The stories we carry into the day

Read Part 1 here: https://www.humaninference.ai/essays/the-project-i-kept-putting-off

Our Thoughts Shape Our Reality

I recently spent a day in “financial panic,” despite nothing changing about my finances or outlook. I just couldn’t stop thinking about money problems. I couldn’t tell what thought started it, but I recognized that I was spiraling.

By the end of the day, I’d almost forgotten about it. My reasons for not being in a financial crisis felt believable again, even though earlier that day the same facts wouldn’t have persuaded me.

I work with a somatic embodiment coach who, ironically, often reminds me how much my thoughts can shape my experience. Being aware of what thoughts I’m already carrying into a situation is half the battle, and easy to forget when I’m caught up in the moment.

In a 1998 experiment, psychologist James Gross asked people watching a disturbing film to change how they interpreted what they saw. Those participants felt less disgust than people who watched without those instructions.¹

That doesn’t explain exactly what happened to me that day. But it does suggest how changing our interpretation can change how we feel.

I’m not advocating for financial illiteracy and just focusing on good feelings. A change in how I understand my finances won’t pay a bill. But it can affect what feels possible, what I pay attention to, and what I decide to do next.

And if some of my suffering can start from within, wouldn’t some of my satisfaction and joy come from within, too?

The story tells us what to chase

If I can get so caught up in my own thoughts, what does that say about the stories we carry as a group?

We tell each other what success looks like. We learn what earns respect, what counts as an achievement, and what we’re supposed to want.

If our shared stories keep telling us that individual wealth and status lead to fulfillment and happiness, we have good reason to keep pursuing them.

A review of research across 259 samples found that placing greater value on money and possessions was linked with lower well-being.² This doesn’t mean that having money makes us unhappy, or that wanting financial security is a problem.

But it does make me wonder about how much we expect wealth to give us, and how those expectations shape what we reward.

What Are We Solving For?

On Between us and the Machine, Juliet MacDowell asks every guest this closing question: “If you could change one thing about who owns, governs, or profits from AI, what would you change?”³

I mentioned how the who seems easy. It ought to be all of us. But the how is trickier. Aside from the challenges of any democratic process, how do you align incentives so that people want to do what’s best for everyone?

There are obvious problems related to wealth that need to be solved. Money shouldn’t buy you political leverage. A society should reflect the values of all its citizens, not just those with money.

A 2014 Gilens and Page study examined 1,779 proposed U.S. policy changes between 1981 and 2002. In their model, economic elites and business interest groups had substantial independent influence on policy outcomes, while average citizens had little or none.⁴

Regardless of how you feel about wealthy people or corporations, a society isn’t healthy if it fails to represent the needs and values of all its citizens.

But solving this takes more than changing legislation. I think it also requires us to question what our culture celebrates and teaches us to believe.

The process of making laws isn’t as interesting to me as the worldviews of the people making them. Their beliefs shape which problems they see, whose needs they consider, and what they think a law should accomplish.

If we’ve learned to measure success by how much money and power we gain, how do we come to value decisions that give others more of a say?

I don’t think we’ll stop having people with more money or power than others. But I do think it’s worth challenging our stories about what the pursuit of happiness means. Those beliefs can influence what we want from our lives, and what we ask of the people who make our laws.

An Inviolable Power

So much of our debate about social issues seems to boil down to one argument: How much suffering is caused by systemic issues, and how much is caused by our internal states?

When someone struggles financially, how much comes from their circumstances, and how much room do they have to act?

Honestly, I don’t think anyone can diagnose that clearly in every case. There are too many moving parts, and their importance can shift.

What I do know, though, is my belief in there being an inviolable power in each person, when they choose to recognize it.

I don’t think we have to choose one explanation for every situation. Our circumstances matter. So does our ability to understand them and decide what to do next.

I think we’d make better choices if we understood the difference between pursuing wealth and success, and pursuing healing and fulfillment. These paths can overlap, but progress on one doesn’t necessarily mean progress on the other.

Through the internal work, I think we can become more able to bring out the best in each other. I think a leader’s need to be right can limit a team, and people can offer more when they feel understood.

Amy Edmondson’s study of 51 work teams found that teams where people felt safe taking interpersonal risks showed more learning behavior.⁵ That includes asking questions, discussing mistakes, and seeking feedback.

I think these conditions also give creativity more room. People have to be able to share an idea before they know whether it’s any good.

This is part of why I wonder about the wider effects of changing what we value. If more people find fulfillment in contributing to society, perhaps we’d see more ambition directed toward work that benefits others.

I think that could help us develop stronger teams and more useful ideas. It may also support the economic growth and innovation we’re already trying to achieve.

When I think about AI, human capabilities like judgment, connection, and creativity seem even more worth developing. There may be an economic reason to take this work seriously, alongside the reasons we already have to want better lives.

The social problems we have today won’t improve simply because AI gets more capable. We still make decisions about what to use it for, and our norms and worldviews influence those decisions.

My finances hadn’t changed that day. But the story I was carrying had.

I wonder what becomes possible when we start questioning the stories we carry together. Could we place more value on social well-being, meaning, and fulfillment, while still making room for ambition, wealth, and success?

Sending you my best,

Muxin

References

Footnotes

1. James J. Gross, “Antecedent- and Response-Focused Emotion Regulation: Divergent Consequences for Experience, Expression, and Physiology,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74, no. 1 (1998): 224–237. Study.

2. Helga Dittmar, Rod Bond, Megan Hurst, and Tim Kasser, “The Relationship Between Materialism and Personal Well-Being: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 107, no. 5 (2014): 879–924. Study.

3. Muxin Li, interview with Juliet MacDowell, “Can AI Be Safe in a System Built to Race?”, Between us and the Machine — How to build AI that deepens our humanity, October 1, 2026. Spotify.

4. Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page, “Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens,” Perspectives on Politics 12, no. 3 (2014): 564–581. Original study.

5. Amy Edmondson, “Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams,” Administrative Science Quarterly 44, no. 2 (1999): 350–383. Study.