclosed characteristics. It's been said that you should be wary of what you get for free, because it means you've become the product. Facebook, after all, is a business with an end goal to maximize profits.
But why does a company have this kind of power over our lives? Americans and their legislators are ensnared in an existential predicament. Figure out how to regulate Facebook and be accused with endangering free speech, or leave the cyber business alone and risk the public's health going up for sale along with its government.