0:00

Pickaxe. This

0:07

episode is brought to you by Paramount+. Get

0:09

in loser! Mean Girls is now streaming on

0:12

Paramount+. Join Katie Herron as

0:14

she meets the Plastics and Tina Fey's new

0:16

twist on the modern classic. Get ready for

0:18

more of the rumors, backstabbing, and jokes you

0:20

loved from the original movie with some fetch

0:23

surprises. Rated PG-13. Wear

0:25

pink and head to paramountplus.com to try it

0:27

free. When

0:30

you hear this, what do you feel?

0:33

At IMAX, you'll feel transported by

0:35

our unique sound system and crystal

0:37

clear images. Like you're

0:40

running across the desert planet or

0:42

defending your city from a surprise invasion.

0:45

With immersive IMAX sound and screens curved

0:48

to show more, we take fans to

0:50

the edge of their seats. Get

0:52

tickets to Dune Part 2 now

0:54

and experience it in IMAX's exclusive

0:56

expanded aspect ratio. Today

0:59

we're going to talk about analysis paralysis.

1:06

As a psychiatrist, I've worked with a

1:08

ton of people who get paralyzed

1:10

with over-analysis. So they're trying

1:12

to solve problems in their life. Really

1:14

important problems, like what should I major

1:16

in in college? Should I stay in

1:18

this relationship? Should I quit this job?

1:21

Should I pursue my dreams? Or should

1:23

I do something that gives me a stable

1:25

income? And as we're faced with all of

1:27

these problems, our mind starts

1:29

logic-ing through things. It makes calculations. It says,

1:31

okay, we could do this, we could do this, here are

1:33

the benefits, here are the cons. And

1:36

at the end of the day, though, the mind ends up warning

1:38

us. Because what if things go wrong? What

1:40

if you break up with this person and

1:42

you can't find someone else? What if you

1:44

choose to study this in college but then

1:46

you can't find a job? So in all

1:49

of these situations of analysis paralysis,

1:51

we make calculations and then

1:53

our mind warns us of

1:55

the consequences. And no matter

1:57

how many times we think through things, We

2:00

can't seem to find

2:02

an answer that prompts

2:04

us to action in.

2:06

The reason for that

2:08

is because our brain

2:10

is making intentional miscalculations

2:12

about the future that

2:14

end up paralyzing us.

2:17

In this is the science of loss

2:19

aversion. they'll If you're interested in applying

2:21

some of the principles that we share

2:23

to actually create change in your life,

2:25

check out Doctor Cave Guide to Mental

2:27

Health. It combines over two decades of

2:29

my experience about being a monk and

2:31

a psychiatrist and distills all of the

2:33

most important things I've learned into a

2:35

choose your own adventure format to check

2:38

out the link the bio and start

2:40

your journey the day. So this is

2:42

super cool Because of this, research comes

2:44

out of the field. Of neuroeconomics.

2:47

This is part of the reason why

2:49

no one really understands this because this

2:51

is an emerging field. see, we used

2:53

to have psychology which started people like

2:55

Sigmund. Freud and Young and stuff like. That and

2:57

now we have things like psychotherapy. We

2:59

have therapists who understand all these things

3:02

about human behavior and then we have

3:04

stuff like neuroscience. We started doing. Brain

3:06

scans. But the people who are

3:08

doing brain scans aren't actually helping

3:10

human beings. Change their behavior, And

3:12

then we have the field of

3:14

economics, which is about how human

3:16

beings make choices and something really

3:18

cool has happened. Which is that

3:20

in the last decade. Or so

3:22

these three fields emerge into something

3:25

called Neuro. In

3:27

the revelations from neural Economics are

3:29

fascinating and one. Of the most important

3:31

things that we discover which. A lot of

3:34

therapist don't understand. we're not trained in

3:36

the stuff is about last summer so

3:38

if we want to understand how to

3:40

overcome analysis paralysis, it turns out that

3:42

neuroeconomics. Gives us a. Really good insight

3:44

into how. Our brain makes

3:46

decisions and how there are certain

3:48

parts of the brain that will

3:50

keep you paralyzed because they are

3:52

afraid of the consequences. The crazy.

3:54

Thing is that these parts of

3:57

the brain actually make incorrect calculations.

3:59

Which is. Part of the reason why

4:01

we, when you do something that's really

4:03

difficult right often times, you'll have this

4:06

experience of like. Wasn't that bad after all.

4:08

And if you stop and think about it for

4:10

a second, how is it that you thought it

4:12

was gonna be so bad in the turns out

4:15

to not be that bad after all as because

4:17

your brain is making an intentional miscalculation. So let's

4:19

start. By understanding the basic circuitry of loss

4:21

aversion and once we understand this will understand

4:24

why we end up in analysis, paralysis and

4:26

what to do about it. So let's take

4:28

a quick look at the circuits of the

4:30

brain that are involved in loss aversion. So

4:33

the first is the ventral tegmental area. Which.

4:35

Is also governed by dopa mean.

