# How to Break Out of the Spinning Stories in Your Head  | Zindel Segal & Norman Farb

## Метаданные

- **Канал:** 10% Happier
- **YouTube:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxRl2bavlYs
- **Дата:** 20.04.2026
- **Длительность:** 1:04:39
- **Просмотры:** 2,441
- **Источник:** https://ekstraktznaniy.ru/video/47444

## Описание

Ready to begin or deepen your meditation practice? Join Dan Harris and world-class meditation teachers on the 10% with Dan Harris app here:
https://app.danharris.com/membership

This episode originally aired in May 2024.

Your brain has a default setting. It kicks in whenever you're not actively focused on a task, and it tends to fill the space with self-referential thinking, rumination, and habits of mind that feel like facts. Two neuroscientists call this the "house of habit" — and they've spent two decades studying how to get out of it.

Dr. Zindel Segal is a distinguished professor of psychology at the University of Toronto, a pioneer of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy, and one of the world's leading researchers on depression relapse. Dr. Norman Farb is a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto Scarborough whose neuroimaging research has helped explain why mindfulness works — and what it's actually doing to the brain. Together, they wrote Better In Every Sense.

In

## Транскрипт

### Introduction and origin story of the collaboration []

Dan Harris: Dr. Zindel Segal and Professor Norm Farb, welcome to the show. Norman Farb: Thanks, Dan. Thanks for, thanks for having us. It's a Dan Harris: pleasure to have you. Zindel, let me start with you since you've been on this show before. Can you give me the, um, origin story of how your friendship with Norm came about and, and, and how it led to this book? Zindel Segal: Sure. Um, a lot of my interest in working with mindfulness meditation to help people dealing with depression, um, found its way into neuroimaging, because at that time, there was a compelling story of, uh, antidepressants changing the brain and, uh, serotonin, uh, deficiencies being a kind of ironclad argument for antidepressants. And the idea that somehow meditation could also help people, um, was bolstered by the fact that a neuroimaging f- finding showed that people who practiced mindfulness, people who practiced meditation, um, also had changes in brain regions that, um, were important in affect emotion regulation. I didn't have the expertise to conduct those kinds of studies, but I was able to connect with a colleague, uh, at the University of Toronto, uh, Adam Anderson, and his star graduate student happened to be Norman Farb. Norman Farb: Uh, I think his star graduate student went to work for Apple, but I was, like, the backup star grad student. Oh. Dan Harris: His, his, his less well-compensated graduate student is now your co-author. Got it. Um, but maybe more, uh, psychologically stable. Norman Farb: Well, it remains to be seen. A lot of that deep psychopathology emerges late in life, so playing the long game. Dan Harris: So, so Norm, now that we're picking on you a little bit, what's your version of the story? How did this, how did this come about? Norman Farb: Yeah. So I would say, uh, like, like you, Dan, I was not a meditation guy at all. Um, I wa- really wanted to learn neuroimaging. I'd done, like, psychophysiology, and like how the body responds to emotions for a master's degree, and, uh, functional neuroimaging or fMRI, um, is really expensive. And, uh, I knew that, uh, Adam, my supervisor, had something cooking where he had a funded fMRI study, and I wanted to do neuroimaging and emotions for my PhD, and I was already the guy in, in the lab who did yoga, like, on the weekends. So, you know, it was mostly, uh, initially, I would say, like, a, a marriage of convenience, where there was gonna be this big, uh Imaging opportunity is gonna be something kind of new and out there, which appealed to me. Um, and it was, uh, kind of scary meeting Zindel at the start. He's like a distinguished professor at the biggest like mental health institution, uh, Center for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto. Um, so and there was quite a big power imbalance, I think when we first met. I'm like a first or second year PhD student. So at the start, I was just like the person like grinding the scans and, and getting the analysis

### What is the default mode network? [3:00]

going. And I think over the course of then starting to try to write grants together and, uh, just like, I don't know, thousands of meetings. I think I heard you swear for the first time maybe five years into our relationship, and I was like, "Oh, I'm getting somewhere with this guy. " And then Adam ended up leaving to Cornell. I ended up getting hired, uh, to stay on in Toronto as a professor, and so now we're a bit more equalized in our roles, and we continue to meet and trade off clinical and, and neuroimaging expertise as we write papers. So it was really, uh, an organic, uh, relationship. And, and I did start to sip and eventually bathe in the Kool-Aid of meditation, uh, over, over this two decades as well. So we kind of grew together I think. Dan Harris: Well, let's start with a foundational idea for this book you've written. What is the default mode network? Norman Farb: Um, yeah, I'll take that one since it's kind of a brain-oriented one. The default mode network is a constellation or group of brain regions that are activated when you let someone ostensibly relax in the scanner. So they're doing arithmetic or some kind of mental rotation or memory task, and you say, "Hey, just for a couple minutes, just, just relax. You don't have to do anything at all. " And then all these, uh, brain regions, especially on the midline of the brain and then a couple little horns above the ears, light up when you tell the person that they have nothing to do. And so this led to this, um, characterization that this is what the brain does by default when you're not up to anything in, in particular. And, uh, ostensibly, you know, it... 'cause it doesn't show up in, in earlier mammals and, uh, other species. This was originally, uh, a network that kind of takes care of the interior state of the body. But more and more, um, we started to recognize that the default network can be activated intentionally, and it, it gets activated when you start thinking about whether things apply to you or not. So if you see a word like honest, you think, "Oh, am I honest or am, am I not honest? " And when you have those kind of thoughts, you can voluntarily activate the default network. But that was discovered maybe four or five years after, uh, the first publication showing that there's this really consistent, very strong pattern of activity that turns on when you ask people just to do nothing.

### Why they call it the "house of habit" [5:00]

Dan Harris: Why do you call it the house of habit? Norman Farb: So one thing you noti- that we noticed with the default network is whenever things kind of become business as usual, um, and it feels as though the person is no longer putting in a lot of effort to manipulate things out in the world, the default network kind of takes over. So as an example, if you had someone pressing a button to, for a left arrow and a different button for right arrow, and they just started doing that task, it's the first time they'd done it, they're a bit nervous about doing it right. You get all this other stuff happening in, in the top and the front of the brain so they can make sure they're, they're getting, uh, the job done. But after about 20 to 30 seconds, they're like, "Oh, really? That's it? I'm just pressing arrows? " And that's all they're doing. A lot of that activation kind of quiets down, and the default network kicks back in, and part of that might be because they're starting to mind wander a little and, but part of it is also that, um, they've automated their response to the world. They've created a model for the world that exactly fits what they need to do, and no updating is needed, and that's, like, the default network's bread and butter. Um, and so, um, what we've also started to see is that people who have really deep self-evaluative habits, like rumination, people with depression, show exaggerated activity of this default network. And so these different, like, pieces of evidence come together, that it's on when we're not doing anything in particular, that what people report doing a lot of times when they're not doing anything in particular is they think about themselves, like, "What's for lunch? What am I doing in this scanner? " And that sort of thing. That when they do explicitly think about themselves, the default network comes online. Uh, and then when they start to automate behaviors, the default network also comes online, kind of converge to create this impression that, um, what the default network is doing is instantiating and perpetuating our habits over time. And not only that, that our habits tend to be predominantly self-referential or self-evaluative. We're always worried about how things affect us in particular. Dan Harris: So Zindel, would you say our default mode is a happy place or an unhappy place? Speaker 3: Um, I'd say it's an efficient place. I'd say it's a very self-focused place. And I think that if we ever need to step out of those habits, it becomes very hard

