Thank you for writing this! I have struggled a lot to implement external commitment mechanisms in my life. I see forcing functions as setting up unfair punishment, I suspect due to some moderate authoritarian parenting and not feeling heard. Where I resist force reveals a ton about my internal programming - I hate forcing myself to not play video games (dad heavily curtailed me as a kid), but I have no problem committing to relationships (my parents modeled that through their ongoing 30-year-strong marriage). This probably sounds a bit like Internal Family Systems.
Environment and upbringing unavoidably programmed our original ideas of what we should commit to, and that continues to operate invisibly, and if we don't understand that, forcing functions are liable to make us more miserable. They make things a lot harder to see - am I pursuing this commitment because *I* want to, or because I was told it would be a good idea?
Now I'm drifting tangential to your post... When and how can I evaluate whether a commitment I've made is aligned with *me*? The odds that at any given moment I'm graced with clarity and exactness are low. Thus, perhaps commitments should be built up incrementally. If I get excited about doing idea A, and it keeps on coming up in many different emotional states, and I have some way of tracking this frequency, I can identify a good candidate for pursuing.
My problem is that I can't tell which commitments are mine, and which are from my parents, teachers, friends, books, or whatever. So it ends up that forcing functions are either unbearable (my assessment of the commitment was already wrong), or unnecessary (I landed on something that resonated immediately), and I miss out on things that require a bit more data to assess properly - where a forcing function will get me past the first 5-6 sessions of onboarding, or something similar.
So for me anyways, before applying forcing functions, I think it is prudent to have a process for evaluating potential commitments over some time, and an inventory of where I might be biased by programming. I hadn't written that out to myself until just now though :)
This is all very true. Shoutout to those whose shadows were the ones in the relationship. To make out of that and find your way out towards this is a huge achievement. Saying this mostly for myself 😮💨
The part on skillfully escalating commitment mechanisms spoke to me. There is an art to finding the right commitment mechanism for 1) who you are, 2) at a given time. I used to tell everyone I was going to do something - thinking the social pressure would compel me to overcome my psychological blocks. It was a poor commitment mechanism, and instead I switched to Beeminder for monetary incentives - a much better match.
Such a wonderful piece and the personal example you shared shows how important “doing the work” is after you’ve made the commitment, there is no magic bullet, but there are much better ways to get going!
I think that you write very persuasively, using good generic examples as well as those from your personal experience, and your prose style is hard-hitting and engaging.
Having said that, I have reached the exact opposite conclusion, and have learned the value of keeping options open. A good example might be that I often pay slightly over the odds to make fully refundable reservations.
Really sharp piece, but it’s worth avoiding the takeaway that ambivalence is just something to hack rather than listen to — that way lies self-coercion, or the sense that discomfort = seriousness. Curious how you think about failure modes. What if the forcing function backfires, or the commitment no longer fits? I’m pretty sure you’re not saying everything worth doing has to hurt.
It's funny you use the example of Odysseus as a good, well-executed forcing function, because to me it (and indeed the whole idea) kind of fail when you examine it further. Who tied Odysseus up? His crew. And who is in charge of the crew? Odysseus. So all he has to do to untie himself is convince his crew (who are obliged to listen to him) to untie him.
I really strongly disagree with this idea actually for that reason - you can just not do the forcing function. If it's really bad, you can just back out of it, unless you set up something incredibly high stakes. Ultimately even involving friends does not help - they have split loyalties between past and future you.
Like I was a beeminder subscriber for a while, I had it linked to Duolingo. Then I missed my goal one night, paid $25, and unsubscribed from the service. It was a fake barrier because I erected it and I could tear it down.
Idk. Maybe it's my ADHD but these things have never worked for me.
Feels like I’m missing the spirit of the position to reply to a classic irrationalist shitposty comment with a legible response, but: I don’t think there’s any contradiction here! Cate and I are both happy we committed hard to first marriages that taught us a lot about ourselves, and happy that we committed again for a second marriage that’s better for both of us. IMO, better to optimize for learning and commit to things that might not work out than waffle and never have to blow up your life.
I'm a big fan of legible responses, especially when I am not the one writing them. There is no bigger joy in my life than to receive a legible reply to my shitpost.
Hey, just wanted to say thanks—these recent posts have really stayed with me. Especially since the agency piece, your writing has helped me reflect more deeply on some things I’d been circling for ¡years! haha
I had two questions:
1) Every now and then I’ll get sudden, vivid bursts of clarity—like extreme lucidity. But they fade, and I slip back into something flatter. I’ve tried chasing those lucid states through fasting, reading, sleep, etc., and even used little “forcing functions” (like rewards or small self-imposed consequences) Like pg. 16 in the link below from James
It kind of worked, but also left me weirdly stressed/fearful of myself. I’m curious if you’ve found ways to invite these kinds of states more gently or consistently?
