There are two radically different ways to make a positive change in your life, which one is better?

If your opinion is "it waries, depends on you" then of course the question is how to know which one is right for you?

Option 1 - Static Balance. Small, regulated positive changes, in the form of routine. To save money, stick to a realistic budget every month. To lose weight, stick to a calorie budget every day and a regular exercise regime - every Tuesday is a chest and legs day etc. Advantage: can be easier. Disadvantages: it is boring to have regular routines, to have every day or month like the other, to have this organization. Small, easy changes don't fulfill you with a sense of pride and challenge. And always something unforeseen happens that puts you out of the routine. 

Option 2: Dynamic Balance. Understanding that unforeseen events can upset any routine, don't have a routine, rather go all-in today and be OK with not doing it all in a month, then repeating it - go from one extreme to another, then your average will be in a good balance. Have a buy-nothing November then splurge in December. Overtrain like crazy for two weeks, then pursue some other interest for a week. Wanna lose weight, go crazy fast for two days, have a ridiculously restricted diet for a week, then accept your friends invitation to that all you can eat buffet. Advantage: going crazy gives you fulfillment and challenge, it is a fun game, and you are prepared for unforeseen situation throwing you off track for a while, because your average is still OK. Disadvantage: can be hard.


What do you think?

Tags: balance, changes, diet, frugal, loss, spending, training, weight

Views: 242

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I usually found that the static option was, well, static. So I pushed hard. It worked for some things.

Option 3, surrender, "turning it over" as they say in AA, was sometimes the only way change happened.

My issue with the post is that things are more of a continuum, rather than a couple of discrete options.

I would hazard that a series of small, discrete, intended changes in one's lifestyle is not a "static" endeavor.

Similarly, a wild swing between extreme behaviors is not a balanced endeavor.

As to the initial OP question, you know what's right for you when it works for you, and works longer than a couple of days or weeks.

+1, although are you talking about losing weight specifically? Or are talking about positive changes in your life as a whole?

But, it really *does* depend on you.

 

Depending on your own mindset, either approach is equally valid.  The incremental changes are typically less painful and more palatable, but sometimes you just have to rip off the bandaid.

 

I've found, for me, a "break" with the old in favor of a new habit is often my best approach.

 

With regards to weight loss, I might have a suggestion.  There is an app called LoseIt! which I found awhile back.  Basically it's a calorie counting app, approximately analogous to the Weight Watchers system as I understand it.  It seems to be working for me, and I'm already down 6.4 pounds, without the pain of an abrupt change.  Maybe worth a look?

My wife and I actually practice a stance between option 1 and 2.  Based on Edward Deming's work.

We call it Focused Consumption.  We are focused on one area, currently weight loss and put extra resources on that until we find the method that works and then we lock it in, monitor and reward progress.  The rest of life stays like option 1 - Static.  It allows us to find the pride in the changes and make harder ones than "little shifts", yet smaller then an extreme all or nothing like option 2.

Once the method is locked down and the progress metered and rewarded, we can focus on the next topic, without loosing the gains from the first goal.

 

RSS

Latest Activity

Andrew D, USA Ret replied to Josh Allen's discussion If you can tell me what religion you are then you are in a prison.
"Says you ;0"
14 minutes ago
Andrew D, USA Ret replied to Josh Allen's discussion If you can tell me what religion you are then you are in a prison.
"It is also interesting to think of predestination, in the sense that since God is omniscient, he can't help but know who is going to heaven and who to hell.  He can't help but know our every action since the moment he first conceived…"
33 minutes ago
Dave P replied to Steve C's discussion Bedtime
"I sleep naked.  Occassionally, if it is cool in the room, I will wear a t-shirt because my shoulders get cold.  Only where boxers when sharing a hotel room with family members other than my wife like when we go on family trips,…"
38 minutes ago
Liam S. replied to Caleb's discussion Socks with Brown Shoes
"some neutral, chunky hiking socks would work. Heathered greys, browns, ivory, etc.  e.g."
50 minutes ago
Michael D. Denny replied to Regular Joe's discussion How Many Of These Opportunities Blew You By?
"I'm actually in the same boat, so to speak. I don't like showering with my lady friend. Golden ones not withstanding, showering for me is a kind of zen thing. I usually play out my day in my head while I shower, review what shoulda been…"
1 hour ago
Profile IconDwight Dutton, Max Payne, Ryan Skuce and 14 more joined Art of Manliness
1 hour ago
Will replied to Josh Allen's discussion If you can tell me what religion you are then you are in a prison.
"Won't speak for Joe, but I'll say that if we're completely controlled by the cosmos, no determinist can help being a determinist, and no free will guy can help being that.  So there's no point in trying to convince anyone.…"
1 hour ago
Michael D. Denny replied to Regular Joe's discussion How Many Of These Opportunities Blew You By?
"I got turned down a lot, but I had a tendency to shoot way out of my league. Still do.  as I hate showering with girls,   :::insert obligatory gay joke::::"
2 hours ago

© 2014   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service