### Is the default mode network a happy place or an unhappy place? [7:00]

because we've relied on them, and very often we have very few ways of thinking, uh, differently outside of habit. That's a huge focus in our book, which is to suggest that there are ways of stepping out of habit that are actually quite close at hand, but it's almost like a failure of imagination to be able to conceive them in the moments when we need them. Dan Harris: So is what you're saying that our default mode is adaptive and useful, and if we have no other option, it can turn into an unpleasant and even hellish way of being? Speaker 3: Yeah. I mean, automatic pilot, all of these terms are very familiar to us because, um, they've been used to help us understand how we can do a lot of things and not have to devote much attention to them. But when those things that we're doing a role into problem-solving emotional situations or complex interpersonal relationships. Habits themselves may not serve us any longer if we need to, um, look at different options or consider other ways of responding that are different from ways that we've responded in the past. And I think that that's really where it starts to break down. In those moments, what do we reach for? Um, usually it's other habits. There are other things we can do, but those are the first things that pop into our minds. Dan Harris: Let me quote you back to you. There's a quote in the book that struck me. "The DMN," that's your sh-shorthand for default mode network, "The DMN's mental routines evolved to help us survive long enough to reproduce, but they are agnostic when it comes to our individual wellbeing. " Norman Farb: Um, yeah, I'll take credit for that one. Uh, the default mode network, for sure, it, it's absolutely essential. I would say it's not voluntary that we have mental habits, that we have an internal narrative, that we have a sense of where we are in the, in the world and, uh, and some personal sense of identity. The fact that, you know, regardless of your philosophy, identity, uh, occurs ubiquitously shows that it probably has some necessary evolutionary, um, and life-preserving function. So, um, it's absolutely essential that we have some, some sense of purpose and, and knowledge of what we're up to. And we can see in disorders where that breaks down that it's catastrophic, right? Depersonalization or derealization disorders, a person really has no function, no relation. And, um, at the same time, the things that we've learned just to get by in life, uh, are totally agnostic. Like, the, the system doesn't care at all about whether the model we have makes us happy or content or fulfilled, related, um, unless, uh, there's some sort of threat to our ability to do those two main things that evolution wants us to do, which is stay alive, or at least stay alive long enough to, to procreate and, and pass on our genes. So when we think there might be some threat to ourselves, the default mode network actually isn't agnostic. It will become even more active. We'll tend to double down on the habits we already have. And if that leads us into a really dark place, so be it, because survival trumps, uh, feeling good or, or connected or so on.

### Languishing vs. flourishing — and the connection to the default mode network [10:00]

Dan Harris: Okay, so we've established the default mode network. Let's move on to another key pair of concepts, um, as, you know, because we're gonna, we're gonna stay on the definitional tip for the, for the beginning of this interview before we get into the practical parts. Mm-hmm. Um, uh, so as I said, we talked about the default mode network. You then talk about the difference between languishing and flourishing. So Zindel, why don't you pick up and describe what you-- what are the diff- what are these two states and what, what is, what is the difference? Zindel Segal: Yeah, languishing is a term that actually was popularized during the COVID, um, epidemic to suggest the state in which people are just getting by, not a lot of satisfaction, not a lot of, um, engagement with what they're doing. But, um, surviving difficult circumstances and often by, um, retreating, avoiding, and living, uh, lives of sort of quiet desperation. This is linked to people making decisions about work, um, choices that involved, um, not willing to return to previous routines, you know, something what was called the Great Resignation. But basically, it, it's a, a kind of, um, deficit of the reward system, the ability to feel motivated and incentivized by the same things that kept us moving. It could be a low-grade depressive reaction or a low-grade reaction of despair and hopelessness to circumstances, often external circumstances, that, um, keep people living in a way that's very constricted. So that's languishing. It's kind of just day to day, not really going anywhere, waking up, the whole thing repeats again. Um, and it's in contrast to flourishing, which I think is also a bit of a new age-y concept where people can be seen to maximize passion, maximize engagement, pursue important values and goals, and allow themselves to have, um, a trajectory in their lives where they can see themselves, um, optimizing, uh, values and, um, living in ways where they're both, um, enriching and expanding their sense of self and also, uh, contributing to those people around them. So there's sort of two contrasting views of, uh, lives lived through periods of time when conditions were very challenging. Dan Harris: And so what is your thesis about how we move from-- Well, actually, let me, let me go back for a second. What is the connection between the default mode network and languishing versus flourishing? Zindel Segal: The default mode network allows us to engage in routines that are working for us, that allow us to get through the day. Um, but often they also keep us trapped in, uh, solutions

### How to move from languishing to flourishing: the central thesis [13:00]

to, um, problems that we face that have been kind of tried and true. And so it reduces novelty, it reduces curiosity, it reduces exploration, and it keeps us, in a sense, running off the same script. Um, and I think as a result of that, the things that we're trying to put into the, uh, conversation involve much more of a commitment to curiosity, exploration, and novelty, um, as a way of trying to undo some of these tendencies that are, um, over-rehearsed and often automatic. Dan Harris: Okay. So Norman, I think this brings us to the central thesis of the book, how do we move from languishing to flourishing? How do we escape the more noxious aspects of the default mode network? Norman Farb: Yeah. I, I think it's useful, um, as Zindel already alluded to, to remember that the default mode network is absolutely essential. Habits and the ability to automate our experiences is essential. But to think of it as one of two major psychological, um, forces that, that are being perpetuated in, in our lives, which is a force towards stability, right? So we're trying to, um, find ways to have accurate models of the world, and in doing so, uh, we want to discount things that are going to disrupt our models, right? And try to have the sense that, you know, we're in control and we know what's going on, and that can come at the expense of surprise, new connection, and, and change in general. And for us to really flourish, uh, one of the central sort of aspects of flourishing is this feeling that we're, we're growing and developing, right? If, if we were to tell anyone today is as good as it's ever gonna get, nothing's ever gonna get better than it is now. You already know everything you're gonna, you're gonna know about the world. Um, so yep, good luck. You know, it's, it probably wouldn't be the best day of that person's l- life, right? The best days of our lives are often days where we feel like we've expanded, grown, made a new connection, learned something. Um, and so those are all aspects of change, which the default mode network is trying desperately to minimize. They're trying desperately to minimize how often we become surprised or have to update our own models or change ourselves to accommodate the world. So the thesis is that if we really want to have lives where we have flourishing, um, where we feel like we're growing and developing, we have to undercut the dominance the default mode network and develop a skillfulness in toggling from a state of automaticity when it serves us into a state of, of exploration, where we're allowing the world to change us instead of always making the priority having the world fall into line with, with our expectations and our models. So we have to learn to step out of the house of habit. We have to learn to disengage from default