4:38

So. This are dopaminergic circuit of the

4:40

brain. This provides motivation, reward, and

4:42

behavioral reinforcements, right? So this is

4:44

a part of our brain that

4:46

tells us to do it. But

4:49

when we make a decision down here

4:51

we also have another part of our

4:54

brain. We have our a medulla are

4:56

limbic system this one that is also

4:58

nor address or jack and this will

5:00

become important later. But this is

5:02

what gives us. Fear. Or.

5:05

Predicts losses. Okay, so what ends

5:07

up happening is this circuit of

5:10

the brain And this circuit of

5:12

the brain eg, generate a response.

5:14

That. Then combined together

5:17

into. Some kind of calculation

5:19

in the striatum, and then. This

5:21

results in some kind of decision, so let's

5:23

just. Think through this. Okay, any time we're trying

5:25

to think about the decision, we think about the reward.

5:28

We think about what's the advantage of doing this. This

5:30

is done by the Be T A. And

5:32

then we also think about. The consequence?

5:34

okay like will or should I break up with

5:36

this person or not. Well let's see like if

5:38

I break up with this person may be all

5:40

feel alone. Maybe. I won't find

5:42

someone. will I be able to find

5:44

someone? There's a lot of uncertainty here

5:46

and. then what happens is weak sort of end

5:49

up over here and unless this decision is made.

5:51

in the right where it less this calculation isn't

5:53

the right weight we end up not making a

5:55

decision is a the same super simple right we

5:57

think about the potential advantages we think about the

5:59

potential consequence and then we

6:01

result in the decision. And the reason

6:03

that I'm paralyzed is because I don't

6:06

have enough information to

6:08

make the appropriate calculation. So it feels

6:10

like in my brain I'm spinning my

6:12

wheels. I think through the same stuff

6:14

over and over and over again, but

6:16

this remains a question mark. There's no

6:18

decision to be made because I need more

6:21

information. Turns out that the reason that you

6:23

can't make a decision is because this guy

6:25

over here is is intentionally

6:29

divorced from reality.

6:32

And this is insane. And if

6:34

we want to overcome analysis paralysis,

6:36

what we actually need to do

6:38

is rein in this circuit of

6:40

the brain to be more commensurate

6:43

with reality. And once it is

6:45

more commensurate with reality, our ability

6:47

to act will become easier.

6:50

So let me just give you all a simple example of this,

6:52

right? So anytime you have analysis paralysis,

6:54

what it boils down to is you

6:57

can't act because what if something goes

6:59

wrong, right? That's the essence of

7:01

it. So your brain is worried

7:03

about a potential loss. All

7:05

of this effort without some kind of

7:08

gain. What if I put in all

7:10

of this effort, resources, time, energy, and

7:12

what if it doesn't work out? So

7:14

your mind is predicting the

7:16

loss. And if you sort of

7:18

think about it, that's why you can't act, right? Because there

7:20

could be a potential loss. There could be something that

7:22

goes wrong, and then all my effort is wasted.

7:25

So if you really look at what paralyzes you,

7:27

it's not the calculation. It's that there's

7:29

a chance that something could go wrong.

7:32

If I could eliminate the

7:34

chance that something could go wrong or reduce

7:37

the chance that something could go wrong, would

7:39

it be easier for you to act? And

7:41

if the answer to that question is yes, we're going

7:44

to show you exactly how to do that.

7:46

So this is where we get to a

7:48

couple of experiments about neuroeconomics. And

7:50

this is what's really weird, okay? So a lot

7:53

of this stuff isn't going to make logical sense

7:55

because it's not logical because our brain works in

7:57

an illogical way. that

8:00

we understand is that if I have

8:02

$5 and I have

8:04

an object that is worth $5, these are not

8:08

worth the same in my mind. Literally

8:10

what my brain does is anytime I'm thinking about

8:13

purchasing something, okay, so I have the $5 in

8:15

my hand, I want to buy a $5 object. What

8:18

my brain does is thinks about all of the

8:20

possibilities of the $5, right? I

8:23

could do this with $5, I could buy that,

8:25

I could get a coffee, I could get a

8:27

digital cosmetic, I could order a book on sale,

8:29

I could do all of these things with $5.

