This is a short post with some musings on motivation, morality and demandingness, after reading Atomic Habits and Tiny Habits.
In Atomic Habits vs Tiny Habits, I describe how Atomic Habits‘ loftier goals and demands made me feel de-motivated. When the “ask” is big, it’s natural to question “why” and refuse to comply until you receive a satisfactory explanation. In contrast, Tiny Habits made such small asks that I happily complied, even if I was sceptical about the request. (The “Maui habit” was super-cheesy, but super-easy.)
A similar phenomenon arises with morality. Donating 10% of your income isn’t exactly a “small” ask, but it doesn’t make me question the whole point of being moral. However, if you ask me to change careers, I’ll question all the assumptions underlying that—including how moral I should be (if at all). And the problem is that there’s no good answer to these questions.
What does this imply for things like Effective Altruism outreach? Perhaps it means focusing more on concrete, small steps like the Giving What We Can (GWWC) pledge and less on people’s careers. Of course, there’s a trade-off. One high-impact person changing their career could have a much bigger impact than 20 people donating 10% of their income. But you could also argue the GWWC pledge is a “foot in the door” technique, a (not quite) “tiny” habit that can grow or multiply.
This is really just a musing on my part. Which outreach approach is “best” is highly uncertain and will ultimately involve judgement calls.
Any thoughts on the above? If so, please share in the comments below!