### What is a "state of sensation" — and how is it different from habit mode? [16:00]

the default mode network as the dominant mode and find a way to balance that with another state, which we think is fundamentally distinct from moving towards automaticity and preserving habit, which we call a, a state of sensation. Dan Harris: Okay, so say more about that. What is a state of sensation? Norman Farb: So if you think about the architecture of the brain being somewhat wiggly between people, there's still some very clearly, uh, delineated parts of the brain that are almost exactly the same for everyone, including where the default mode network is and where the sensory, uh, cortices, where the parts of our brain that first put together sensory information from our sense organs like the eardrums, the retina of the eye, the surface of the skin, and the feelings within our body. And these sensory neighborhoods are geographically distinct from the default mode network. So you can think of the brain as being this massive factory trying to send resources, number one resource being oxygen, to different parts of the factory depending on what it's trying to produce. And to the extent that we're putting a ton of resources into the default mode network, we're somewhat impoverishing our ability to accurately and dynamically represent sensory information. But the converse is also true. If there were a way for us to prioritize sensory input and integrating and exploring and expanding upon sensory information, we would be drawing resources away from the default mode network. But at a higher implicational level, that means we're also drawing resources away from the priority of stability towards the prioritization of change and growth. So the fortunate thing for pretty much every person on the planet is that we do have the ability to choose where these resources are allocated, and we call that ability attention, right? So if we pay attention to our senses in a way that is genuine, and we say that the point of the exercise right now is actually to notice things

### Isn't this just mindfulness? The lower-bar version of the same idea [18:00]

like to notice the contours of my hand right now as I look at it, the weight of my hand in the air, you know, the colors, the different textures, and really that's the point of the exercise. I'm not trying to do anything, figure out what routine to activate with my hand at this point. Then what I'm doing in this very moment is changing the priorities for the brain to activate sensory cortices, and by doing so, I'm necessarily pulling activity away from the default mode network. So when we say engage in sensation, we mean develop some sort of basic skillfulness in intentionally attending to the senses. Dan Harris: Aren't you just describing mindfulness and meditation? Zindel Segal: No. I think what we're describing, and this is potentially disruptive, are some of the fruits of mindfulness and meditation, but I would say that the bar for entry is much, much lower. I mean, some of the motivation for writing this book has come from a kind of public health realization, you know, the success of your app and others notwithstanding, that many people, they don't sign up for meditation. They, or they try it, but they disengage pretty quickly. And so we're trying to find a way of providing them with some of the sensory saturated experiences that some people who practice meditation can get without the practice of meditation being required. Now, maybe that's a very short runway, and without a continuous practice of meditation, they won't get very much further down the road But for the purposes of what we're trying to suggest, there is this natural quieting, uh, response that happens when sensation is amplified through attention and the default mode or, uh, other parts of the brain that are much more thinking-oriented quiet down. And to be able to provide that to a very large number of people might be an important starting point. It's kinda like putting fluoride in the water. It's something that's gonna touch very, very many mouths. It may not fully have the same impact as going to the dentist in terms of dealing with cavities and other sorts of things. But I think what's seductive to us is the reach of the possibility that people can very easily, and without much infrastructure, have this experience of sensation in a way that opens them up to the qualities of exploration, curiosity, complexity, change, um, that you can find in meditation, but that might help them to start to see things even differently on a moment-by-moment basis. Dan Harris: Yeah. I'm, I'm intrigued by that as well. The meditation is a pain in the ass, and a lot of... I mean, I, I do it regularly. A lot of people do, do it regularly, but it's hard to start a habit. It's hard to find the time. And even when you do start a habit, you f- can fall off the wagon. And so it, so the, the fluoride analogy lands for me. Perhaps you could say a little bit more about what exactly is the difference between what you're proposing, the fluoride version, the widely accessible version. Uh, what's the difference between what you're proposing and what I think a lot of people listening to this show will recognize as meditation? Zindel Segal: Yeah. I'll just take a crack at it. So I, I think there is a way in which we're, we're not trying to distance ourselves from the meditation world. In fact, and I've heard this a lot, people often stop meditating because they have misconceptions of what meditation should be doing. So for example, people who start to meditate and find that they're not really good at emptying their minds, and so it turns them off and they stop, or they're not very good at producing relaxation on command.

### Sense foraging: what it is and how to try it right now [22:00]

Meditation's not doing that for them, so they stop. These are, I think, barriers for people to engage in meditation. And so for us, what I would say is meditation practices that emphasize the sensory elements of the practice rather than the conceptual elements are more likely to be, um, tractable for people. Now, on the other end, the disruption, um, that I think people are picking up from the book is that what we're suggesting to people when they practice sense foraging is something akin to a shift of attention into the sensory world. But the barriers are very, very thin because senses are ubiquitous. Sensory information and the possibility of, um, immersion in any moment is right there, literally at our fingertips. And so this shift can be made very easily, very quickly, very portably without having paraphernalia of a cushion and a this and a that and a place. And not that those are bad things, but that we can invite people into this theater to see maybe the first act of a play that they might wanna continue to watch. But the price of admission is very, very low, and they get a lot back from it. They get the neural benefits of this natural quieting, and they just start to realize, I think over time, that sensing is not thinking. Thinking is often the place where many of their problems are, are cooked, cooked up, and yet sensing might be the place where change is possible. Dan Harris: is-- He just introduced it into the conversation for the first time, sense foraging. What does that mean? Norman Farb: So sense foraging is gonna sound a lot like the, the Jon Kabat-Zinn definition for mindfulness, uh, but focusing specifically on sensation. So it's going to be, uh, paying attention on purpose. That probably sounds Zindel Segal: familiar. Stop right there. Yeah. Norman Farb: Um, but to, uh, something sensory that you can, you can notice right now. Um, and, uh, to do it with, um, I would say not an expectation, but with an intention to, to find something that is interesting, surprising, um, or, um, unusual. So, uh, you can think of this as a refinement or a subsection of a broader mindfulness practice where we're really trying to, when we sense forage, is say, "I wanna look for something that I can sense that I would ordinarily ignore," right? That I would normally pass by. Not that we are physically blind or, or deaf to the world around us, but we are attentionally blind to most things just so we can get through life, things done. So sense foraging is saying, you know, "Right here around me, what is something that I would normally dismiss, and how do I explore that for, for a moment or two? " Um, and what we predict is what will happen is, uh, something surprising, and you, and you'll have to step into kinda not knowing, right? If you really don't know when you look at something, that's when you're getting into sense foraging and, and it, it's more than just confirming, "Oh, there's a table here. " It might be, "Oh, I hadn't noticed, you know, the grains on this table before," or, um, "I hadn't noticed how, how dirty it was," or, "I hadn't noticed, you know, that it has a smell to it. " You know, whatever it is, uh, you're waiting and trying to be receptive for, for what's showing up in response to allocating your sensory attention. Um, but there is an expectation that it's going to be something, um, surprising and probably something that, that might be of some use to you, right? I think that's why we use it, the term foraging. You don't go foraging in the forest, you know, saying, "Oh, it's all the same to me if I find a chanterelle mushroom or a bear mauls me. " You go foraging thinking like, "I'm hoping I find something useful. " So, um, so it's paying attention on purpose, uh, i-in the moment, uh, to our, our senses, uh, but with the intention of, of finding something interesting, uh, novel, and, and potentially useful to us. Dan Harris: Well, let's get a little bit more concrete. Can one of you just walk us through...