8:32

Oh my God, imagine all the stuff I could do with $5. And

8:34

then what happens is we think about the object itself

8:36

and what does the object do? It can only do

8:38

one thing. So then my brain decides,

8:41

okay, even though these two things are technically

8:43

worth the same, my brain values the

8:45

$5 more. Now

8:47

that may make perfect sense, but now this is when things get

8:49

weird. So let's say I

8:52

have an object with $5, worth $5,

8:54

sorry, and I'm thinking about selling

8:56

the object. So then what

8:58

happens is my brain does the opposite. It

9:01

actually thinks to myself, oh my God, I have this $5 coffee

9:03

mug, this is the best coffee mug, I

9:05

enjoy this coffee mug every single day. It's

9:08

really crazy, but like, man, I love this coffee mug so

9:10

much and if I sold it, I wouldn't be able to

9:13

use this coffee mug anymore. And so now

9:15

what we sort of think about is the

9:17

value of the object and then we

9:19

end up thinking a little bit about the value

9:21

of $5. So now

9:24

that's kind of weird, but like there's very

9:26

little value in the $5 if we already own

9:28

the object. So this is what's kind of weird,

9:31

but the science of loss

9:33

aversion teaches us that that

9:35

which you already own is

9:38

worth more to you than

9:40

a possibility of something else. Now this may

9:42

sound kind of weird, but I want you all to just

9:44

think about this for a second, okay? So

9:47

anytime you're thinking about, let's say, should I

9:49

major in this particular thing in college? Should

9:52

I study this in college? So think about it, in that

9:54

moment what you own is a lot of free time,

9:56

right? So this is your time, you haven't committed

9:58

to a major. in this

10:00

moment is the possibility of choosing the right thing. There

10:02

are a lot of sort of things that you own

10:04

already. I know it sounds kind of weird but this

10:06

is how it works. And in

10:08

the moment that you commit to something,

10:11

it's either it works out or it doesn't work

10:13

out. But right now, before you make a

10:15

choice, you have all of these

10:17

possibilities available. This is like having the $5.

10:20

And then the other thing that's really weird

10:22

about this is that the duration of ownership

10:24

matters. So the longer that

10:26

you hold the $5 or the longer

10:28

that you own the object, the more

10:30

it is worth to you. And

10:33

this explains why it is really confusing but

10:35

a lot of people I work with will, let's

10:37

say, waste their life playing video games. They say,

10:39

I've been playing video games for 10 years and

10:41

oh my god, people

10:43

think that logically if you've been

10:45

wasting your life for 10 years, then

10:48

that you should be more motivated to do something

10:51

with it, right? So if it's like, okay, I wasted

10:53

a day like not that big of a deal but

10:55

once I waste a month, I'll be more motivated. If

10:57

I waste a year, I'll be more motivated because I

10:59

have all this catching up to do. But

11:01

the science of loss aversion teaches us

11:03

that the longer that you hold in

11:06

a particular pattern, the longer that you

11:08

engage in this dopaminergic activity, the more

11:10

it matters to you, the more that

11:12

it you become attached to it and

11:15

the harder it is to give up.

11:17

So we literally value things that

11:19

we've been doing and things that

11:21

we own for a longer period of

11:24

time. So the value of that

11:26

which you own is worth more

11:28

to you than a potential possibility. And

11:31

this explains some of our analysis

11:33

paralysis because if I'm in a

11:35

relationship, let's say, and the

11:38

relationship isn't very good, let's

11:40

say it's only a 2 out of 10 and

11:43

I look at the rest of the world and I think

11:45

to myself, okay, there's a lot of people out there that

11:47

I could have a 5 out of 10 relationship with. The

11:50

problem is that once you already

11:52

own this relationship, your

11:54

brain amplifies this by 2 to

11:56

3 times. Literally, we sort of know

11:58

what the number is. And this also

12:00

changes with the duration of the ownership. So

12:03

the longer that you've been in a relationship,

12:05

the more that your brain values it,

12:07

even if objectively it is

12:10

not worth very much. Okay?

12:12

So now we begin to see one calculation,

12:14

and this will fit in more, but that

12:16

the duration of ownership and what you own

12:19

actually increases the value of something in

12:21

your mind, even if it is objectively

12:24

worth less. We'll talk about how to

12:27

deal with that information or how to use it more applicable,

12:29

but this is the first bias that we need to understand.

12:31

The second thing that we need to understand is a temporal

12:33

bias. Now, this is going

12:35

to sound kind of confusing, like a lot of

12:37

stuff in this video, because a lot of stuff

12:39

is not logical because it's actually divorced from reality.

12:42

So let's understand the temporal bias. Okay?

12:46

So remember, we have the ventral tegmental area, which

12:48

gives us dopamine, which gives us our

12:50

experience of a reward. And then we

12:52

have our amygdala, which gives us our

12:54

fear, which gives us our projection of

12:56

loss. So here I am

12:58

trying to make a decision about the future.

13:00

So I don't know if this makes sense,

13:03

but when we make a decision about the

13:05

future, when we're worrying about the future, the

13:08

pain of a future

13:10

loss can be experienced

13:12

today. But the

13:14

dopamine reward from a

13:17

future accomplishment cannot be

13:19

experienced today. This is

13:21

screwed up. So anytime you sort

13:23

of look at something that you're doing, right,

13:25

let's say I'm picking a major in college.

13:28

So the exhilaration of graduating

13:30

four years from now with a degree

13:33

doesn't give me any dopamine. It's

13:35

just a possibility. It doesn't activate this

13:37

part of my brain. Thinking about

13:39

the future, thinking about how much fun

13:41

a game is going to be does

13:43

not release a surge of dopamine. The

13:45

thing that is screwed up about our

13:47

brain is that a future

13:49

loss can be

13:52

experienced today. So literally,

13:54

if you were stuck in analysis paralysis

13:56

and you're thinking about the benefits and you're

13:58

thinking about the losses, The pain

14:00

of the loss can be experienced

14:02

in the present moment, even if

14:05

you haven't lost anything. And it

14:07

is that pain of loss, right,

14:09

that you experience over here, this,

14:11

you get this signal, we

14:13

get this one, right? So this one actually

14:15

comes in to our brain is like, ouch,

14:17

this hurts. But we don't get

14:19

any of the prospective pleasure. This remains empty.

