Reminds me of the distinction of symmetric and asymmetric techniques (I think that’s a CFAR handle, but I don’t remember).
“Just committing” seems to be a powerful asymmetric symmetric technique. Here’s the process that I roughly follow to get utility from the technique, without “just committing” to things which are bad ideas:
Define exactly what the thing is that I’m committing to doing or not doing.
Reminds me of the distinction of symmetric and asymmetric techniques (I think that’s a CFAR handle, but I don’t remember).
“Just committing” seems to be a powerful
asymmetricsymmetric technique. Here’s the process that I roughly follow to get utility from the technique, without “just committing” to things which are bad ideas:Define exactly what the thing is that I’m committing to doing or not doing.
Make a very specific deadline for the next time this rule will be evaluated (make it a time and place where you don’t face the pressures of the decision context).
You don’t get to argue with the rule until the next deadline (unless lives are at stake)
For me, I notice that it’s very hard for me to completely relax into a hard rule unless I trust myself to reevaluate it later.
(relevant: hard rules)
I think you mean symmetric? Symmetric is the one where it doesn’t matter whether the thing you’re doing is good or bad. The handle comes from SSC.
Oops, that makes more sense.