### A step-by-step sense foraging exercise [26:00]

I, I know the book is loaded, larded with, uh, these exerci- sense foraging exercises. Can you just give us a taste of what one of these exercises, and, and me, ta-taste, uh, obviously is a kind of a loaded word 'cause that is a sense, but give us a, a taste of what a, a sense foraging exercise would be like. Norman Farb: Yeah. I mean, I, I think one that I really like is, um, borrows from the, the three-minute breathing space actually, um, but does a really sensory focus here, which is, um, first take stock of, like, how much you actually care about what the space around you is like. So really just don't... You don't even have to start sense foraging or anything, but we're just trying to notice, like- You know, how much do I care about what this room around me is like? Like right now, we're in a, a studio space that we've never been in before. It's tons of novelty, but I'm really focused on this podcast. So if I first check in, I might say like, "I don't care," right? Because I wanna perform well in the podcast. So I notice like, yeah, I don't, I don't give a shit, right? Like there's a lot of stuff to pick up right now, and that's sort of what's true of me right now. The, the second step would be then to say, "Okay, I wanna set this intention that I'm gonna give myself permission to go out of doing and performing mode and become receptive. " So I'm, I'm giving myself permission to care about what's around me, and then I can just take a few moments and actually look around the room and like what is it like to let go of the task set and actually, you know, care about like the interesting accoutrement of this, uh, studio space, for instance. And so you can, uh, edit in or out as much that time as, as you want, but I would say give it, you know, five or 10 seconds at least. Um, and then you can come back and say, "So, you know, have I noticed anything different? " So for, for me right now, I can notice actually feeling a bit more relaxed because I've put down the weight of, to some degree, you know, I've been neurotic so I don't have to put it down all the way, of performing well in a, in a podcast environment, and I realize I'm also kind of grounded in this space. And, and so it's not a completely new exercise. You can say, "Well, this just sounds just like a grounding exercise that you might do if you have anxiety," and say, yeah, that sense, that's a sense-foraging practice, right? So I think what we're trying to introduce here is not like no one's ever heard of this before, right? This isn't... No, I've never described in mindfulness, right? It's never been done in, in counseling, in psychology, or any other tradition. It's more like this cuts across all of these different, um, wisdom traditions, modern and, and ancient. And what we're trying to do is really to show that there's this one mechanism that's, that's really important that I think is still vastly underappreciated, which is how quickly we lose our ability to care about the space around us and within us, and as Zindel was saying, how imminently available it is. Um, and without a lot of preciousness or, um, you know, bowing and, and kowtowing to, to tradition or anything like that, it's, it's available, and there should be returns like immediately pretty much for most of us who are living kind of stressed, over-automated, over-narrated lives. Dan Harris: So let me just s-see if I can sum up where we are at this point in the interview. Zindel, I'll throw this at you. Um, you, you acknowledge you're not saying something th-that

### Summary: dropping out of spinning stories and into the senses [29:00]

these exercises, these sense-foraging exercises, and we'll, we'll explore a few more of them as this interview continues. It's, it's not, you know, something new in the universe per se, but you're trying to make the, a very, um, uh, urgent point that if we can get in the habit of dropping out of the spinning stories in our head, the spinning stories, the habitual, uh, um, uh, thought patterns of the default mode network, if we can create a habit of v- of It doesn't involve a cushion, it doesn't involve candles, it doesn't involve an altar. It's just you can do it wherever you are at any time of dropping into your senses and out of your thoughts. This can have many, many salutary psychological consequences. Is that a r- as, as a rough summary, am I, uh, am I in the neighborhood? Zindel Segal: Absolutely. I mean, even the well-worn, um, phrase, "Just drop into your body," is still a concept, and so we're trying to take it a little bit further by saying that, um, caring, as Norm talked about, is really attending, but attending, caring enough to attend, I guess, to step out of what you're already attending to. But the, the body is a very big place, and we're trying to increase the resolution of that sort of idea by saying when you shift your attention, shift it to sensations that are already present for you that you can identify and that you can immerse yourself in, because those are real, those are present moment oriented, and those have this natural, you don't need to push it yourself, um, effect on the c- ruminating, overthinking, self-referencing parts of the brain that can, can quiet down, and then you find yourself in a different space. Dan Harris: So you're saying there's a difference between sense foraging and, quote-unquote, "dropping into the body" generally? Zindel Segal: Dropping into the body is an invitation to, to potentially sense forage, to look in the body. Maybe you notice some pressure in your chest. Maybe you notice that your temples are throbbing. Maybe you notice something going on. But sense foraging can also be feeling some, um, air conditioning breeze pass by, um, through your hair. It can see, uh, it can help you see colors that are more vivid. It can help you hear sounds that are unanticipated and localize them in space. It's all of the senses without any kind of, um, uh, I guess ulterior motive- Mm-hmm of, um, looking for something that might connect to emotional state of mind or something that you're experiencing. It really is foraging through the sensory, um, uh, world through the senses themselves and being curious about that. And I would say that the main shift is into a mode of receptiveness, allowing sounds to arrive, allowing sensations to be noticed, allowing, um, images to be recognized. And in receiving, we're not really sure what we're gonna be receiving until we start to categorize them a little bit further down. But that in itself is a very big shift, as Norm said, out of a task set, "What do I do with all this information? What do I do next? " to just letting it wash over me And placing myself already in a very different type of relationship to it. Norman Farb: Yeah. Like, I think it's, it's definitely modeled, you know, in meditation instructions, but I, I've personally, just speaking from my own experience, you know, I've done a body scan before where it's like a checklist. Like toes, yep. Feet, yep. Ankles, yep. And like very little of that time is actually me in contact with my body. So we have this idea like, well, if I'm doing a body scan, of course I'm sensory and I'm in the moment. I'm not just using concepts. But you can completely like reify a body scan and just walk through to be like, "Do I still have a knee? Got a knee. Okay, did my body scan, like I must be a better person now," right? And so in, in that way, all you're doing is, is model confirming. And of course, yeah, it's important to notice if there's something amiss in, in your body or your, your expectations are wrong. But you could also do a body scan in a way that has very little, uh, receptivity, right? And of course, if you've listened to like a, a really skilled meditation teacher, they will leave such big spaces that you're just like, "Come on, why am I still on my toes? I already found the toes. " And they're like, "Exactly. You found the toes, so you, you conceptualized, 'Oh, here's the toe. ' You got the thing, and now what? " Right? And then, and so what we're trying to do is give our own, you know, Westernized, scientific-y, clinical psychology take on, on why this might be. And we have something I'd love to talk about if we have time, is a lot of evidence both that through mindfulness training, these capacities are developed, but also when these capacities atrophy, this is where we really see deep suffering, like, uh, specifically depression vulnerability.

