Conversation with My Brain: “You Like Feeling Bad”
therapist
You like feeling bad.
ME
Brain, do we like feeling bad?
BRAIN
No.
ME
Exactly.
BRAIN
What kind of hypothesis is that supposed to be?
ME
Wait. Maybe she isn’t talking about whether we actually like feeling bad.
Maybe she means that when the cost gets really high, we still keep going.
BRAIN
Obviously.
ME
Why?
BRAIN
Because we can.
ME
So ‘you like feeling bad’...
BRAIN
We do not.
ME
I know. But maybe what she means is:
“Why do you keep paying the cost when it’s this high?”
BRAIN
Aaaa.
BRAIN
Then she should say that.
ME
She does. Just in her own language.
BRAIN
Terrible interface.
ME
Okay. Let’s try again.
I know you can do it.
The question is: why should you have to pay this cost?
BRAIN
...
ME
Well?
BRAIN
I don’t know.
ME
What do you mean, you don’t know?
BRAIN
I never factored that in.
ME
So what did you factor in?
BRAIN
Whether I could make it.
A Bug in the Algorithm
For years, my system asked three questions:
- Can I do it?
Almost always: yes. - Is there a solution?
Almost always: yes. - Can I keep going?
Usually: yes.
If the answer was “yes”, the problem was considered solved.
Except my system was leaving out one question:
Is the outcome worth the cost of continuing?
And that changes a surprising amount.
Being able to endure something is not a reason to endure it.
The existence of a solution does not mean the solution is worth its cost.
And “I can do it” tells me only that something is feasible. It tells me nothing about whether it’s worth it.
Epilogue: the bike rack
BRAIN
But there was no problem with the bike.
ME
No?
BRAIN
No. We had a system. Take off the wheel, fold down the seats, turn the handlebars, put the bike in at just the right angle…
ME
For two years.
BRAIN
One hundred percent success rate.
ME
And the therapist asked:
“Why don’t you have a tow-bar bike rack?”
BRAIN
...
ME
Well?
BRAIN
That wasn’t a problem.
ME
There was.
BRAIN
No. The bike fit in the car.
ME
...
BRAIN
What?
ME
Nothing. I think I just understood the whole problem.