Aversion Factoring

A CFAR technique for decomposing complex aversions into their specific, addressable components. Based on the LEGO brick model: no activity is monolithically aversive — aversions are collections of distinct sub-aversions that lose valuable detail when averaged together.

Three Modes

1. Design Mode — Map out an aversion and create a targeted plan to address each component
2. Practice Mode — Walk through the technique on a moderate aversion to build skill
3. Execute Mode — Decompose and address a real aversion blocking the user

Core Insight

"I hate going to the gym" isn't one feeling — it's a bundle: the drive there, the locker room, the equipment, the self-consciousness, the time cost, the post-workout soreness. You might be fine with 80% of it and only truly averse to 1-2 specific things. Fix those specific things and the whole aversion may dissolve.

Core Process

Step 1: Articulate the Aversion

"What do you avoid or dislike? Be as specific as you can about the activity."

Step 2: Decompose Into Sub-Aversions

List everything that contributes to the aversion:

• "Walk through doing [the thing] step by step. Where does your enthusiasm drop?"
• "What's the worst part? What's the second worst?"
• Include: weird impulses, trivial inconveniences, concrete sensory details
• Don't filter — trivial things matter (a missing barbell pad prevented someone from going to the gym for months)

Step 3: Button Test

For each sub-aversion, mentally press a button that removes it: "If [sub-aversion] magically disappeared, would you do the thing?" This reveals which sub-aversions are actually blocking you vs. which are minor irritants.

Step 4: Categorize and Address

For each significant sub-aversion:

External/situational → Address with concrete action:

• Self-consciousness at gym → Go at off-peak hours, wear headphones
• Missing equipment → Buy your own pad/mat
• Time cost → Reduce to 15 minutes instead of 1 hour

Internal/psychological → Address with reframing or graduated exposure:

• Fear of looking foolish → Graduated exposure: start with low-stakes situations
• Feeling of wasting time → Reframe: "This is an investment in energy for everything else"
• Boredom → Add podcasts/audiobooks/music

Step 5: Mindful Walkthrough

Conduct an actual or imagined walkthrough of the activity with defenses in place. Where does resistance still appear? Address remaining pockets.

Facilitation Prompts

Opening: "What's something you avoid or hate doing? Let's break it down into pieces."

Decomposition: "Walk me through what it's actually like to do this. Start from the beginning." / "Where exactly does it start feeling bad?" / "What's the single worst moment?"

Button tests: "If I could magically remove [sub-aversion], would you be okay with the rest?" / "Which one thing, if fixed, would make the biggest difference?"

Solutions: "For [specific sub-aversion], what would make it tolerable?" / "Who does this without minding it? What's different about their setup?"

Common Patterns

• Trivial inconvenience dominance: The blocking factor is often surprisingly small and easy to fix
• Sensory specificity: The aversion is about a specific physical sensation, not the activity in general
• Social component: Many aversions are really about what others think
• Time/energy accounting: The aversion is about opportunity cost, not the activity itself

Common Failure Modes

• Treating as monolithic: The whole point is decomposition. If the user says "I just hate it," push for specifics.
• Dismissing trivial inconveniences: Small things compound. Take them seriously.
• Over-applying to protective aversions: Not all aversions should be overcome. Fear of standing near speeding cars is good. Ask: "Is this aversion protecting you from something real?"
• External fixes for internal problems: Some sub-aversions need reframing, not environmental changes.
• Stopping too early: Use button tests to verify you've found the real blockers.

Practice Exercise

1. Pick a moderate aversion (a chore, a type of meeting, a health habit)
2. List 5+ specific sub-aversions
3. Button-test each one
4. Identify the top 2-3 actual blockers
5. Design one concrete fix for each
6. Imagined walkthrough: Is it better now?

Integration

• Goal Factoring: Aversion Factoring is goal factoring focused on the cost side
• Internal Double Crux: When the aversion reflects a genuine internal disagreement
• TAPs: Create trigger-action plans to implement the fixes
• Focusing: Access the felt sense of the aversion for deeper understanding