### What the neuroimaging actually showed — and why they were wrong about meditation [34:00]

Dan Harris: Uh, say more about that. Norman Farb: So, um, I think one of the, the big themes we talk about in the book is how, how wrong we were about what mindfulness meditation was doing and about what, uh, made people more vulnerable to depression, and we were wrong in almost the exact same way. So we went into, uh, studying one-- some of the very first, um, neuroimaging, um, uh, trials of mindfulness-based stress reduction, this eight-week course popular- popularized by Jon Kabat-Zinn, probably the, the cornerstone of the modern, uh, meditation science movement. I'm thinking that what we're really gonna see is this very well-characterized self-referential network, the default mode network, was, uh, being turned off by meditation, and that's why people felt better, right? Because, you know, like, oh, they're doing this, you know, Buddhist drive practice. There's no self, so they're gonna realize there's no self, and when the self is out of the way, your problems go away. So cool, like we're gonna put them in the scanner. We know what the self region looks like. We know it's actually a specific part in the front of the brain of the default mode network that's like some of the most involved in self-judgment, and we should just see that turn right off. And then we scan people who'd, you know, done MBSR, mindfulness-based stress reduction, and we scan people who are wait-listed, so they're equally weird and wanting to do meditation, but they haven't done the training yet. And we didn't see any difference, uh, in the activity in, in the self-referential region. Even people without training could turn it down a little bit, um, but there was no training effect there. And, uh, by contrast, we finally sort of like stopped myopically just focusing on this one self-referential region. We saw there were big training effects and that they were, uh, not in the default mode network. We saw that the training effects were that when people were thinking about themselves, they were starting to include activation of, of sensory parts of the brain, especially parts of the brain that map out what happens on the surface of our bodies and inside of our bodies. And so, um, the weakening of the, the dominance of the conceptual evaluative self did not come from destroying or undercutting the ability to have self-knowledge as we know it, but rather by increasing the scope of self-knowledge to include dynamic, momentary sensory impressions of the body in the world at the same time, concurrently with conceptual knowledge. Um, and, uh, sorry to extend slightly, but we can-- I'll let Zindel talk a, a much more about this. As we started to look at what happened with negative emotions, specifically with inducing sadness in people, we found a very parallel story that it wasn't so much the fact that people started to conceptualize and judge when they were exposed to sadness that was predicting the magnitude of their sadness, and later in our larger studies, the likelihood of their relapse into depression. The, the biggest predictor of depression at the time that they're being in the scan or future depression in our larger, uh, prospective studies was how much they were shutting down sensation of their bodies and to some extent, even visual sensation of the film clips that they were viewing, um, while they're in the scanner. That was the real canary in the coal mine. Um, but it wasn't something that the people were

### The real risk factor for depression: not rumination but sensory shutdown [37:00]

spontaneous report it-- spontaneously reporting. This was an effect we saw in the brain. So it's a loss of this dynamic changing signal from the sensory cortices. That was actually the risk marker. Everyone ruminates a little bit when they get sad, and it turned out that trying to just get rid of rumination was to ignore the reason why rumination can be so destructive. It's the, the echo chamber of those thoughts that's actually destructive, not the fact that we have those thoughts to begin with. So I know that was, that was pretty dense, so we might wanna unpack it a bit. No, it was great. Dan Harris: Let me, let me see if I can only just be the dummy here and see if I can restate it in ways that might approximate accuracy. I, I think what you're saying is that the problem comes when we are cut off from our body, from our senses, and it's-- the problem isn't having sad or depressive thoughts, it's that there's no release valve when we're completely disconnected from our senses. Norman Farb: I, I think that's a, a great way to put it. Like, if our senses are where change comes from and our thoughts are stabilizing

