[taeric]

This feels like answering a different question? That is, I'm asking how you increase motivation. If you are saying to just reframe the task, I guess that makes sense? Did you find specific framings that work for you? Did you stay quantitative on it?

[mettamage]

Well, I think autonomy specifically is in part in how you frame things. Just like in CBT, when you influence your thoughts it will influence your emotions.

Simple example: if you believe an action you did was a really bad thing, you will most likely feel negative emotions about it. However, if you can figure out a perspective that will reframe the information you have in a different light and therefore you now believe it was a positive thing, you will likely feel good about what you did.

Example (I'm improvizing so not fully according to the sketch outlined above):

Negative: I don't dare to talk to that person because they don't know me and it is not done to talk to someone you don't know without a context.

Positive: While it is unusual to talk to someone you don't know without a context, I give that person a chance to meet me. If I tend to do this often enough, then there will be people that are open to this.

[taeric]

I think I'm largely looking for what makes this different from telling someone to just not be depressed?

I can see approaching things in a different way. I was fond of a more Socratic approach for a while, as an example. But that is more than just reframing, that is using a different approach.

For your example, it looks like you are making sure to consider things in a way that does not assume the outcome?

[mettamage]

> I think I'm largely looking for what makes this different from telling someone to just not be depressed?

It's not wishful thinking if that's what you're alluding to. The idea of reframing isn't to tell yourself positive things so that you feel good. It's to highlight positive things that you'd otherwise not have seen and to factor them into the full equation of what it is that you're doing.

It's also more about the following: with many situations it's hard to objectively evaluate the truth to such an extent that different perspectives seem equally true given the knowledge you have. If that's the case, then pick the most optimistic, hopeful and motivating one.

It's not just "the power of positive thinking". There is truth in the fact that a person that doesn't know you hasn't had the chance of meeting you. It's up to you to decide whether that's a shame or not. I personally find it a shame, because the world is a more beautiful place when people are more well-connected in a way that they're happy with. The only way to do that is to reach out to people. Hence, the perspective holds value. Missing out on that perspective would be a shame, but that is what would happen to me if all I can do is having a knee jerk level of a reaction.

Another example is: studying math will teach you discipline. If you hate studying math but you want to learn discipline, there is some solace in that. It's true that many things will teach you discipline, so that doesn't mean that all of a sudden it's all okay now. However, excluding that fact does give a negative bias that doesn't need to be there. Removing that bias gives someone a bit more autonomy, especially when they also have some control over their schedule so they can study when they feel sharp.

Now, it could be that someone then would say "yea but the issue actually is that I'm doing this all by myself". Now you're touching upon relatedness. Relatedness is not something to reframe, it's something to seek out. So you could search for a math community. Now, one could hear "I don't like these people" (or they do and then it's problem solved). If that's the case, it could very well mean they're just not feeling fully socially settled in at school and that's actually interferring with them from having a calm mind.

That last example is semi-auto biographic. What eventually happened was that I got good at socializing and then studying for geeky things became easier again.