Hello everyone,
Consider the relatively desirable/pleasurable experiences of (1) a person who willingly pursues chosen values and (2) a person who indulges in a momentary pleasure. They can be said to be the same in one fundamental way: they both are desired experiences, and so both will be experienced with a relative degree of satisfaction/contentment/fulfilment/pleasure/happiness (satisfaction et. al). But they also have important distinctions.
The momentary pleasure is there for a period of time and then it’s gone. The pleasurable/desirable experience does not endure past a point, and then we are without it. When we are without these type of feelings/experiences (i.e., satisfaction et. al), then naturally we will seek them out. And we do this again and again, seeking satisfaction et. al through temporary sensual experiences.
Time spent “wanting/desiring” (i.e., the time spent seeking what we want) is simultaneously time spent without relative feelings of satisfaction et. al. It is relatively undesirable experience. It is experienced as relative dissatisfaction. It is experienced as relative suffering.
The pleasurable experience to be derived from values-based actions endures with us well past the time of the value-based actions we engage in. It is experienced as a relative pleasure that is not dependent on the presence or absence of any momentary stimuli external to the body/mind of the individual. It is therefore one we are able to take with us across physical environments. In such ways can the pleasurable experiences derived from such values-based actions be seen as more “lasting/enduring/durable”.
Its important to understand, however, that a person who persists in engaging in values-based actions, and thereby continuously experiences the relatively desirable/pleasurable ongoing effects of doing so (including feelings of relative satisfaction et. al), can still experience moments of relative displeasure/pain/dissatisfaction/suffering (even strong and enduring moments of these experiences) through their moment-to-moment interactions with their environment/s (i.e., each and every moment).
Consider a person, well trained in ACT and continuously pursuant of values-consistent actions, who is physically walking on some path of their choosing toward a desired destination. At a certain point of this path, he/she notices that on one side of the path are a series of stimuli that would cause them physical pain/discomfort/displeasure: large thorn bushes, spilled boxes of large tacks on the ground, broken glass, etc. When he/she looks to the other side of the path, they see none of these aversive/painful stimuli.
This ACT trained person could conceivably choose to walk over and through the painful stimuli with acceptance and willingness, while remaining committed to their chosen values, and come out the other side of that part of the path without lingering feelings of relative pain/displeasure/suffering continuing past the actual physical experience. And yet, for the time that they were in that painful part of their path, they likely suffered in relative pain/discomfort/dissatisfaction. And, if their path happens to contain similar parts riddled with painful/aversive stimuli in the future, then they will continue to experience the relative suffering that comes from such stimulation. The painful/aversive stimuli, besides likely being relatively undesirable experiences, also likely increase the momentary probability of engaging in actions inconsistent with ones values (e.g., experiencing moments of stimulation sufficiently aversive for one to act out impulsively/automatically instead of making a values-based choice).
This same ACT-trained person could also conceivably choose (and probably wisely so) the other side of the path, the side that avoids the physically painful stimuli/feelings/experiences. They can also do so with acceptance and willingness while remaining committed to chosen values. And so, this person who avoids the relatively undesirable experiences not only looks out for their future relative satisfaction et. al (by increasing the probability of/engaging in the continuance of values-based actions) but also their momentary and ongoing relative satisfaction et. al (by steering clear of the physically painful stimuli experienced as relatively displeasurable).
ACT theory includes an important component that emphasizes teaching people to not just run away/avoid/escape aversive feelings/condition/situations/stimuli but engage them with acceptance/willingness/curiosity when doing so is beneficial to the continued pursuit of values-based actions. This type of attitude/behavior can be useful when one has no choice but to overcome and persevere through the aversive conditions in the pursuit of “better outcomes” (e.g., when the painful stimuli are all over the path and, if one chooses to continue, must go through it). But what about situations in which a choice can be made and progress can be had without the physically painful/aversive stimulation? Its not difficult to see that the “better” choice in such situations would be to avoid the painful stimuli while continuing on chosen paths (e.g., a values-based one). This can be seen as the preferred outcome to the extent we desire not only better outcomes in the future, but also (preferably) in the current moment and ongoing.