14:22

And what this results in is it keeps

14:24

us stuck. And if only things

14:26

were that easy. It turns out that

14:28

things are actually even worse than this.

14:31

So it isn't just that you can

14:33

experience a future loss in the present,

14:35

which will paralyze you from acting because

14:38

it hurts so much. It's

14:40

that the amount of loss that

14:42

you experience is two times what

14:45

it actually is. Okay, so

14:48

this is literally what we know. So when

14:50

our brain makes a calculation about the future,

14:53

it cuts the reward in 50% or one half. And

14:57

it actually doubles the size of

14:59

the loss. So let's take

15:01

a quick look at a paper that sort

15:03

of illustrates how screwed up this is. So

15:06

while potential loss has a significantly greater

15:08

effect on choice than potential gain in

15:10

both adolescents and adults, this is looking

15:12

at specifically adolescents. But the key thing

15:14

here to understand is that

15:17

we value losses more

15:19

than we value gains by a factor

15:21

of about two. So I know that sounds

15:23

kind of bizarre, but what that literally means

15:25

is any time you are faced with some

15:27

kind of analysis paralysis, your

15:29

brain is actually doubling the

15:31

cost of what you're trying

15:33

to do and cutting in

15:35

half the benefit of what you're trying

15:38

to do. And if you've kind of gone through

15:40

life, you sort of notice this, right? You've noticed

15:42

that, okay, you're really worried about something going

15:44

wrong and your brain is like, this could go wrong and

15:46

this could go wrong and everything could fall apart. And then

15:48

you end up doing it and you're like, you know

15:50

what? It wasn't that bad after all. I see this

15:53

a lot even in children who are getting

15:55

vaccines or getting injections where it's like,

15:57

okay, the kid is terrified of the

15:59

shot. Oh my God, this shot is

16:01

gonna hurt so much. But you get the

16:03

shot, it lasts like less than five seconds

16:05

and then you kind of feel fine and

16:07

everything is okay. And so it turns out

16:09

that because of evolutionary reasons, our brain has

16:11

learned how to amplify

16:14

perspective losses in

16:17

order to protect us from making

16:19

mistakes. But the world that we live

16:21

in now has changed drastically from when we

16:23

were like primates living in the wilderness and

16:25

we were like trying to figure out whether

16:28

we should try to hunt down this deer

16:30

when we also see tiger tracks. So

16:33

this is the problem. The world that

16:35

we live in today has a lot

16:37

of uncertainty. And in all of this

16:39

uncertainty, there are a lot of possible

16:41

losses that you could experience. The

16:44

challenge is that in your brain, all

16:46

of those possible losses

16:49

literally activate your

16:52

loss experience in the

16:54

brain. They activate your fear response center,

16:56

they activate your amygdala, and those

16:58

things decrease your motivation. They make

17:00

it hard for you to act. So

17:03

not only is this temporal component where

17:05

we can experience the losses of the

17:07

future in the present and we can't

17:09

experience the gains, but also there

17:11

is an amplification of the signal. So

17:14

now the question becomes, what on

17:16

earth do we do about it? And this

17:19

is where there's good news because in the

17:21

same way that our brain is kind of

17:23

screwed up, there are other revelations that we

17:25

have that can help us almost trick the

17:28

brain into overcoming

17:30

analysis paralysis and acting.

17:32

The first thing that we

17:34

need to talk about is order of operations. So

17:36

I don't know if y'all remember this, but if

17:38

we kind of go back up here, we

17:41

remember that that which we own

17:44

already is worth more

17:46

than a perspective gain, right? So if we kind of go

17:48

back to this idea of the $5 in our hand versus

17:52

the $5 object, this is worth

17:55

more. So in our

17:57

brain, literally the Order of

17:59

Our Thoughts. Mattress. And. I'll give

18:01

you a very, very simple example of this:

18:03

See you wake up in the morning. And

18:05

you say I want to play video.

18:08

Games. And then your

18:10

brain says but. I. Should

18:12

work I want. To.

18:14

Game but. I

18:17

should.dot. And. If

18:19

you pay attention to your thoughts,

18:22

in or out analysis paralysis. What?

18:24

You will find his some combination.

18:27

Of this structure all the time, right?

18:29

Throw the best birthday party ever that

18:31

your child will always. Have

18:36

a lawyer. For.

