What To Do About Your Broken Heart

A broken heart can really hurt. It can physically hurt and it can be distracting, obsessive, depressing and unrelenting. The internet offers a lot of advice about what to do when your heart is broken, but this advice is anecdotal, hit and miss at best. That's why I then searched for articles based on science and I found one the offered an effective way to lessen the pain of a broken heart.

At Scientific American, Psychologist Guy Winch discusses a study that considered three strategies, to see which of these best helped heartbroken subjects reduce their love feelings.

In the first condition, subjects focused on negative reappraisals of their ex-partner (eg, by responding to prompts about their ex’s annoying habits). In the second condition they were asked to reframe their loving feelings as less problematic (eg, by endorsing prompts such as ‘It’s okay to love someone I’m no longer with’). The last condition used distraction (eg, questions about the subjects’ favorite food) to get the participants’ mind off their heartbreak. The researchers found that only negative reappraisals were truly effective in reducing love feelings. However, doing so did increase feelings of unpleasantness.

According to Winch, although this unpleasantness might seem to be a big price to pay to reduce feelings of love, there are two ways to address this unpleasantness: 1) Remember that "when we are heartbroken, our mind is likely to bombard us with highly idealized snapshots, memories and thoughts both about our ex and about our relationship." When we force ourselves to remember the downsides of the relationship, we are correcting for these untrue idealized images that are causing the pain 2)  We shouldn't contemplate only the person to whom we were attracted. Instead, we should force ourselves to think of the dynamics  of the relationship itself.  That's where we can best see the problem, because quite often a relationship consists of two smart good-hearted people who merely lack the chemistry to be a pair.

In my experience, it might take some work to see the downside to a relationship, especially when one is the dumpee rather than the dumper. But it's not always difficult.  There might be low-hanging fruit, things like addictions or rampant dishonesty, things that would have been absolute deal-breakers on Day One.  If only your lover had revealed these things at the very beginning of your relationship.  Imagine a Match.com profile indicating: "I will tell you the opposite of what I'm really feeling when we discuss important issues."  Or "I will become annoyed when you come over to spend time with me because I'd rather spend time with my other friends, who like to get drink heavily."  For most of us, dysfunctions like these, if revealed up front, would destroy the possibility of ever having a first date.  Once a romance has been going on for months, the confirmation bias encourages us to overlook any evidence pointing to major problems like these.  Once the relationship fractures apart, major issues like these often become obvious, sad and embarrassing memories.  But once the relationship is over, stark bad memories like these are also the best medicine to lessen the pain of your broken heart.  The better the hurt, the better the cure.

Even in the absence of major issues, there are doubtless various reasons why any particular relationship failed.  There had to be friction and frustration, even if nothing "major," and even if the cause is ineffable. Even where one doesn't understand why the relationship was not smooth sailing, one certainly experienced that it was not smooth sailing.

Winch suggests the following as the best salve for a broken heart, whether the issues were major or minor:

If you are trying to get over heartbreak, make a list of the person’s faults as well as of the shortcomings of the actual relationship and keep that list on your phone. Whenever you find yourself having idealized thoughts and memories, whip out your phone and read a few reminders in order to balance your perceptions and remind yourself that your ex was not perfect and neither was the relationship.

I have tried this approach to the letter and I highly recommend it.  Reviewing your own long list of real grievances turns a wonderful movie about you and your ex-lover into a sad and frustrating movie that makes you want to throw popcorn at the screen and walk out.  Once you see your ex-lover as they were, not merely as you crave them, it's much easier to turn the page to a new chapter of your life.

What follows is Winch's TED talk on this same topic:

Continue ReadingWhat To Do About Your Broken Heart

Donald Hoffman’s version of the Matrix: Things might be Extremely Different than they Seem

I enthusiastically recommend this podcast featuring Donald Hoffman. Sam Harris and (his wife) Annaka sound, in equal parts, skeptical and intrigued, which makes for some deeply engaging conversation. Hoffman's thesis might challenge almost everything you think.  Hoffman argues that evolution has not honed us to have veridical perception (seeing things as they really are). Rather, natural selection has privileged evolutionary fitness to prevail over veridicality. This topic dovetails nicely with Andy Clark's theory of predictive processing, in which Andy portrays perception as a "controlled hallucination."

The first hour is free for non-subscribers. Here's the promo for the podcast:

In this episode of the Making Sense podcast Sam and Annaka Harris speak with Donald Hoffman about his book The Case Against Reality. They discuss how evolution has failed to select for true perceptions of the world, his “interface theory” of perception, the primacy of math and logic, how space and time cannot be fundamental, the threat of epistemological skepticism, causality as a useful fiction, the hard problem of consciousness, agency, free will, panpsychism, a mathematics of conscious agents, philosophical idealism, death, psychedelics, the relationship between consciousness and mathematics, and many other topics.