So, the question is: what are the ways in which one can avoid unnecessary relatively painful/displeasurable/suffering experiences while remaining steadfast in pursuit of values-based actions and outcomes? If such ways can be identified, then they likely function to increase overall relative pleasure/satisfaction/happiness and, therefore, represent “better outcomes”. Not only this, but they also likely increase the probability that one can continue to engage in behaviors consistent with chosen values by avoiding aversive situations in which unmindful/automatic responses are more likely to occur.
...
Consider the experience of someone new to ACT who is putting in effort to engage in behaviors consistent with chosen values. This person has identified their long-term health as a value and is committed to eating relatively healthy meals in current and ongoing moments. So, this person, hungry from a long day at work, comes home one day, intent and committed to eating their pre-prepared meal of salad, quinoa, and veggies, and then sees (and/or smells) that their spouse has made their all-time favorite food, lasagna, for the rest of the family.
Naturally, strong feelings of desire/wanting may likely, and rather instantly/automatically, develop in the moment for this person for the lasagna. They may think about all kinds of reasons why it wouldn’t be such a bad thing to eat the lasagna in the moment; they may even convince themselves that they NEED it for whatever reason. But, if they are well trained/practiced/committed in ACT and its pivots, they may also take a moment (or a few moments) to try to defuse from these type of unhelpful thoughts, see them as just thoughts, and willingly commit to values-based actions while accepting and persevering through the relatively discomforting/dis-pleasurable feeling/s that results from having a desire (e.g., for lasagna) that is not, and will not, be satisfied.
Over time, this person who remains steadfast to their commitment to their long-term health and becomes well practiced in not giving in to momentary desires related to foods they want/crave will likely come to experience these momentary cravings at decreased magnitudes compared to when they first started the practice of valuing their health (and not indulging). This reduction of magnitude can be explained, in a behavioral view, through the process of extinction in which reinforcement is withheld for a behavior that had been previously reinforced under similar conditions. Previously, feelings of desire that arose from seeing unhealthy/desired food items were likely frequently reinforced (in addition to the motor behaviors necessary to achieve the result) by the follow-up experience of indulging in the sensually pleasing experience. But since similar conditions no longer produce reinforcement for the health-conscious individual (as they are now focused on values-based actions), then the feelings of desire that arise in such situations are placed on extinction; they are no longer followed by their reinforcing experience. Extinction is known to produce the common effects of a temporary increase in dimensions of behavior (e.g., rate, magnitude) followed by eventual and, for the most part, sustaining decreases in these same dimensions.
Of the two experiences of the person who values their health and chooses to eat healthy:
1. The first, in which they likely experience relatively stronger feelings of desire for a non-values based indulgence while remaining committed to values-based actions and
2. The second, in which they experience relatively weaker feelings of desire for a non-values based indulgence while remaining committed to values-based actions,
Its not difficult to see that the second option would be the relatively more desirable experience. This option represents a greater level of relative satisfaction et. al both in the moment (i.e., feelings of desire for unhealthy foods are less intense currently and ongoing) and in the future (i.e., remains committed to values-based actions by eating healthy).
In this example, the process of extinction on strong feelings of desire related to momentary pleasures can be seen, over time, as clearing the path we choose to walk on of future painful stimuli (e.g., relatively strong feelings of desire that will go unsatisfied, by choice) we do not wish to encounter, as it is not necessary. Just as for the person who walks around the thorns/broken glass, instead of through them, on their path, this represents a relatively beneficial, desirable outcome both now, ongoing, and later.
It is my belief that contemplative practices can also have such desirable functions, and the reasoning for this belief is based on the fundamental principles of Relational Frame Theory (RFT). Here’s my reasoning/evidence on why:
Contemplative practices, or “thinking intentionally/with a purpose”, can be described as an exercise in pairing, and unpairing, arbitrary relations between and among verbal stimuli. In doing so, these practices likely affect the probability of particular feelings/experiences (through alterations in the “transformation of stimulus function” property of these relations) related to stimuli we encounter on moment to moment basis. These practices of conditioning relations between/among verbal stimuli can (perhaps, should?) be done with the purpose of creating better outcomes/experiences for ourselves. In other words, we can use contemplative practices in ways that function to decrease relative feelings of desire/aversion related to particular stimuli and, by doing so, increase momentary and ongoing (relative) feelings/experiences of satisfaction et. al. Said in yet another way, we can use these practices to help clear the way of future relatively painful/dissatisfying/suffering stimuli while walking the path we choose to walk (i.e., a values-based one).