18:39

Divorce. Actually started at three hundred

18:41

dollars at all birthday parties include pizza

18:43

throwing, a party where a widow for

18:45

shows, groups offers. Limitations at all for

18:47

a trash is a big air tram only

18:50

embark is a birthday party. You and

18:52

your kids will never forget. Book your

18:54

part. Is it bigger? Come on for

18:56

the fun Never and visit biggerusa.com What

18:59

Columbus or Details. I really don't

19:01

wanna be in this relationship but I

19:03

could be alone forever. He really

19:05

do want to. Be. In this relationship. But I have

19:07

feelings for this other person so we have all

19:09

of these kinds of. Initial. Thought

19:12

followed by but.dot.this is where

19:14

once again, Neuroeconomics teaches us

19:16

something really. Interesting. whatever

19:18

thought you think first.

19:21

Is worth way more in

19:23

your decision making then the

19:25

thought afterward. The. First thought

19:27

is more likely to be what you

19:29

go with. Then. The second thought and

19:32

I've seen this in my work as an

19:34

addiction. Psychiatry. So. What I've noticed

19:36

when I saw read the paper were equipped with me because

19:38

when I work with people. Who are addicted To Stop. When.

19:40

I noticed is that the order of their

19:42

thoughts changes. Hey. I really want to

19:44

have a drink today, but I shouldn't. And then

19:46

eventually what starts to happen. As they wake up in

19:49

the morning they say wow. I I really

19:51

really need to take care of X, Y and Z.

19:53

Today I have this to do I This do. Mean.

19:56

It would be really nice to have a drink so what

19:58

starts to. Happen. Is the temporal. The

20:00

order of their thoughts changes, and

20:02

what Neuroeconomics teaches us is whichever.

20:04

Thought you think first is

20:07

going to have a stronger.

20:09

Motivational impact. So

20:12

if you are trying to do. Something Another

20:14

sounds kind of weird, but what we really

20:16

want you to do is think in. The

20:18

direction that you naturally. Want to

20:20

go first? right? So if you're

20:22

trying to struggle with gaming addiction, wake up first

20:25

thing in the morning and think yourself. This

20:27

is what I really need to accomplish. Today rights

20:29

as Start immediately thinking about the direction that

20:31

you want to move in and then your

20:33

mind will come up with other reasons bought

20:35

I want a game Are not saying that

20:37

this is. Going. To work one hundred percent.

20:39

There's more to it, but we actually know

20:41

from studies of neuroeconomics that if you can

20:44

change the order of you're thinking. It

20:46

will start to result in. A motivational change

20:48

and committed can potentially movie on

20:50

the right direction. The second thing

20:52

that we're going to talk about

20:54

his intermix to losses. This one

20:56

is Huge. So here's what we

20:58

know. Imagine for a moment that

21:00

you are playing one game of

21:02

your favorite whatever immobile Fps, whatever

21:04

you're queuing up for one round

21:06

or something. Is that game is

21:09

a loss. How. Much does it. Hurt

21:11

right? You play one game in a day

21:13

and you lose. It hurts a lot. And

21:15

in fact, if you're like me, you never. Just

21:17

play one game a day, right? If you.

21:20

Only. Can play one game a day in. There are

21:22

times in your life. Where you could you up for

21:24

one route? You actually don't Because what if the

21:26

game goes bad? You don't want to just play

21:28

one game and lose. But.

21:31

If. You have ten. Hours. To

21:33

play you're going a queue up ten. Times you

21:35

can afford to lose the first game, it's

21:37

not that big of a deal. So we

21:39

look at these two scenarios and sit there.

21:41

Literally the same, right? So I played one

21:43

game. And I've lost that one game. but

21:45

in one scenarios this is okay. let's just

21:48

queue up and plane other and the other.

21:50

Scenario: This hurts a lot because things

21:52

had ended. So this is another

21:54

thing that we understand about loss aversion. When

21:56

we set a particular. And

21:58

point the past. possibility of a

22:01

loss hurts way more. But

22:03

if we have intermixed losses and gains,

22:05

which means we have some wins and

22:07

some losses, each of those

22:09

losses hurts way less. So

22:12

what this practically means is if you're thinking about

22:15

picking a particular major in college, you sort

22:17

of pick your end point in your mind

22:19

at four years. And you think to

22:21

yourself, at the end of four years, what if I've

22:23

made a mistake? Oh my God, I don't know what to

22:25

do. If I picked the wrong thing and then I can't

22:27

find a job, because that's our particular end

22:30

point. So the way that we frame

22:32

the end determines how much the

22:34

loss hurts. And remember, the more

22:36

that the loss hurts, the more

22:38

it activates our amygdala and the

22:40

more paralyzed it keeps us. So let

22:42

me give you all a different scenario. Let's say I said,

22:44

okay, you've got 10 years to

22:47

figure out what you're going to do with your

22:49

life. You've got 10 years to sort out

22:51

your career. Are you willing

22:53

to spend four out of your 10

22:56

years to go to college and get

22:58

a particular degree? Now just think about

23:00

how different that feels, right?

23:03

Picking a major that will determine the

23:05

rest of your life versus

23:08

you've got 10 years to figure it out.

23:10

University or college is an option. You can

23:13

spend four years doing that and you've got

23:15

six years left if things don't work out.

