Story
Emily sat in her hotel room, breathing the scent of unknown cleaners and staring at her laptop screen. Her fourth recital of her presentation had just trailed off, when she spotted a muddled and misleading bullet point on the fifth slide. She’d been through this deck more than a hundred times this past week. How had she thought that line would make sense to anyone?
She presented at nine tomorrow morning, earlier than she really liked. What if her colleagues felt the same, and no one came? Alternatively, what if everyone did, including Rahul? Rahul worked in a related area and did not seem to like her. He also had a way of asking good, challenging questions — and then refusing to listen to the answers.
And there was the issue her advisor had brought up. She had adjusted her explanation to clarify the proof to the audience, but then, a week ago, she had seen another possible point of confusion in the adjusted version. She thought she had fixed it, but what if she was wrong? Or what if her rapid summary in the presentation left out too many details? Rahul would ask about it, and she would try to explain, and he would talk over her. And someone would probably ask why this problem interested her in the first place. What if she found herself completely dumbfounded? What if the editor of a prestigious journal came and saw her stumbling around like there was nothing in her head but mush?
She glanced at the clock; it was already past midnight. The last thing she needed on top of these nerves was to go in with only a few hours’ sleep. But how could she sleep?
As she leaned back, exhaustion pulling at her eyelids, something shifted. She reminded herself that she could not know what questions her audience would ask, and with the reminder came a wave of relief. The future was a mystery, so she would have to focus on the present. Her future self, the one who would give the talk, would have to answer the questions at that time. She didn’t have to be stuck in this narrative.
The weight of expectation lifted, and she felt a profound sense of alignment. It was as if all the pieces of her mind—the worried self, the analytical self, the confident researcher—suddenly harmonized.
In this state, she felt empowered. She was no longer at war with herself but operating as a cohesive unit. She didn’t feel stuck in her story about the audience’s questions. In this state, Emily was able to make the choices she needed to make: practicing her talk one more time, then setting it aside to go to sleep.
Analysis
In this story, Emily is engaged in a particularly human behavior: that is discussion with herself. At first, she tells herself that no one will like her talk. This negative self-talk anticipates the Emily’s efforts will not be rewarded with pleasure. I would argue that this self-talk relates to Emily’s particularly modern context. Hunter gatherers didn’t have to give academic talks that could lead to acceptance or rejection by strangers. They typically spoke to audience of people they’d known their whole life. The idea of sharing a presentation with strangers is mostly outside of the DHR (the Default Human Range, or the range of positive experiences that humans evolved with). However, social rejection is inside the DHRS (the Default Human Range of Stressors). The Default Human Range of Stressors consists of unpleasant experiences that would have been rare and dangerous for hunter gatherers – but, at least in some cases, more common and less dangerous for modern humans. In this case, the experience of rejection would be dangerous because ostracism from the group could be a death sentence. Therefore, it is not unusual for Default Human Range of Stressors events to lead to negative self-talk.
Later, Emily is talking to herself and reminding herself that the future is a mystery. This is positive self-talk, and is closer to the Default Human Range. Hunter gatherers, too, would tell stories or narratives to themselves and to each other. Hunter gatherer storytelling can help to solve a particularly modern problem: increased concerns about the future. With the advent of economics and wealth, we’ve become interested in our future. We have to educate ourselves in order to have a career. We have to save money in order to become wealthy. But worrying about the future is stressful – not because it’s intrinsically worse than other worries, but because it’s relatively less in the range of hunter gatherer experiences. Emily applies this hunter gatherer storytelling to frame the situation differently, saying that “the future is a mystery.”
Storytelling and self-talk are appealing because humans like talking to other humans. As Lev Vygotsky argued, thought and language – one autonomous, the other dyadic – are closely interrelated. However, when humans are frightened, they may engage in negative self-talk instead of positive self-talk. Emily’s positive self-talk is an example of a Default Human Range state. In this Default Human Range state, Emily experiences pleasure and learns that pleasure can be the outcome of her preparations, contributing toward her overall optimism about effort.
Vocabulary
- Default Human Range (DHR): the default range of positive experiences that humans evolved with.
- Default Human Range of Stressors (DHRS): events that would be dangerous for hunter gatherers, leading to stress, even if the event may be more common and less dangerous for modern humans.
Nexus State Theory 