Consider the previously mentioned case of the person who values health but has momentary strong desires in the presence of favorite foods like lasagna. We know that, initially, these feelings of desire would be expected to be strongest and that they would subside over time; the more these feelings subside, the relatively “better” the moments in which the person persists in making healthy choices are experienced.
Now, what if this person, understanding that the experience (and probability) of making healthy choices would be enhanced (made “better”) if desires for incompatible actions subsided, decided to do something to directly increase the probability of this relatively preferred experience (instead of just waiting for the process of extinction to work it’s magic)?
And so this person can think/understand, through an RFT perspective: the moment I see one stimulus (e.g., a highly desired food item), other stimuli, and the relations between/among them, are automatically derived and functions are produced.
From a RFT perspective, seeing/smelling the desired food item immediately leads to the action of “naming” the food (e.g., “It’s lasagna!”). This name/word/stimulus is arbitrarily related to many other words/thoughts/stimuli such as “tasty”, “desirable”, “fulfilling”, “best” and so on. Unfortunately for this person who values their health, this stimulus is strongly related to many stimuli associated with “pleasurable experience”, particularly strong when there is hunger involved. These arbitrary relations combine to help give the stimulus (i.e., lasagna) its function in the moment: to desire strongly and the want to attain immediate reinforcement.
So this person, dissatisfied with the automatic functions currently produced by the relations (as they are experienced as relative displeasure), may decide:
“I will work to transform the undesirable functions of such stimuli. And just as I know that its current function is a direct product of stimuli it is closely related to in relational networks, I can work to create new relations that function to transform the current relations (and their function/s) in a way that is beneficial to me and my ongoing core yearning for more/deeper/lasting relative satisfaction et. al.”
So this person who understands that the stimulus (e.g., lasagna) is closely related to other stimuli that function to produce strong feelings of desire/wanting can decide to focus on creating/altering stimulus relations that will function to transform their current function: in this particular case presented, they might likely benefit by engaging in the practice of contemplating undesirable aspects of stimuli they currently cling to/crave/strongly desire.
For instance, this person who values their health and healthy eating could commit to a practice where they would sit and contemplate the fleeting nature of the pleasure they currently cling to. In seeing, pondering, and understanding its temporary nature, and thus relating the stimulus to more undesirable aspects (stimuli) of the experience, this practice itself, over time, can likely have an transformative effect on feelings of desire when the stimulus is encountered on future occasions (likely largely depending on how well the new relations have been established). Seeing/contemplating the transitory nature of such experiences of indulgence is just one way the function of such stimuli can be altered. There are likely many others ways they could relate stimuli (through thinking/contemplating); for example, they could ponder themselves alone in a hospital bed (largely due to unhealthy eating) and think about lasagna at the same time and how it helps lead to such undesirable life situations.
If these new relations can be firmly established through consistent practice/pairing and, to the extent that these relations effectively counter/alter previous relations connected to momentary pleasure, then it seems likely that the magnitude of desires in the presence of such stimuli (e.g., lasagna) will decrease. This is a desirable outcome not only short term, but long term relative satisfaction et. al.
Food, and healthy eating, is just one example of countless that could be provided. The possibilities for such strategies are almost limitless, limited only to the extent that the mind is limited. These contemplative strategies can be applied for literally any relations between stimuli that function to produce relatively undesirable experiences/feelings in the moment. And when we do such practices, we are essentially clearing our own path of future aversive stimuli/situations; in essence, we are choosing to walk around these undesirable parts of our path before we even get to them. In doing these practices, we look out for our well being and further increase the probability of continuance of values-based actions.
Thank you for reading this.
Jesse