23:17

Just notice how different that feels mentally. And

23:19

this is because we are now

23:22

utilizing intermixed losses and gains. So

23:24

what we want to practically do is if

23:26

you are paralyzed with some kind of analysis,

23:29

chances are you are looking at an

23:31

end point. And that end point, if

23:33

you extend it further out, instead of

23:35

saying, is this the right person for me

23:37

or not? Should I break up with this person

23:40

or not break up with this person? Try to

23:42

add more time to the end of it. Try

23:44

to really think about things in terms

23:46

of intermixed losses and gains. This

23:48

may actually particularly go wrong. That may

23:50

happen. There's no way we can't predict. We don't know that

23:52

things aren't going to go wrong. But the more

23:54

time that we add to the end of

23:56

our mental equation, the easier it is to

23:59

act. that the goal of

24:01

this video is not to say that

24:03

you should act or shouldn't act, it's

24:05

to help you overcome analysis paralysis. And

24:07

one of the most powerful things that

24:09

keeps us paralyzed is a particular conception

24:12

of endpoint. As you extend

24:14

that endpoint out, it will be easier to

24:16

act. And now we get to the third

24:18

thing. So the third thing is actually going

24:20

to be a combination of a couple of things.

24:23

And what we're going to do is go back to our

24:25

core structure, because we know

24:27

that there are multiple things that

24:29

modify this core structure. Okay, so

24:31

we've got dopamine, we've got noradrenergic

24:34

transmission over here, and now this is

24:36

going to become important. So remember I

24:38

said that there's a box over here,

24:40

and then we end up with a decision.

24:42

So now we're going to learn

24:44

about how to fix this system and what's

24:46

in the box. Okay? So

24:49

the first thing is remember that this

24:51

side gets amplified by 2x, and this

24:53

side gets cut in half. Okay?

24:56

So the first thing that we can do is sort of

24:59

cognitively recognize that. Right? So

25:01

recognize, just notice that your mind is making

25:03

things twice as bad as they should be,

25:05

and that the gains are going to be half

25:07

as much as what you expect, unless

25:09

you're on Wall Street bets, in which case it's

25:11

all screwed up, which is why it's a beautiful

25:13

corner of the internet. Okay? So

25:15

now let's understand a couple of things.

25:18

The more that you can engage in

25:20

emotional regulation, the easier this equation will

25:22

be. So this is a

25:24

problem that we run into with analysis paralysis. We

25:27

turn to logic or

25:29

calculations. Right? We think

25:31

about a lot of variables, A

25:33

plus B plus C minus, and

25:36

here's the loss aversion stuff, but

25:38

this could go wrong, this could

25:40

go wrong, this could go

25:42

wrong, and then we don't know what to do. So

25:45

the cool thing is that we tend to

25:47

think that if we logically think through this

25:49

equation over and over and over again, like we're some

25:52

math professor, right, who's working on some

25:54

famous equation, that eventually we'll figure it

25:57

out. That's not what we need to

25:59

do. If we literally engage in emotional

26:01

regulation techniques. We will diminish the

26:03

size of these variables and it will be

26:06

easier to act. We've talked a lot

26:08

in our channel about different ways to

26:10

regulate emotions and the lexithymium and all

26:12

this kind of stuff. But literally if

26:14

you have analysis paralysis, you don't need

26:16

more information, you don't need to spend

26:18

more time calculating, you need to calm down

26:21

your amygdala so at least you can go

26:23

from a 2x to

26:25

a 1x estimation, which is

26:27

literally what we know from the science of neuroeconomics

26:29

and loss aversion. If you can

26:31

employ emotional regulation strategies, it will be

26:33

easier to make a decision because your amygdala

26:36

will not be controlling you. And

26:38

remember also that this is a rigged game because

26:40

you don't get any benefit of dopamine from

26:42

a hypothetical, but you do suffer

26:45

from a potential loss,

26:47

a hypothetical loss in the present, which

26:49

is completely screwed up. The next

26:52

thing that we can do is

26:54

reduce our noradrenergic transmission. So

26:56

let's take a quick look at

26:58

a paper that sort of illustrates

27:00

this. Loss aversion might rely on

27:03

a similar amygdala striatal noradrenergic circuit

27:05

in humans. Supporting this

27:07

hypothesis, positron emission tomography

27:10

assays of noradrenergic activity

27:12

have found that individuals

27:14

with lower adrenergic transporter

27:16

density, presumably leading to, this

27:18

is the key thing, greater noradrenergic

27:20

transmission are more loss averse. This is the

27:22

sentence that we're looking at, okay? So I

27:25

know it's kind of like weird because I

27:27

just read a bunch of crap, but

27:29

I've deciphered this stuff for you. Here's

27:31

the takeaway. The more adrenergic

27:33

transmission you have, the more power

27:36

loss aversion will have over you.