2) Relatedly: do you have any practices for feeling, in a daily way, the finite time, as in opportunity cost of a day”? It hits me in waves, but it’s hard to hold onto. I’ve read that near-death experiences sometimes spark this kind of awareness—shortcuts to perspective. But maybe literature can do something similar? Would love your thoughts.
Also, I thought this old William James piece might be up your alley (via Gwern):
Grateful for what you’re sharing—it’s been quietly shaping how I think.
For transparency: I used llm s to edit this comment. Not a native english writer, and wanted to express thoughts more clearly, hope this does not come off as dishonest.
How do we get this taught in schools? I don't know I've ever read a discussion of commitment setting as a skill issue and it seems like a very useful idea.
What you wrote about marriage rhymed a lot with things I'd heard from religious books and talks about marriage geared toward young adults, particularly the limitations of a feelings-based immediate-freedom-maximizing approach to dating, marriage, etc. The "feelings" view is so prevalent in our culture that you almost have to be part of a weirdo subculture (conservative Catholic in my case) to get a different story.
Very much in favour of commitment devices like the ones described. But my experience has been largely the opposite of what’s described here, especially when it comes to punishing yourself using money. I’ve tried using systems like Beeminder to force myself into behaviours, and they simply don’t work for me. These are iterated games and your future self becomes wary of the commitments and punishments your past self has foisted on it.
I actually prefer what the post argues against - finding an emotional connection to a goal rather than constructing systems that punish you when you inevitably derail.
The mechanistic approach feels fundamentally misaligned with how motivation actually operates, at least in my case.
Thank you for writing this! I have struggled a lot to implement external commitment mechanisms in my life. I see forcing functions as setting up unfair punishment, I suspect due to some moderate authoritarian parenting and not feeling heard. Where I resist force reveals a ton about my internal programming - I hate forcing myself to not play video games (dad heavily curtailed me as a kid), but I have no problem committing to relationships (my parents modeled that through their ongoing 30-year-strong marriage). This probably sounds a bit like Internal Family Systems.
Environment and upbringing unavoidably programmed our original ideas of what we should commit to, and that continues to operate invisibly, and if we don't understand that, forcing functions are liable to make us more miserable. They make things a lot harder to see - am I pursuing this commitment because *I* want to, or because I was told it would be a good idea?
Now I'm drifting tangential to your post... When and how can I evaluate whether a commitment I've made is aligned with *me*? The odds that at any given moment I'm graced with clarity and exactness are low. Thus, perhaps commitments should be built up incrementally. If I get excited about doing idea A, and it keeps on coming up in many different emotional states, and I have some way of tracking this frequency, I can identify a good candidate for pursuing.
My problem is that I can't tell which commitments are mine, and which are from my parents, teachers, friends, books, or whatever. So it ends up that forcing functions are either unbearable (my assessment of the commitment was already wrong), or unnecessary (I landed on something that resonated immediately), and I miss out on things that require a bit more data to assess properly - where a forcing function will get me past the first 5-6 sessions of onboarding, or something similar.
So for me anyways, before applying forcing functions, I think it is prudent to have a process for evaluating potential commitments over some time, and an inventory of where I might be biased by programming. I hadn't written that out to myself until just now though :)
This is all very true. Shoutout to those whose shadows were the ones in the relationship. To make out of that and find your way out towards this is a huge achievement. Saying this mostly for myself 😮💨
Thank you, wonderful article as always!
The part on skillfully escalating commitment mechanisms spoke to me. There is an art to finding the right commitment mechanism for 1) who you are, 2) at a given time. I used to tell everyone I was going to do something - thinking the social pressure would compel me to overcome my psychological blocks. It was a poor commitment mechanism, and instead I switched to Beeminder for monetary incentives - a much better match.
Such a wonderful piece and the personal example you shared shows how important “doing the work” is after you’ve made the commitment, there is no magic bullet, but there are much better ways to get going!
I think that you write very persuasively, using good generic examples as well as those from your personal experience, and your prose style is hard-hitting and engaging.
Having said that, I have reached the exact opposite conclusion, and have learned the value of keeping options open. A good example might be that I often pay slightly over the odds to make fully refundable reservations.
