In policy debate there's this idea called "inherency" which is basically the reason why your plan isn't already in practice.
There are three main kinds:
Structural (e.g., physical barriers, laws against it)
Attitudinal (e.g., people doubt or dislike it)
Existential (i.e., it doesn't exist because it doesn't exist)
I've learned that this is a fantastic framework for thinking through my personal barriers.
Why haven't I done the dishes?
Structural: I haven't bought more dish soap yet.
Attitudinal: I hate doing dishes and don't want to.
Existential: Well, I'm not doing them right now, so I'm not going to do them.
Existential sounds weird, but it is entirely too common. Often when I end up endlessly, mindlessly scrolling on social media, I have other tasks I need and want to do. I have zero structural or attitudinal barriers, and yet I'm still not doing the tasks.
It is an existential barrier.
Structural inherency is solved by removing the barrier. Attitudinal inherency can be changed with rewards, reframing, etc. Existential, though?
The only way to deal with existential inherency is to do the thing or, at least, start it. This is where strategies like "just move" and "set a 10 minute timer" work best.
Anyway. This framework helps me because I am better able to articulate what's going on in my head and am better able to pinpoint what kind of strategy will help best.
All the rewards in the world won't put dish soap in my cabinet or change the fact that I'm not currently doing the thing.