27:38

So I want you all to

27:40

really think about this too, okay? Because this

27:42

is weird. So when you think something is

27:44

going to go wrong, what

27:47

I want you all to understand is that

27:49

the way that your brain calculates what

27:51

goes wrong is not based

27:54

on reality. It depends

27:56

on the level of your

27:58

noradrenergic transmission. So then

28:00

the question becomes how can

28:03

we reduce nor adrenergic transmission

28:05

and this is huge so stress fatigue

28:08

inability to sleep

28:11

all of these things Increase

28:13

your nor adrenergic transmission, right? So

28:15

what we literally know is that

28:17

when you are stressed out in

28:19

some way your cortisol levels increase

28:21

your Adrenaline levels increase and

28:23

then related to adrenaline is also

28:26

nor adrenaline So like we have

28:28

epinephrine we have nor epinephrine So

28:30

all of this these kinds of

28:32

stress hormones will literally amplify the

28:35

pain of a potential loss as We

28:38

amplify the pain of a potential loss it

28:40

becomes difficult for you to act So

28:43

let's kind of come back to our example Should

28:45

I major in this thing and if you

28:47

look at people in college you'll notice that

28:49

some of them you're like how the hell

28:51

Do these people do this? They just pick

28:53

a major and they seem to be excited

28:55

in life But I am

28:57

not able to be excited I am so

28:59

worried and you look at those people

29:02

and they're happy-go-lucky. They're chilling. They're

29:04

vibing They're able to enjoy things and

29:06

that's because they're adrenergic their nor adrenergic

29:08

level is low They are less stressed

29:10

out and we seem to think That

29:13

okay, they have figured everything out,

29:16

which is why they are so

29:18

carefree We think that

29:20

once I figure everything out then I will

29:22

be carefree The beauty of

29:24

what neuroeconomics teaches us is it's

29:26

literally the other way around you

29:28

be carefree first and Then

29:31

it will be very easy to make decisions

29:33

and you may say to yourself But dr.

29:35

K that's not going to work because I

29:37

can't be carefree Until I

29:40

make this decision and this is exactly

29:42

the intervention that we need to talk

29:44

about that is factually incorrect but

29:46

we know from yogic principles of detachment

29:48

and vairagya and all these

29:50

other things is that you literally if you

29:53

decrease your stress level by yoga or meditation

29:55

or even Sleeping a full night or reducing

29:57

your caffeine intake or reducing your substance use

30:00

intake is that your stress level will

30:02

objectively go down. Anything that

30:04

you can do to decrease your noradrenergic

30:06

transmission will make you more carefree. The

30:08

more carefree you are, the easier it

30:10

is to make a decision. And then we come

30:13

to the last thing, which is

30:16

where we are the most screwed, especially

30:18

in this community. The last variable to

30:20

consider is interoception. So

30:23

the more interoceptive you

30:25

are, the more loss

30:27

aversion will hurt. So what does

30:29

interoception mean? So generally speaking, if we

30:31

look at human beings, they pay attention to two

30:33

different things. Some people pay

30:35

attention to the outside world, and

30:38

some people pay attention to the

30:40

inside world. So if you know

30:42

people who pay attention to the outside world, they

30:44

can be a little bit more materialistic, right? They're

30:46

not so aware of what's going on in here.

30:48

They're not focused on how the

30:50

bag that they purchased, let's say I

30:52

purchased some designer bag. And then

30:55

that bag makes me happy. So some people

30:57

are like, wow, this bag is really great.

30:59

And then there are people like me and

31:01

probably like you because you're here, you pay

31:03

attention to in here. Wow, look at this

31:05

happiness that I feel from this bag. Our

31:07

focus is not in the outside world. Our

31:09

focus is in our internal

31:11

environment. And the more

31:14

interoceptive you are, the more vulnerable

31:16

you are to loss aversion, and

31:18

the amygdala kind of gets hyperactivated.

31:20

So people in our community especially

31:22

pay a lot of attention to

31:24

themselves, right? They're thinking a lot

31:27

internally, they're feeling a lot internally,

31:29

they're paying attention to their internal

31:31

signals. It makes you awesome. It's

31:33

a big advantage in spiritual

31:36

growth because the more interoceptive you are,

31:38

the easier it is, or the more tuned

31:40

you are to your internal environment. The problem

31:42

is that generally speaking, if we kind of

31:44

think about it, right? Spiritual growth and worldly

31:46

success tend to be viewed

31:48

in some ways as opposite ends

31:50

of the spectrum. And so as

31:53

our interoception increases, as we pay

31:55

attention to more internal signals, and these can

31:57

be our thoughts, they can be the logical ways that we

31:59

can do it, we calculate through things, they

32:01

can be our internal emotional environment, the

32:03

more vulnerable we are to all of

32:05

this loss aversion circuitry. So

32:07

the solution there is to externalize

32:09

your attention. And the very practical

32:11

way to think about this is to

32:14

simply just do things that move your

32:16

attention outside of your head. So if

32:18

you are struggling with analysis paralysis, where

32:20

is the focus of your

32:23

attention? Logic, calculation, fear.

