Getting 1% Better – Atomic Habits and Philosophy for Life (And Other Dangerous Situations)

“The unexamined life is not worth living.” – Socrates

“We acquire the virtues by practice” – Aristotle

Over the course of past few months, I’ve read several books, both fiction and nonfiction. The mind
tends to make associations, sometimes to our detriment, but I thought I’d explore a few of those books
in this blog post. The first quote can be attributed to Socrates and perhaps you have heard it uttered over
the years. As I understand it, as humans, we are programmed to think about things, be it our life or the
meaning of life (or lack thereof). Some of the ancient Greek philosophies believed that we could lead a
“flourishing” life (i.e., eudaimonia in Greek) by harnessing our “spark of divinity”, or our capacity for
reason. By using reason, we could better understand ourselves and consciously decide to improve our
condition through directed (i.e., rational) action and this directed action would often be rooted in
practices or habits. The second quote is attributed to Aristotle and the point is rather simple – actions
speak louder than words. If we want to live a good (i.e., virtuous) life, we need to work at it, through
practice and through habits targeted at personal growth.

In Philosophy for Life And Other Dangerous Situations by Jules Evans, the author explores multiple
Greek philosophies, from the Stoics to the Epicureans to the Skeptics (and more). The book is quite good,
covering about 250 pages over 12 chapters and several appendices. Each chapter is devoted to a particular
school of thought or individual philosopher. It is coherent and addresses the various strengths (and flaws)
of the various philosophies. The author also relates the potential utility of philosophy by sharing how his
own personal struggles were tempered through the practice of philosophy. The synergy of this book with
Atomic Habits by James Clear was most evident in Appendix 1 – Is Socrates Overoptimistic About Human
Reason? The author addresses human limitations by introducing the reader to the work of behavioral
psychologists like Daniel Kahneman and Dan Ariely. A nice introduction to this area can be found in the
great Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman and perhaps the more accessible The Undoing Project
by Michael Lewis.

As the author relates, “The ancient Greek philosophers suggested we can know ourselves, and
become wiser and happier through the daily practice of philosophy.” However, behavioral psychologists
“have argued that, while humans do possess the capacity for consciousness, self-reflection, and rational
choice, it’s very limited and weak. These psychologists suggest that humans possess two thinking systems:
a conscious, reflective, ‘slow’ system, and an intuitive, emotional, ‘fast’ system. We use the ‘conscious
reflective system’ for some higher-level tasks, like maths, planning for the future, negotiations, and
emotional self-control. But we use the automatic-emotive system a lot more, because it’s faster, and it
uses less energy.” That last point is important as humans are biologically programmed to conserve energy.
Essentially, this is what you may have heard of as “System 1” vs. “System 2” and it is contrasted in the
table below.

System 1 System 2
Automatic Conscious
Emotional Rational
Fast Slow
Conserves energy Expends energy
 So, if we default to System 1, can we really ever deploy philosophy as a daily operating system to
improve our lives or is it bound to fail? The author believes that philosophy can work even while
acknowledging the validity of the two-system framework. In short, he believes that “philosophy works
with both the conscious-reflective system and the automatic-emotive system. It makes the automatic
conscious and the conscious automatic.” I found this sentence to be rather profound; make the automatic
conscious and make the conscious automatic. Essentially, we need to apply reason to bring awareness to
our automatic habits (i.e., Is this a good, bad or neutral habit?) and we need to apply grit, determination
and practice to make our conscious desires (i.e., What kind of life do I want to live?) a living reality. As the
author notes, “it’s very hard, and takes a lot of energy, effort, and humility (no one likes to admit their
story is wrong).”

Enter James Clear, author # 2.

Building on some of the earlier (and illuminating) work of Chares Duhigg in The Power of Habit as
well as the work of some of the aforementioned behavioral psychologists and many others, James Clear
recently published Atomic Habits. The book is very well-researched, concise, practical, and potentially
transformative. The underlying premise is how “tiny changes” can yield “remarkable results”. If we can
learn to automate good habits and delete bad habits, we can improve. If you are familiar with the term
compounding, then simply apply a “tiny change” of 1% per day and compound it over one year. The
performance gap between 1% better and 1% worse is staggering. See the graph below for a nice visual.
This “1% better every day” idea is also championed by a Charlie Munger inspired character (Francis Xavier,
“Mr. X”) in the more recent “fiction” novel The Rebel Allocator by Jacob Taylor. Mr. X cautions a young
man that “You’re either getting slightly better or slightly worse every single day. There’s no stasis, and
one percent change is barely noticeable in isolation.”
 Clear advocates a four-step framework (Cue → Crave → Respond → Reward) to establish a good
habit. Step one of Cue involves a “Habit Scorecard”. This is a crucial exercise whereby an individual
documents and scores (i.e., good, bad, neutral) all of their habits in order “to become more aware of
them.” The author notes that “40 to 50 percent of our actions on any given day are done out of habit.”
These actions would thus appear to be “automatic”, and the awareness derived from the “Habit
Scorecard” exercise would seem to correspond to what Jules Evans describes as making the “automatic
conscious”. A person essentially inventories their day and becomes more aware (i.e., conscious) of what
is good, bad or neutral. So, if I can make the “automatic conscious” through a “Habits Scorecard”, how do
I make the “conscious automatic”? In Chapter 2, the author introduces three different types of behavior
change/habits: (1) outcome-based, (2) process-based, and (3) identity-based. He defines identity as “what
you believe” and that “With this approach, we start by focusing on who we wish to become.” Importantly,
identity-based change/habits tend to be more lasting, as “behavior that is incongruent with the self will
not last” and that “The ultimate form of intrinsic motivation is when a habit becomes part of your
identity.” Thus, in identity-based change, one consciously decides to introduce a habit and make it
automatic because it is linked to his/her identity. As a result, the habit is longer lasting.

Putting these two together, we learn to make the “automatic conscious” through a “Habits
Scorecard” and we learn to make the “conscious automatic” through our chosen identity, both of which
are tied to our “spark of divinity”, or our reasoning power. With this foundation, one can then deploy
various habit tools which the author details (e.g., “habit stacking”, “implementation intention”,
“temptation bundling”, environmental priming, etc.) to successfully establish good habits. The model I’ve
arrived at is as follows: Inventory assessment (scorecard) → Identity assessment (who do I wish to
become) → Implementation (stack, intention, bundle, etc.) → Success primers (environment, frequency,
reduced friction, etc.) → Introspection (examine success/failure, establish positive loop).

If we wish to apply philosophy on a daily basis, it will likely involve a series of struggles, yet growth,
or “flourishing” (eudaimonia) may ensue as a result. Understanding our two-system brain and how to
“hack” it through habits, perhaps we can improve our chances of success? As a fan of the Stoics, I am
reminded of a famous quote from the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius, “Waste no more time arguing what
a good man should be. Be one.” Carpe diem. Good luck.