More Flow

I think the Flow book confuses 3 types of flow.

The first is the 'big flow' experience which is generally accepted as the definition of flow. It's the experience that operates of a limited timescale and is a deep and fully focussed, enjoyable activity. I have no doubt that this is a good element to a model of the human mind.

The second is the ongoing 'happieness' factor in daily life. The Flow book contends that this can be controlled and is linked to 'big flow'.The link could be via both the ability to experience it and and regularity of it's experience.

The third is something I'm sure is specifically not flow at all. This is when someone jumps into an activity and throws full attention into it for the return of bio-chemical, monetary or other responses. I'm aware that everything in human experience is basically bio-chemical, but I'm specificall thinking about things like gambling. I'm also referring to flow activities that are pursued to the level of being self-destructive. Adrenaline junkies, dopamine junkies, etc.

This is interesting because something that was 'big flow' can become something that is no-longer flow. Without a definition for 'big flow' it is easy to see how some people might get very dissillusioned by a change like this. So how can we define Flow better then?

We appear to have a conundrum: which came first, the flow or the enjoyment? This discussion suggests to me that the link is the other way up. You don't enjoy flow because of itself, but that flow is flow because you enjoy it and are therefore investing time and effort in something you enjoy. Now 'big flow' has become more understandable: an absolute investment of attention in a task which is, of itself, enjoyable. The investment doesn't automatically make the task enjoyable.

Let's investigate the middle of the three then. 'Little flow', or 'enjoying life'. To enjoy life, it seems self-evident that you must commit yourself to the here and now with 'just enough' vigour. However, can a non-enjoyable task become enjoyable purely through investing effort? I suspect this is only true if the enjoyment is found in the investment of effort itself.

So, if one finds enjoyment in making an effort then any task can become enjoyable by proxy. Therefore the simplest way to deal with non-enjoyable tasks is to cultivate an enjoyment of making an investment of effort. I guess this is part of what makes 'big flow'. You have the twofold enjoyment of the task. Also, this will reinforce the sense of enjoyment in investing effort.

I totally agree with the Flow book that external demands cannot make a task enjoyable. It is also difficult to see that delayed rewards can make a task enjoyable - although it can make a task much more bareable.

I'm basing this purely on my own thoughts, so untested by experiment and unbacked-up by research.