32:25

Instead what you need to do

32:27

is have conversations. Collect

32:29

data and data is not reading random

32:31

crap on the internet. Go and talk

32:33

to people. Explore things. Take a

32:36

look at actual data if you can. So

32:38

the more that you can externalize your attention,

32:40

you can even do things like talk with

32:42

other human beings about other things. You can

32:44

go for a walk, you can play with a

32:46

dog, you can go to a yoga studio, you

32:48

can go out for a cup of coffee, whatever

32:50

it is. You can smell the smell

32:53

the roses. Whatever you want to

32:55

do. The more that you externalize

32:57

your attention, literally what happens is

32:59

this amygdala loss aversion circuitry in

33:01

your brain starts to become less

33:03

powerful. As that loss aversion

33:05

circuitry becomes less powerful, it becomes easier to

33:08

act. So let's summarize. So a lot of

33:10

people today struggle with

33:12

analysis paralysis. We have all

33:14

kinds of problems around gender dynamics and dating

33:16

and professional careers and inflation. We have all

33:18

of these problems. The world is filled with

33:20

uncertainty. So when our brain is filled with

33:22

this and anytime we think about acting, we

33:24

think about the pros and we think about

33:26

the cons, the problem is that

33:29

anytime we think about the cons, it

33:31

activates our negative emotional circuitry. As

33:33

we activate our negative emotional

33:35

circuitry, we feel the pain

33:38

of a hypothetical loss in

33:40

the present. In that pain

33:42

of the hypothetical loss because it

33:44

cannot be balanced by the pleasure

33:47

of a hypothetical gain,

33:49

right? So I can think

33:51

about what it feels like to

33:53

get dumped by my girlfriend or

33:55

boyfriend, but I cannot experience the

33:57

pleasure of a hypothetical orgasm. if

34:00

I do not get dumped. This is

34:02

a fundamental mismatch with the

34:04

way that our brain experiences

34:07

potential gains and potential losses.

34:10

And since we have this

34:12

imbalance, it biases us towards

34:14

the loss. And so literally

34:16

our brain experiences more loss

34:18

than gain when we're making a calculation. So

34:20

what do we do about this? So our

34:22

brain is kind of weird but there are a couple

34:24

things we can take advantage of. The first is that

34:26

the first thought that we have is worth more

34:29

in terms of motivation and action than the

34:31

second thought we have. So literally

34:33

rearrange your thinking as best as you

34:36

can. The second thing to

34:38

consider is intermixed losses and gains. If

34:40

we pick a particular endpoint, that will

34:43

hurt so much more. So instead

34:45

what we want to do is extend our time scale

34:47

and give ourselves more time for

34:50

wins and losses. Because if you

34:52

really think about analysis paralysis, what is

34:54

it that paralyzes you? It's this concept

34:56

of if there is a setback, it's

34:59

all over, right? If I break up

35:01

with this person, it's all over. I'll

35:03

never find anyone ever again. So

35:06

really pay attention to where is the endpoint in

35:08

your mind. And the third thing is really looking

35:10

at sort of the neuroscience of that circuit. And

35:12

there are three things that we can do. Emotionally

35:15

reduce our fear and loss aversion will

35:17

get better. Secondly, we can reduce

35:19

our stress level which affects our nor adrenergic

35:22

circuitry, which means that if you are stuck

35:24

in analysis paralysis, the most important thing

35:26

that you can do is to get a good

35:28

night's sleep. Remember that it's not

35:30

making the right decision that makes you chill.

35:33

It is becoming chill first that allows you

35:35

to make the right decision. And this is

35:37

also where people get so stuck, right? Because

35:40

so many people I've worked with assume

35:42

that their mental well-being is a

35:44

consequence of the right decision. That's

35:46

why you're so fucking paralyzed. Because

35:48

if you make the wrong decision,

35:50

then your life is ruined. So

35:52

it becomes so important. You're so

35:54

stressed out about it. It's literally

35:56

the other way around. Become

35:59

stress-free. First, by Ragu,

36:01

a detachment, check out our guides, check out our other

36:03

videos, we have lots of resources on that, and decisions

36:05

will become easy. The last

36:07

thing is y'all, like me,

36:10

have an advantage and disadvantage.

36:12

During the character creation screen,

36:14

we picked interoceptive. Interoceptive means

36:17

you're thoughtful, you're careful, you're

36:19

spiritual, but you also amplify

36:21

the negative signals of

36:24

loss aversion. So the more that you can

36:26

externalize your attention, the better off you'll be.

36:28

So I'd love it if y'all could give

36:30

this stuff a shot and let me know

36:32

how it works for you. Hey, Dr.

36:34

K, how do I get my kid

36:36

to put down the game without it being

36:38

a fight every single time? The problem with

36:41

gaming is that it tricks our brain into

36:43

being a substitute for love.

36:45

Once we start to get our psychological

36:47

needs met through the game, that's when

36:50

we become addicted. How to Raise a

36:52

Healthy Gamer combines the latest in neuroscience

36:54

research along with a decade of clinical

36:57

practice. Check it out anywhere books are

36:59

sold.