Everyday Questions Wanting Rational Answers

Calvin: Know what I pray for?
Hobbes: What?
Calvin: The strength to change what I can, the inability to accept what I can't, and the incapacity to tell the difference.
Hobbes: You should lead an interesting life.
Calvin: Oh, I already do!

1) I work in an environment where problems can't really be left unsolved. Although I kind of appreciate the Serenity Prayer, it's one of those sentiments which I think belongs to other people.

If I experience dismay about a problem, I know it's something which I can probably rectify but don't want the hastle of having to deal with, (c.f. courage). If it's something I actively dread, I know I'm being given responsibility for something which is probably beyond my ability to solve (I'm not sure serenity is quite what I need in this case; resigned dour commitment, maybe). Distinguishing between the two is just a matter of knowledge on a case-by-case basis. I don't think there's any general wisdom for sorting them. I don't think problems generalise that way.

If I were a theist, I think I'd probably just pray for problems with satisfying solutions.

2) There's a colloquialism you may or may not be familiar with called a "dick-move". I have had a lot of cause to use this term recently, and have concordantly been thinking about it a lot. Doing something which gains you a minor benefit at enormous cost to another person is a dick-move. I am a little annoyed that I haven't found a better convenient term for it in utilitarian or economic lexicons. If you know of one, please tell me.

(Edited to add: I'm aware of a number of economic concepts this is an example of, but I'm not aware of an exactly analogous term. The closest I can come up with is "negative-sum negative externality", which is so cumbersome I'd rather use "dick-move")

I think a reasonable request is one that's based on a reasonable transaction. When I reap a benefit at a cost to you, I'm putting a value on your discomfort. Being thrifty with your discomfort and spending it wisely makes me a good friend and ally. If I spend your discomfort haphazardly and carelessly, it makes me a liability to be around. If I make a request which undervalues your discomfort, I'm being cheeky. If I force that undervalued discomfort on you, I'm pulling a dick-move.

Not much to contribute on (3), as my frequent falling asleep on public transport can attest to.

The William James zone is the positive feedback loop of mental and physical anger responses which keep you a person even after the conflict has been addressed or resolved. I find myself in the WJZ sometimes when I remember or anticipate something which made/would make me angry, even when no conflict is presently occurring. This happens primarily when I don't have a ready distraction from the upsetting thought, e.g. when I'm in the shower or waiting to fall asleep. Other than simply waiting for it to pass, how can I get out of the WJZ or avoid entering it?

So far, the only mitigating factor I've found is my overall physical and mental state. Being hungry, tired, or stressed makes it easier to fall into the anger cycle and harder to get out. Therefore, taking care of myself in general helps to prevent it, but it's not always possible to remedy those problems after the cycle has already started.

Maybe the thing to do is direct the physiological arousal to another end? You're all revved up, so go get some exercise, or something?

When is it okay to ask someone for a little time to vent?

Probably if that person is extroverted enough, or has enough time, that they're open to spending chunks of time just talking to people; also if you haven't presumed on that person's kindness too often. (I worry about that last one a lot: i relied on the same person to make me feel better many times this past year, when I wasn't in the most sensible frames of mind, and I think it probably cost me his respect.)

Just looking at the second paragraph, I don't think I agree with your definition of an unreasonable request. I think very few exchanges are really equal, but that doesn't make all interactions unreasonable.

In my mind, the stronger your relationship is, the more uneven the request could be. You could ask a stranger in the movies to perhaps remove their hat, but you can ask your best friend to watch your cats for 3 weeks.

I suspect that part of the reason it's okay to ask more of people with whom you have stronger relationships is that there is an expectation that they will at some point ask the same of you. The stranger in the movie you're never likely to see again. But your best friend will be around when YOU go out of town for a month. It's not really a "they'll be around to repay the favour" as much as "over the expected lifetime of the relationship there will be enough back-and-forth to come out even".

OK, I'll try and answer with fairly straight-forward points, as you seem to be in need of practical ways of judging these kinds of decisions:

1) When thinking about "things that need changing", it is very important to know two things first: a) How important is it to you? b) How easy is it to obtain?

