(Like Duhigg have also mentioned around “keystone habits”), some decisions are small and easy – yet have a huge impact. Similar to the Butterfly effect, a simple shift can release a cascade of events, some of which might be invisible, rendering less than obvious the connection between the decision and the impact.
For instance, we can drink vitamin C powder and, hidden chemical reactions taking place, observe increased productivity later, – but given the fluctuations and delays we can only guess at this connection through repeated experiments.
It is a very simple action to spike the coffee with Amanita and Morning Glory, and yet with useful effects.
The tiny scale is misleading. Could take some wisdom or insight to make the simplest decisions and the easiest steps, as they can be eclipsed by a magnitude of a task.
Picking a set of repeated audio suggestions is like that. It takes a couple of seconds, ((QM: but the cumulative effect can be profound)).
If we’re going to have a snack, then whether to prefer proteins, fats or carbohydrates is a “free” decision to make, as we’re going to be looking for food anyways, but with a lasting impact on attention shape, mood, performance, etc. We should, for example, prefer the fats when going out into the cold, in order for britening to happen.
When resting or traveling, it does not take any effort to summon a spirit. And yet the ((wodehouse: effect of the interaction can be enormous)).
Seems like a good policy to seek and notice small steps with macro outcomes. One wonders if there’s a trick to mark or highlight such tasks, or to expediate discovery.