### Sensation as the release valve — the butterfly counterargument [38:00]

crystallizing forces, and all we have are the crystallizing forces and they're negative, then it's, you've, you've con- we've condemned ourselves, right? Because I think, "Oh, I'm, I'm hopeless. I'm worthless. I s- I'm a screw-up. " And then we're not, we're not receptive to new information. So the last thing that happened was this like f- this fact And if it was competing with like, "Oh, and there's a butterfly," right? Then like that's a really different place than, than I- that's all I have is this thought, right? And of course, how are we gonna react if that's all there is? Well, then more negative emotion spills up, and then we turn even more away from it, and all we've done is confirm. We've checked if the toe is there. We checked, "Oh, uh, yep, screw-up thought is still there. No competing information. " Dan Harris: So o- one of the, one of your, part of your thesis here is that there's, I think you call sensation the chaotic counterbalance or counterweight to the, the certainty, the habitual, um, judgments of the default mode network. And chaos doesn't necessarily carry a positive connotation, but you, you really mean it in a positive way here that, uh, uh... You said something quite poetic earlier, Norm, that, that in the default mode network, it's kind of us as an isolated ego trying to control the world. In the sensory mode, we're letting the world change us. And so that is this kind of beneficent chaos that you're trying to get us to open up to because then we're not so stuck in, you know, our inner asshole. Norman Farb: Y- yeah, so I feel like I should, you should go, uh, just to finish the thought. Yeah, like if you take it too far, right? And this, and this is stuff that I'm not sure you've had her on the, on the show, uh, Willoughby Britton and, and Jared Lindahl have studied. If you take it too far and you go completely sensory, and you com- and you find a way to completely undercut the default mode network, you also get pathology, right? If you're like, "I'm gonna become an agent of chaos, and I will lose my ability to return to conceptual self-knowledge," then what you get is depersonalization and derealization disorder. The world isn't real, and I'm not real, and there's no room for motivation because there's no models to be surprised. There's no model of, of behavior at all, right? As, as Willoughby would often say, um, you know, you'd-- someone would see a red light when they're driving, and it wouldn't occur to them that the red light meant they should do anything with their foot, just keep driving. So that, that's not good. Um, but I think our, our thesis is that most of us aren't, uh, too close to the depersonalization, derealization edge. The problem is that most of us are really, really steeped in self-concept and knowledge about the world really is a certain way. And so for, for the majority of us, uh, if we had to just ga- guess from base rates, which way would you wanna move first to feel a bit more balanced between order and chaos, which is like a fundamental tension? Most of us could use a little bit more chaos in our lives. If, and, and don't worry, like you're still gonna remember to be the, the selfish, you know, jerk that you are. Uh, that, that'll come back. For most of us, we're not gonna just like lose track of that and be like, "Oh, no, I didn't realize that was at stake," even though in, in rare cases it c- can happen. Dan Harris: Zindel, we haven't heard from you a minute, i- in a minute. What's w- what, what's going on in your head? Zindel Segal: You know, I think that There are a lot of ways in which we're trying to suggest to people that, um, moving into uncertainty, giving up the sense of knowing what's coming next, categorization, labeling, all of these things are very helpful until they're not. But when people start to see that they're not, what's their next step? Where do they go? And sensation is very, very close at hand. But the, um, intention when we meet sensation is really one of being receptive. I think being receptive is an important, um, way of helping people understand what it is that we're asking for. We're not asking for results. outcome, because that's still very task-oriented. Um, we're asking people to see what the next moment brings when they're able to pay attention to sensation, and very often we're richly rewarded because there's so much that can come at us. And then, uh, as Norm said, you know, you're sitting there, you're castigating yourself, something didn't go right, this went wrong, and then it's like, "Wow, a butterfly. " If you can notice that and pay attention to it, there can be an interesting shift in loosening the grip of the certainty and absolutism of a lot of the ways that, um, we're conceiving that moment. And, and very often when we start to move into sensory, um, enriched experiences, that's sort of what comes up. Like, "Oh, I didn't expect that to be there," or, "Wow, that's really vibrant," or, "This is really strong," or, "That's very faint. " And so now we're preoccupied with something else, and we're expanding the space in which our problems and our views of self can sit alongside the possibility that the world is changing and moving at its own

### Radical acceptance and how it connects to sense foraging [43:00]

pace that isn't necessarily coordinated with the way things are in our heads. Sometimes that can leave a little bit of space for people to start to see things or experience or think things through differently. Dan Harris: You talk about radical acceptance or accepting turmoil. Can you describe what you mean by that and how it's relevant to everything we've been discussing up until this point? Zindel Segal: The radical acceptance phrase comes from the dialectical behavior therapy tradition in which one of the ways of helping people who have high-intensity impulsive behaviors and acting out and often associated with borderline personality disorder. There's a way in which radical acceptance tries to build the tolerance for distress in people where circumstances cannot change, they can't be forced, things can't be undone People can't go back into the past and change things that have happened to them. So the radical acceptance is a starting point that allows people to maybe let go of some of those efforts and to start to script a different way of relating to those problems, um, when they come up in their minds. And I think the radical acceptance that we're talking about isn't limited to those more clinical situations. I think what we're talking about is this letting go of expectation and being willing to explore, uh, situations from the perspective of not having an answer at first, but making a move into sensation at first as a place in which to stand, even if some of those sensations may be, uh, difficult to bear, even if those sensations can be challenging. The radical acceptance is a way of moving into that receptivity and seeing that sometimes putting a pause on answering, figuring out, generating outcomes can itself be an important step or an important strategy. Dan Harris: And does radical acceptance happen in sense foraging? Norman Farb: Um, I think it's a skill that can build up. I think, I think accepting the, the physical or sensory world is, it is a radical act in the sense that you're moving out of business as usual and narrating and judging. But it's not, it's probably relatively, um, achievable, right? Like, I can accept that I have a feeling in my body in this moment. I can accept that I, I see something around me in this moment, and I can question, like, you know, what else am I ignoring? Um, I think where it really gets radical in the sense of, like, like out there is when we think about, um, where this becomes not just, oh, a butterfly, but, you know, I'm seeing the, the hurt in my partner or coworker's face, and I, I didn't notice it before. Um, right? Or, like, I'm, I'm willing to start looking at the fact that I have misgivings about something that

### What radical acceptance looks like in practice — Norm's hip story [46:00]

I'm doing, or I feel that I, I don't have integrity in a certain part of my life. Um, these are places that are, it would be more of a radical act to accept because it would be, it would be threatening to the idea that, like, everything's fine. Like, let's just keep going, right? Which is sort of the default whole network process. So we're modeling a behavior in, or scaffolding, um, a, a process of receptivity in a place where probably it's gonna start off at the level of, like, look, a butterfly. And that's why-- And people can dismiss it for that reason and say, "Well, okay, so I'm just distracting myself. Like, whatever. Is it, what's the difference between this and potato chips? " And, you know, if you're really foraging into the, the savory, fatty, salty goodness of potato chips, like, that can be a sense foraging practice. But what we're also doing is, is creating a space where we can notice the kind of things that we deep down habitually have learned to navigate around, um, so that, you know, maybe I'm harming someone else with the way I'm used to being in the situation, right? Maybe, um, the, the things I'm doing to get be successful or, or get things done in the world are actually really, um, causing problems for me at a level that I, I'm putting off that I don't want to acknowledge. And the-- So to start to acknowledge those things is the same act of foraging. It's just that what we've seen from the, the neuroscience side is as soon as this negative information comes in, many of us have a deep-seated habit of, of closing those gates to sensation and immediately trying to fix the thinnest wedge of the thing that we saw, right? So, um, what I talk about from my personal experience sometimes is having developed some arthritis in my, my hip after doing too much like ultimate Frisbee and taekwondo and stuff like that, and realizing I couldn't do those sports anymore, and even yoga now is gotten kind of compromised. And the initial thing is like, "Well, how am I gonna f- fix this? " Right? Like, do I need to do surgery? You know, physio probably isn't totally gonna fix it. Do I have to take painkillers? How am I gonna fix the fact that I have this sensation that's not supposed to be there? And every time I come into contact with it, like I don't like it, I need to find a way to fix it. This is what we call kind of an active inference. Like, I'm supposed to change the world 'cause my model of my body is a model where, you know, I feel fine, um, I don't have pain. You know, it's like we... a lot of us have the model of our bodies like, like we're 18, right? And we're just trying to keep that model going by any means necessary. And so where acceptance comes in is, is saying like, you know, I'm s- actually suffering in some way or, or at least tiring myself. It's exhausting getting upset and angry and frustrated and avoiding all the fa- the fact that my hip doesn't work the same as it did, you know, even 10 years ago, and that it may never be fixable in, in the way that, you know, I, I'd ideally aspire to. What if my model was that now this hip doesn't turn as much, and it kinda gives me twinges during the day, and that was really like who I was and, and I was really okay with the fact that that's who-- how I was. Like, not that I would like a twinge of pain or wouldn't be annoyed sometimes at a loss of mobility, but I was really okay with that's my, that's now my model. I've accepted that's the model of my body. So now all of this like wearying, you know, how am I gonna fix this hip, it's, it's not necessary. Like maybe at some point I wouldn't, I will need to have a, a hip replacement, but I don't have to stress over it every single time it shows up as though like, "Oh, I have to deal with this problem all over again. " It's not a, a problem anymore. And so I'm talking about a, a physical like, uh, um, example here because I think, you know, all of us who as we get older realize that there's this sort of ill-kept secret that like things don't all feel great all the time a- as you get older, and this is a major place where culturally we don't have the ability to... we don't have a skill set for approaching these changes in a way that gives us, uh, eventually a place of, of satisfaction and peace. And we argue, and, and maybe think this is a, a stretch, but we argue that this active sense foraging and learning to be receptive to the way things are is the beginning of letting ourselves change in, in the sense that our models of the world, including the models of our own bodies and ourselves and our behavior, get updated by the things that we really let ourselves notice. And after a while, I just think, "Oh, like that's, that's the hip. Yeah, of course it's there because

