You probably knew that. Even the imaginary person in my example knew it. But knowledge isn’t good enough to conquer anyone’s fear of flying. If it were, no one would be afraid of flying. If you want to rewire your mind to fix an irrational fear, logic won’t get it done. You must fight fire with fire. You need something irrational and sticky, just like the irrational fear you are targeting for eviction.
Now, what would be a tool to fix your thinking that is irrational but works anyway?
Answer: Reframes.
In our imaginary example, I would not target the fear of flying even if that is the only problem on the table. I would instead target the general idea that one can evaluate risks by looking at a situation and using common sense. This reframe will take some explaining, so stick with me.
Usual Frame: Safe things are safe. Dangerous things are dangerous.
Reframe: Safe-looking things can be dangerous. Dangerous-looking things can be safe.
Consider the scene shown in the photo. I took the picture while writing this chapter. Young people are climbing jagged rocks up a perilous path to reach a spot from which they can jump into the ocean below. The top of the rocks, where jumpers go, looks to be about as high as the roof of a two-story house. In the water below are some swimmers watching the show, while snorkelers happily swim past the rocks looking for turtles and whatnot. Below the surface on most days are scuba excursions that travel around that cliff to their preferred destinations and back.
Question: Which group has the highest risk?
If I hadn’t already primed you, you might have said the people making the perilous journey to the top of the cliff are taking the greatest risk. Or perhaps the scuba divers because they have the risk of equipment failure underwater. Or maybe you think the spectators floating in the waters below are in danger of being struck by a jumper.
But it turns out that snorkeling is (probably) the most dangerous activity in this photo precisely because it seems the safest. Weak swimmers with snorkel equipment are tempted to go too far past the cliff without realizing how hard it might be to get back. It’s a safe-looking activity that is dangerous. I know this from personal experience. I’m reasonably fit, and I had to push hard to get back.
The non-snorkeling swimmers below the cliffs lazily float out to that viewing area and back. They don’t risk the frothier waters.
The scuba divers and the cliff jumpers have the most dangerous-looking activities, but they can see that risk as clearly as you can. So they take extra-extra-extra care. They take so much care, they turn it into the safest thing happening at the beach.
Commercial air travel is similar. You can be forgiven for thinking it looks dangerous because it is, after all, a gigantic metal tube in the sky that is stuffed with humans and flown by a guy who just had a fight with his girlfriend and . . . she is the copilot on your flight. Or something like that. You get the point. The whole “flying” situation feels super-sketchy.
And that’s why it isn’t.
There would be no air travel if engineers and managers had not beaten the risk out of it until it is now one the safest things you can do.
The reframe I suggested is just something to repeat to yourself every time you are assessing risk: “Safe-looking things can be dangerous. Dangerous-looking things can be safe.” Keywords: “can be.”
The proposition here is that making it a habit to repeat the reframe every time you assess risks will, over time, make it your default first-take in the future. All it takes to reprogram your brain is focus and repetition. It doesn’t take truth or logic. Just repeat the phrase every time you get reminded of it and let the rest happen on its own.
If you don’t think simple repetition of phrases can program a brain, just look at anyone on the opposite side of politics from you. Don’t those people look to you as if they have been programmed with mindless slogans that don’t have any grounding in fact or logic?
They think the same thing about your team, whatever one that happens to be. And you’re both right. Ninety percent of political thought is phrase repetition. The good news for you is that reading this book will ensure your place in the 10 percent who know it.
So the next time you see a political story in the news, ask yourself if someone is trying to tell you a safe thing is dangerous or a dangerous thing is safe. That’s pretty much all of politics. Politicians and pundits convince their base to evaluate risk incorrectly by programming them with repeated phrases. That’s all it takes. Political persuasion is more powerful than the public understands.
Use that power for yourself. If you want your brain to act differently, remind it to do so with sticky, repeatable phrases. Over time, they become permanent structures in your mind. You are the author of your own experience.
Where Happiness Comes From
Have you noticed people seem less happy in recent years? Science suggests social media is making us sadder, and one assumes the news in general isn’t helping. The only good coming out of this realization is that we get to reframe our experience of happiness in a more useful form.
Usual Frame: Happiness comes from within.
Reframe: Use the external world to program your brain for happiness.
If you think happiness is just something happening inside your head, you are simultaneously right and in the wrong place for a solution. The way to reprogram your brain is by learning to treat your environment as a user interface for your brain.
Do you feel grumpy when you haven’t eaten lately? Try eating something. Suddenly you don’t feel so grumpy. That’s an example of using the physical environment to program your brain.
You already know the obvious ways to improve your mood by manipulating external things:
Eat when hungry.
Sleep when tired.
Exercise when stressed.
Have sex when you’re in the mood.
Work (the productive kind).
If you get the Big Five right, you’re probably happier than the people who don’t. Personally, I don’t enjoy sleeping, and I snack on healthy food all day long, so I don’t watch those two variables when tracking my happiness. But I do find a direct correlation between my happiness and the number of these three things I get done in my day:
Exercise
Sex
Work
If I do two-out-of-three of those, no matter which two, I have a “good” day. If I do all three, it’s a great day. If I only do one of those three—even if it’s the most fun activity on the list—I feel hollow by bedtime. The good news is that my two-out-of-three formula for happiness is achievable on most normal days. Your personal formula for happiness might add or subtract a few items compared to my list. But if you find your “Big Three” by experimenting and paying attention to outcomes, you can easily turn bad days into good. Just see what is missing on your checklist and go get it. I can’t tell you how many bad days I turned into good ones by exercising when I didn’t feel one hundred percent in the mood. I just knew it was one of my big three needs, and I knew how to meet it.
Let’s also add beauty to the list of external happiness inducers. When I checked into the hotel in which I am writing this sentence, I had two room options at the same price. One room had the vibe of a prison cell, and the other was like being in paradise. Same price, just different layout and design. (I chose the paradise one.) In general, when I’m in a physically beautiful place, I feel good, and when I’m in a visually barren place, I feel worse. Managing exposure to beautiful spaces is a simple way to boost your happiness.
If you’re looking for an explanation of why my top three or top five variables create happiness, my hypothesis is that acting in ways that are compatible with your biological imperatives creates happiness as the reward. I believe we evolved to find meaning and happiness in mating—and not much else—because that’s all any species needs to survive. A species only needs to be successful at making extra copies of itself. Everything else is less important.