Donald Hoffman is a professor of cognitive science at the University of California, Irvine. He is the author of more than 90 scientific papers and his writing has appeared in Scientific American, Edge.org, The Atlantic, WIRED, and Quanta. In 2015, he gave a mind-bending TED Talk titled, “Do we see reality as it is?”


This teaser for this podcast is not mere hype.



An obvious example for illustrating Hoffman's thesis is color. We don't perceive wavelengths, much less the quantum physics even deeper down. To perceive these things would be too expensive (in terms of bandwidth) for rough and ready biological processors like human brains and bodies, and we don't need to fully understand the physics of the process in order to make use of color (or sounds or pain or shapes). For most of us, most of the time, we are trapped in the Matrix.

It is critical to note that there is NO COLOR in the objects "out there." Wavelengths of light are not colored. Color is something that is created only by the interaction between whatever is out there and our ability to engage with the world because it increases biological fitness. Here's the kicker . . . for Hoffman, everything is like color.  We don't need to understand the electronics and physics of the "objects" on our computer desktops in order to make excellent use off them.  Similarly, we often make excellent use of the things that we seem to encounter in the world, but it is entirely consistent with this observation that we don't deeply understand these things or we barely understand them.  A similar concern provoked Immanual Kant to divide the world into phenomena (how things appear to us) and noumena (things as they are in themselves).

The bottom line is that things might be incredibly useful to us as creatures trying to survive day-to-day, even when our understanding of these things is extremely lacking or even false. Useful trumps veridically-true to those of us who are often merely trying to survive to the next day. We human animals are happy to satisfice, even though we often conflate our hacked-up understandings of things with veridical truth.

In Paragraph 121 of The Gay Science, Nietzsche also pointed out that things that are untrue can often be useful:

Life is not an argument. We have arranged for ourselves a world in which we are able to live--by positing bodies, lines, planes, causes and effects, motion and rest, form and content; without these articles of faith no one could endure living! But that does not prove them. Life is not an argument; the conditions of life might include error

Continue ReadingDonald Hoffman’s version of the Matrix: Things might be Extremely Different than they Seem

The Hidden Trade-offs Made by Successful People

Shane Parrish has written another excellent post at Farnam Street Blog. The topic is trade-offs. We can't have it all, and we can benefit when we recognize the trade-offs we must make in every aspect of our lives:

Economics is all about tradeoffs. A tradeoff is loosely defined as any situation where making one choice means losing something else, usually forgoing a benefit or opportunity. We experience tradeoffs in zero-sum situations, when a plus in one area must be a negative in another. A core component of economic theory is the study of how we allocate scarce resources and negotiate opportunity costs.

Economics offers tools that we can use as guides for getting what we want out of life if we take economic lessons and apply them to resources other than money. We all know our money isn’t infinite, yet we end up treating our time and energy and attention as if they are. Many of us act as if there are no tradeoffs—we can just do everything if we try hard enough. The irony is that those who know how to make tradeoffs can get so much more out of life than those who try to get everything.


Parrish notes that successful-seeming people all make secret trade-offs. They are not great at everything. I have wondered about this when seeing so many people who I suspect are of modest means, driving cars much more expensive than mine, going out to eat and drink much more often than me, and generally conspicuously consuming much more than me. I have this fantasy where everyone's budget and bank and credit accounts floated above them, and I could then confirm, "Oh, they aren't saving for retirement and they are one missed paycheck from disaster!"  The same thing happens with time as with money.  We can't be super-competent at all things. When we are proficient at some things, it is always at the expense of other things.

Can we reach homeostasis? It's not easy per Parrish:

We’re constantly going off-kilter in one area or another and having to make course corrections. When one area goes well, another is usually sliding. It’s like a game of whack-a-mole. Focus on one area and it’s often to the detriment of another.


One solution to getting a grip on this problem that we must make trade-offs is to track your time. I did this for two months and it was extremely telling. I was spending time pursuing my declared life goals a LOT less than I spent time in mundane chores like cooking/eating/cleaning up, driving and various unproductive activities. I was unconsciously making choices to do less important things at the expense of the things that I treasure (good conversations with close friends, artistic pursuits, working on website and my book). I wrote about my approach to tracking time earlier here.

Parrish offers many other tips in his article. For instance, you need to get over the awkwardness that you won't be great at everything.  That would be impossible

I'm taking heed of the many good ideas in this excellent article.

Continue ReadingThe Hidden Trade-offs Made by Successful People

First Batch of Tumbled Rocks Keeps Me Grounded

When I was a boy, I saw rock tumblers for sale in the Sears Catalogue, but I never had one and never knew anyone who had one. Well . . . decades later I do have a rock tumbler and I have recently learned that there are lots of beautiful rocks to be found only about an hour from St. Louis.