### How sense foraging changes your model of the world over time [50:00]

it was there yesterday and it's probably gonna be there tomorrow. " And now I have room to negotiate like, "Okay, so, you know, on to the next thing. " Um, and I argue this also applies interpersonally and relationally, but maybe, maybe that's enough out of me for this one, one bit of the response. Sure. Dan Harris: But it sounds like your argument for sense foraging is, at least in part, it can start as a way to he-help you press eject from the, the less helpful parts of, um, the default mode network. And then it, but, but over time, it can morph into really changing the way you handle a world that is constantly in flux, often in ways that might produce discomfort. Zindel Segal: Yeah, I think that the shift out of certainty and control is a tough one. I think that certainty and control and our models of the world being a certain way, uh, we have a huge investment in keeping them going, and then the models themselves get invested because in terms of forward feedback loops, we're often getting confirmatory information that says, "Yeah, this is the way things are working. " But then things break down, things change, things shift, and that kind of straitjacket strategy really isn't very effective. So when we let in new information, we let in the possibility of updating our models so that there is some room for breakdown, getting older, there is some room for the inevitable kind of impermanence of life that starts to seep in. And with it, the possibility that our struggle against these things can be tempered, uh, because we don't see them as, uh, an absolute challenge to our models. We see them as something which we have to negotiate with, we have to come to terms with, and find a way of, of living with some of that, um, in a way that's a little bit less contentious.

### The nine rules of sense foraging — walked through in a grocery store [52:00]

Dan Harris: Let's talk a little bit more in our remaining time a-about how to do this sense foraging that's at the heart of, of your book. Uh, you've got these nine simple rules. I'm gonna list them and then maybe you guys can jump in and unpack whatever you think might be, might require some more explanation. Yeah. So here are the nine rules. One, you can't force it. Two, you can choose it. Three, ubiquity. Four, completeness. Five, concreteness. Six, immersion. Seven, safety. Eight, you own it. Nine, it's awesome. Say more about these if you don't mind. Zindel Segal: So, um, I'll just, I'll j- I'll take a crack at this. So you're going shopping at the, the local grocery store. You've got to be somewhere afterwards. You've got a shopping list. You've done this a thousand times. And, um- You know, you've read the book and it's like, oh, so they're just saying, "Go for a walk. " That's sense foraging. And I think it's easy to dismiss or, or to see something about the book suggesting that. But the possibility even in a kinda mundane and frequent setting like a grocery store still allows us to meet, I think, all of these principles. So for example, ubiquity, it's right there. Look at the color of every pepper that's on display and try to define-- Sorry, try to label three of them to yourself. Try to look at the texture of the skin of some of the fruit on display. Um, those are ways of trying to, uh, leverage what's in v- available in front of us for the purposes of sense foraging. So that's ubiquity. Immersion, instead of the shopping list and what you've gotta put into your shopping cart, um, allow yourself to see that you're in this highly stimulating environment with all of these, uh, things around you. You can't force it, meaning don't expect to get something out of this

### You can't force it, but you can choose it [54:00]

but allow yourself to fall into it and see what comes at you. Once again, the receptive mode. Um, safety, gonna be pretty safe in a grocery store, but if you're doing this with psychedelics or something like that, make sure that you know what you're doing. Um, at times it can be awesome. Um, all of these things in these kinds of settings, I think, are, are kind of available, and because they are, that's sort of what I meant earlier when I said the, the bar to entry is quite low because you can pretty much find it anywhere. Dan Harris: Norm, anything else you wanna say about, uh, the list of nine? Zindel Segal: There may have been some that I didn't try. Norman Farb: Which ones did we miss? Zindel Segal: Yeah. Norman Farb: Um, yeah, I, I think the, the part I'd like to pick up on is just this idea of you can't force it but you can't choose it. It's not that like... It's not, it's not a, a transaction, right? Like, I'm looking at peppers, so give me happiness. Dan Harris: Right? Norman Farb: It's more that, uh, it's a commitment to understanding that, like, I am always, always kinda committed to a certain perspective that is largely invisible to me, and I only really notice it when I make space for another way of being or way of relating to my experience to creep in. So I can't force my perspective to change because all of my motivation comes from the perspective I'm stuck in. But at the same time, if I choose to take in other information, like I move from like, you know, thinking about, um, my relationship with my students, let's say, to like the textures of the oranges, um, then all of a sudden, uh, things can kind of pop up. Like I'm just, I'm not in this problem-solving mode. My emotions shift, my thoughts shift. I might end up having other insights I come back to the next time thinking about, you know, my relationship with my grad student or something like that. Um, but I've created a, a space, like I've given myself permission To, to shift, right? And I think that's where things can kinda get awesome. Like how... I just, I often think like how much of my time when I'm, I'm s- upset about something, is there nothing about that upset anywhere around me except for the fact that I'm holding onto it in my head, right? Like there, there are times that someone is physically like in your face and is, is causing harm, and some of us are, are privileged to not have it as much of- a- as often as other people. But I dare say that for, for many of us, most of the time, like you have a bad weekend, you're sitting around on the couch or something, and you're, you're holding onto something. You're, you're carrying it with you, and you have permission to choose to do something else. Like as opposed to just saying, "No," like, "I'm bad for doing this," and then you're repeating the thing you're bad for also as you're rehearsing it. Like I can choose to just let myself relate to life as it unfolds in a way that's offered to me by the world around me, right? And that... So when we say it's, it's awesome, it's like when you, when you get that that's something you can do, like that you can put yourself into a space to receive change from the world, just it's like a superpower in the same way that realizing that you can actually plan, you know, your day and, and not completely screw it up is a superpower.