You then decide if or not the combination of the two surpasses your "internal threshold". Or, if you're so inclined, think of it as an equation: if (difficulty / importance) > threshold: go for it.

In human language: If something is important to you, but it is extremely/impossibly difficult, you might want to just let it go. This is basically what the prayer alludes to.

Of course, you realize by now that the wisdom actually lies in being able to judge importance, difficulty and your internal threshold. This is something which you will simply have to practice all your life. If you keep yourself mindful about what worked/what didn't work and what made you happy/what didn't, this is doable.

Another helpful tip in this area is to realize that your idea of what is important is inherently subjective. Most philosophical thinkers will then tell you that you should tune down the importance of "need" (for physical stuff especially) and tune up the importance of moral values (e.g. loyalty, etc).

2) This one is fairly easy to solve: flip the roles in your head. What if someone were to ask you in exactly the same circumstances for the same thing? What would you feel about that? This should give you guidance in the appropriateness of the question. (This is by the way pretty much the "do unto others as you would them do unto you" rule.)

3) Productivity that simultaneously makes you unhappy while doing it and provides you with long-term happiness is as undesirable as non-productivity ("comfort") that makes you happy in the instant and unhappy in the long-term. Why not go for productivity and non-productivity that makes you happy both in the instant AND in the long-term? None of these things are mutually exclusive. Breaking this down is fairly easy: do a job you enjoy (no excuses!) and give yourself well-deserved breaks when you've earned them (no excuses). Neither of those situations should make you feel guilty in the slightest, otherwise you're doing something wrong.

Psychologically, consider this: in the long-term, you will only remember the fun and exciting bits (both work-wise and leisure-wise). You will not even remember the "hard but boring work" in a few years! This implies that your long-term happiness relies on being able to aggregate whole series of happy memories, none of the boring bits are important.

Caveat 1: Sometimes you do have to do something you don't enjoy. Just don't make it a life-style. Caveat 2: Some "comfort" gives you as little positive memories as boring work does. I'd put doing drugs and playing a lot of video-games in that category, but you can make up your own mind about that.

Questions to ask about the wisdom to know the difference would be "Have other people changed this thing? How? What else do I know about the situation?"

what are some rational criteria for deciding between those two responses to an unfavorable situation

Change has inside-out structure. You have greatest influence on yourself, so among the things likely to rank high in "can be changed with courage" are all elements of your personality, starting with your own thinking. Next comes your behaviour. A distant third is your body.

Other people are harder to change, the harder with the various distances that separate them from you: physical, informational, cultural.

Structures involving many people are correspondingly hard to change, but conversely can be leveraged to have influence on many others through a single effort.

Things beyond the thin organic shell surrounding planet Earth are in all likelihood beyond your power to change.

I, too, appreciate the Serenity Prayer despite being entirely nontheistic. I also have a hard time answering it.

In borderline cases concerning asking for something, try phrasing it as a statement of preference or a humble request rather than a command; instead of "make me a sandwich while you're in the kitchen" "oh man sandwiches sound delicious, would it be possible for me to get one too while you've got the bread out?"

As for balancing short and long term... I am this very moment in the process of struggling with the question.

it's almost certainly a better idea to do my homework at some point than to spend the entire week playing video games.

When I was in college, I usually ended up coming to the opposite conclusion. ;)

How can you tell when you've hit your peak at something? For example, on the discussions of Go around here people speak of hitting plateaus that might last for months, and then suddenly beginning to improve again. So how do you tell whether you've just hit a plateau and need to take a break or change approaches, versus actually hitting your ability cap?

1. is a matter of cost/benefit Except maybe for the laws of nature anything can be changed, the question is whether the effort of doing so provides less disutility than the benefit provides utility. That's a question only trained introspection can answer.
2. It's not that you ask, it's how you ask in the second example that makes it bad. The first thing you should do is accept the full responsibility for your own life. If you do this you can always ask for anything in a polite way as long as you clearly treat others as equals and don't imply that you would be entitled to anything except that which has been mutually agreed upon.
3. Always be sure about your midterm and longterm plans, then get as much short term fun/comfort/benefits as possible without endangering them and leave as much error margin as you need to feel good about it. If you keep checking your progress with your midterm/longterm plans you should become well calibrated with this assessment.