Really sharp piece, but it’s worth avoiding the takeaway that ambivalence is just something to hack rather than listen to — that way lies self-coercion, or the sense that discomfort = seriousness. Curious how you think about failure modes. What if the forcing function backfires, or the commitment no longer fits? I’m pretty sure you’re not saying everything worth doing has to hurt.
It's funny you use the example of Odysseus as a good, well-executed forcing function, because to me it (and indeed the whole idea) kind of fail when you examine it further. Who tied Odysseus up? His crew. And who is in charge of the crew? Odysseus. So all he has to do to untie himself is convince his crew (who are obliged to listen to him) to untie him.
I really strongly disagree with this idea actually for that reason - you can just not do the forcing function. If it's really bad, you can just back out of it, unless you set up something incredibly high stakes. Ultimately even involving friends does not help - they have split loyalties between past and future you.
Like I was a beeminder subscriber for a while, I had it linked to Duolingo. Then I missed my goal one night, paid $25, and unsubscribed from the service. It was a fake barrier because I erected it and I could tear it down.
Idk. Maybe it's my ADHD but these things have never worked for me.
I loved this essay SO much! "A commitment is something you make, not something you feel."
Thanks so much!
> Manage to stay with your partner
Write essays in praise of commitment
> Break up with your partner
Write essays in praise of blowing up your life (https://sashachapin.substack.com/p/in-praise-of-blowing-up-your-life)
Perhaps the meta-lesson here is: whatever you do, do it with conviction.
Feels like I’m missing the spirit of the position to reply to a classic irrationalist shitposty comment with a legible response, but: I don’t think there’s any contradiction here! Cate and I are both happy we committed hard to first marriages that taught us a lot about ourselves, and happy that we committed again for a second marriage that’s better for both of us. IMO, better to optimize for learning and commit to things that might not work out than waffle and never have to blow up your life.
I'm a big fan of legible responses, especially when I am not the one writing them. There is no bigger joy in my life than to receive a legible reply to my shitpost.
Hey, just wanted to say thanks—these recent posts have really stayed with me. Especially since the agency piece, your writing has helped me reflect more deeply on some things I’d been circling for ¡years! haha
I had two questions:
1) Every now and then I’ll get sudden, vivid bursts of clarity—like extreme lucidity. But they fade, and I slip back into something flatter. I’ve tried chasing those lucid states through fasting, reading, sleep, etc., and even used little “forcing functions” (like rewards or small self-imposed consequences) Like pg. 16 in the link below from James
It kind of worked, but also left me weirdly stressed/fearful of myself. I’m curious if you’ve found ways to invite these kinds of states more gently or consistently?
2) Relatedly: do you have any practices for feeling, in a daily way, the finite time, as in opportunity cost of a day”? It hits me in waves, but it’s hard to hold onto. I’ve read that near-death experiences sometimes spark this kind of awareness—shortcuts to perspective. But maybe literature can do something similar? Would love your thoughts.
Also, I thought this old William James piece might be up your alley (via Gwern):
https://gwern.net/doc/psychology/personality/conscientiousness/1907-james.pdf
Grateful for what you’re sharing—it’s been quietly shaping how I think.
For transparency: I used llm s to edit this comment. Not a native english writer, and wanted to express thoughts more clearly, hope this does not come off as dishonest.
All the best. Really cool person!
— A college reader
Dear Cate,
Great piece!
I love this framing:
"The delusion is: commitment is a thing that you feel.
The truth is: commitment is a thing that you make."
I also very much appreciate hearing about the way your relationship began, and continued.
Thank you for sharing, as always!
Love
Myq
How do we get this taught in schools? I don't know I've ever read a discussion of commitment setting as a skill issue and it seems like a very useful idea.
What you wrote about marriage rhymed a lot with things I'd heard from religious books and talks about marriage geared toward young adults, particularly the limitations of a feelings-based immediate-freedom-maximizing approach to dating, marriage, etc. The "feelings" view is so prevalent in our culture that you almost have to be part of a weirdo subculture (conservative Catholic in my case) to get a different story.
Very much in favour of commitment devices like the ones described. But my experience has been largely the opposite of what’s described here, especially when it comes to punishing yourself using money. I’ve tried using systems like Beeminder to force myself into behaviours, and they simply don’t work for me. These are iterated games and your future self becomes wary of the commitments and punishments your past self has foisted on it.
I actually prefer what the post argues against - finding an emotional connection to a goal rather than constructing systems that punish you when you inevitably derail.
The mechanistic approach feels fundamentally misaligned with how motivation actually operates, at least in my case.
Good food for thought
always burn the boats
Fantastic post, Cate! Hope you're well.
thank you, matt!