### Access points: nature, art, exercise, travel, meditation, psychedelics [57:00]

It's like you can also unplan your mind in a way. Dan Harris: Mm. Norman Farb: Um, and so even if it doesn't always feel good, it's like awesome that you have this, this capacity just to, to unlock your mind. And I really think it is a, a skill that we could co-develop along with all the analytic and confirmatory and, and model building skills that we already, uh, venerate, um, in our, in our current culture. Zindel Segal: You know, Dan, there's a, there's a poem. Sorry, if I can just add one thing, Dan. Uh, there's a poem by Mary Oliver, "Wild Geese. " Um, I don't know it by heart, but there's a great line in it that I think tries to capture exactly what we're saying, which is, um, I think it starts like, "You don't have to be good. You don't have to crawl through the desert on your knees repenting. Tell me about loss. I'll tell you about mine. " And then there's this awesome line, "Meanwhile, the world goes on. " And it's like all of these gears can be rotating in your head, all of these things, loss, and I'm good, I'm no good, and you're on your knee. And meanwhile, the world goes on. Like all of these sensory things are going on regardless of what you're doing in your own mind, and they're also available for you to plug into, and that sometimes can actually pull you out of that. Dan Harris: You list a bunch of access points for, for this sensory mode. You list them, and then you, you conclude with a great line. Some of the access points are nature, exercise, art, travel, meditation, psychedelics. These are places where, these are target-rich environments for the senses, for sense foraging. And then you say, then you admit, you know, this may sound a little obvious, and here's the great line, "It's not rocket science, but it is neuroscience. " And I am going to steal that and use it all the time. Norman Farb: Perfect. Yeah. As long as there's some takeaway, right? Dan Harris: I mean, it's like Bill Hader, the comedian, was on this podcast a couple months ago, and he said this really funny thing, which was

### The hippies were right — but you get to do it your own way [59:00]

you know, he's, he's started meditating, he's pretty committed to it, and one of his big... And, and yoga and being in nature, all these other things that he's doing to work on his anxiety. And he said the worst part of it is just admitting that the hippies were right. Norman Farb: Yeah. I think there's something to that. I think part of even talking about access points was like, you don't have to give your fealty to any, any one guru or someone like that. Like, if you have a really, you know, uh, divergent personality, um, and you're, you're just like, "I don't wanna subscribe to someone else's stuff, man," like that kind of, that kind of attitude. It's just like if once you understand the principle, you might grudgingly accept like, oh, like, you know, this is what they were talking about. But at the same time, you can still like flex your individualism and be like, "And here's the way I sense for it," right? Like, and it can be something totally weird. 'Cause once you understand that it, it really is like a, a deeply entrenched human principle that we can toggle between these modes of moving towards automaticity and moving towards, uh, receptivity and, and change, um, then yeah, like the hippies were right. And at the same time, like you get to make up your own weird way of doing it, uh, that, that works for you. As long as it- it's kind of safe, you're not hurting yourself or someone else, and you kinda get it, then, you know, more power to you, right? And, um, yeah, I guess that's kind of the, the idea. Everyone gets to have their own brand of sense foraging. No one gets to put the, the trademark on it. Dan Harris: Norm, you just, uh, used a word, um, a key word, and I wanna close on, on this, this word, and Zindel, maybe I'll, I'll let you talk about it. Toggling. Toward the end of the book, you say toggling is at the heart of it all. What do you, what do you mean by that? Zindel Segal: You know, in the meditation world, there's often description of being and doing. Um, the idea that there are two modes available to us, almost like two gears. Most people function in their lives on one gear. The revelation in meditation can be that there is this second gear, there is this other mode, this is this other way of being

### Toggling: the vehicle between the two modes, and why it's at the heart of everything [1:01:00]

and it has characteristics fundamentally different than our habitual modes. And also it can be a mode in which there is less, uh, suffering because the principles of, say, impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, selflessness are more available to us in that mode. So I think this is a kind of nod to the notion of two different modes. Um- Sense foraging versus house of habit. But the notion of toggling is that there is a vehicle that can transport us between these two modes, and the, the fare is not very high. The fare is essentially paying the price of a ticket via attention and via intention to care enough to recognize that at our fingertips, there are lots of sensations that we can plug into and that we can start to receive. In, in addition to that, receive the messages that may be coming through with them that can give us a moment of respite. Norman said earlier that we don't wanna leave ourselves there bathing in sensation, but really not knowing whether up is up and down is down. We wanna have a way to go back changed, enhanced perhaps, touched in some ways to the world that we've chosen to create and live in. And so the notion of toggling is, once again, two modes, an availability, and the capacity to transfer knowledge from one to the other. Dan Harris: Is there some place e-either of you was hoping we would get to that we, that we didn't get to? Zindel Segal: Not for me. Norman Farb: Uh, we didn't go into a lot, a lot of depth about the depression relapse stuff 'cause I sort of spouted it all out at once. But if you think it was distinct and clear enough, I'm happy with that. Um, that's what we spend most of our days foc-focusing on, focusing on. Dan Harris: I think we're good where we're, with what you, we have. Norman Farb: Okay. Zindel Segal: Yeah. I mean, I think it, the, the depression stuff is almost like the proving ground for these larger, larger principles. Um, I think, I think they do extend beyond depression to this bigger point that we're trying to make. Um, you know, we didn't touch too much on like the, the brain and predictive coding and, and active and perceptual inference, but I think we did apply it and imply it in a lot of what we said around the shift into receptivity and, and changing, um, when we, when we have contact with sensation. So I think we did cover a lot of ground. Norman Farb: Mm-hmm. Um, yeah. Ka- uh, Stan, is there anything that we said that was like somewhat in-incoherent and you're just like, "Uh, okay, let's moving on"? Is there anything you want us to try to- Nope... clear up? Or- No. I Dan Harris: think we're good... Norman Farb: do you think this is coming across okay? Dan Harris: Norm, let me ask a last, last question. Just- What'd you think of the book, Dan? Norm, let me just ask the last, last question for you, which is can you just remind everybody of the name of the book and whatever website you've made or other resources that are out there that people can go check out? Norman Farb: Certainly, yeah. The, the book is called "Better In Every Sense," and, uh, the website is www. betterineverysense. com. And the book's available kinda, kinda everywhere. You can search for it and, uh, order it online. It's in a lot of bookstores also. So yeah, hopefully you can check it out. We have lots of little essays popping up into different media outlets, and we'll try to l- make sure those are all linked to, uh, on the book website as well. Dan Harris: Excellent. Norm and Zindal, thank you very much for coming on. Zindel Segal: Thanks for having us, Dan. Take care. Norman Farb: Thanks so much for your time. Zindel Segal: Bye.