After a month of tumbling in my basement, this is what rocks from a Missouri creek look like (a creek near Farmington, Missouri). They shine even though they are perfectly dry. They are fun to hold and fun to look at. They were all so shy, modest about their beauty, while sitting in the creek. But now they are spreading their little peacock tails. Up close, some of them look like abstract works of art. To see many more images, click on the title to this post and then check out the gallery of photos.

Since I obtained my rock tumbler (a Thumler Model B), I've reached out and found dozens of other people who are passionate about finding and polishing rocks, as well as making jewelry and other objects of art out of them. These rock hounds are all over the place, and all you need to do to make them show up is to mention rocks.



For me, this has been a wonderful hobby, above and beyond the thrill of locating a beautiful rock in a creek or in seeing these polished specimens. I tend to think in the abstract throughout the day. I do it at the drop of a hat. These rocks, on the other hand, are real. I want to hold them and feel them and admire their beauty. This hobby has been an excellent counter-weight to my tendency to philosophize. It has, indeed, kept me "grounded."

Continue ReadingFirst Batch of Tumbled Rocks Keeps Me Grounded

Survivorship Bias

Many of us are somewhat anxious, but there are other people out there who lack the ability to feel any anxiety.  Many of those flagrant risk-takers are not with us any more.  They died because they drove recklessly, explored base jumping and generally lived on the edge.  Many others who are no longer with us ignored long term risks like drinking, eating and smoking to excess.  Many of them struggled with cancer, heart diseases and strokes on their way out.

What we see at any given moment are only the survivors. We are the survivors.  We are not living among a true cross-section of humanity.  It's good to remind ourselves of that, because doing risky things puts us at risk, right?  We are living among those who have hit the lottery, and that includes more than a few of the risk takers who are here because they have been extraordinarily lucky.  Those risk-takers are interesting to us.  We watch them, sometimes with admiration, intrigued that they can do dangerous things and yet survive.  They seem to defy death, disease and immense financial risks.  But, again, we forget that we are not looking at a cross-section. Many people jump in and open new restaurants even though 80% of restaurants fail within four years.  When we decide to go out to eat at a restaurant, we are choosing only among the survivors.  The streets are also populated by hundreds of invisible ghost restaurants too.

We are looking at only the lucky ones, and this can mislead us to think that it is relatively easy to do those sorts of things and yet survive.  We might cheerfully announce that we are going to engage in risky behavior without doing a Bayesian analysis. This is exacerbated by the fact that we don't know enough to know the risks, an over-confidence invited by the Dunning Kruger Effect. 

Farnham Street Blog recently took a look at the Survivor Bias:

Can we achieve anything if we try hard enough? Not necessarily. Survivorship bias leads to an erroneous understanding of cause and effect. People see correlation in mere coincidence. We all love to hear stories of those who beat the odds and became successful, holding them up as proof that the impossible is possible. We ignore failures in pursuit of a coherent narrative about success.

Few would think to write the biography of a business person who goes bankrupt and spends their entire life in debt. Or a musician who tried again and again to get signed and was ignored by record labels. Or of someone who dreams of becoming an actor, moves to LA, and ends up returning a year later, defeated and broke. After all, who wants to hear that? We want the encouragement survivorship bias provides, and the subsequent belief in our own capabilities. . . . Most leaps of faith go wrong. It does not mean we should not try, just that we should be realistic with our understanding of reality.



How could I end this article without mentioning the biggest survivorship bias of them all? The eight billion human animals now populating the surface of the earth are all survivors of long unbroken lines of ancestors. We can look around and see only these those human beings who are actually here, not those whose ancestors failed to survive long enough to pass on the next generation at every generation, extending back to the beginnings of life on earth.  This survival of the fittest, natural selection, is sometimes referred to as "breed and weed," nature's amoral culling of ever-new versions of human beings, separating the survivors from those who do not survive.

I find this to be an immensely terrifying and awe-inspiring thought. If you are lucky enough be able to read this, you are a survivor in one of the most long-shot schemes you could ever imagine.  In order for you to be here, your parents had to meet at the right time, be attracted to each other, have sex at the right time and then someone had to take enough interest in you to raise you.  This had to happen twice for your parents to exist. Eight times for your great-grandparents to exist. These numbers grow exponentially as you you look back even a few hundred years.  This is even more stunning when you consider how quickly this occurred--even a millennium is not a long period of time when you break it into generations.  I illustrated this quick passage of time with a hypothetical visual in a post I titled, "Ancestors along the Highway."

On those days when you might not feel special, then, cheer up!  You are special! You are literally a survivor in a long line of organisms extending back to shew-like mammals who found opportunities with the demise of the dinosaurs.  Your line survived all the way back to the first fish to walk on the land, Tiktaalik.  You are a survivor of the sponges, and beyond.

The odds of you being here are infinitesimally small, essentially nil.   So, again congratulations!  That said, good luck with the rest of your day.  And please remember to treat each of the people you encounter as the miraculous survivors they are.  And remember, also, that each of them is a member of your own family.  

Continue ReadingSurvivorship Bias