TL;DR
Get workout gear delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
Tiny Buddha published an essay by psychotherapist Steve Hauptman about accepting that people cannot meet every goal or obligation at once. Hauptman uses a Rubik’s Cube metaphor and a personal hospital visit to describe how recognizing trade-offs can replace self-blame with acceptance. The essay is personal reflection, not a clinical study or a newly announced research finding.
Tiny Buddha has published an essay by psychotherapist Steve Hauptman arguing that people cannot get every part of life right at the same time, and that treating ordinary trade-offs as failure can add unnecessary pressure. Hauptman draws on his own competing responsibilities and a hospital visit to describe a shift toward accepting choices and their costs.
Hauptman compares life’s competing demands to a Rubik’s Cube: concentrating on one side can leave the others scrambled. He lists familiar conflicts, including choosing between seeing clients and doing household chores, spending time with family and working on a book, or socializing and watching his weight. His point is not that one choice is always better, but that attention and time are limited.
He describes the idea as a paradox of control: trying to get control in one area can mean giving it up elsewhere. The essay illustrates this with examples of people prioritizing work, alcohol, parenting, or concealing difficult feelings, while facing costs in other parts of their lives. These are illustrations from his essay, not evidence from a study or claims about every person in those circumstances.
Hauptman says he has become less likely to treat an untidy home, an unwritten page, or a declined invitation as proof that he has failed. Instead, he sees each as a reminder that every “yes” includes a “no.” He closes with a personal account of going to an emergency room after a cardiogram showed a blip that his doctor said could suggest a transient ischemic attack. While waiting for tests, he says, he took a nap rather than reacting with his earlier frustration and worry.
The Cost of Competing Priorities
The essay speaks to readers balancing work, relationships, rest, and personal goals. Its practical relevance is the distinction Hauptman makes between making a choice with a cost and interpreting that cost as evidence of personal failure. That framing may help readers describe why an apparently ordinary decision—such as working late or leaving chores for another day—can trigger guilt when they expect to satisfy every demand at once.
Hauptman’s account is a personal perspective, not a tested intervention or medical recommendation. The essay does not establish that accepting trade-offs resolves mental health conditions or relationship problems. It offers a way of thinking about limits and priorities, while leaving readers to decide how well that perspective fits their own circumstances.
Hauptman’s Control Metaphor
Hauptman identifies himself as a “control addict,” using the phrase to describe a desire to make circumstances and outcomes conform to expectations—not simply a wish to boss other people around. He frames the essay around three paradoxes he says he has noticed in efforts to control life, including the idea that pursuing control in one place can mean losing it in another.
The piece is published by Tiny Buddha and is presented as reflective writing. The source identifies Hauptman as a licensed clinical social worker and author of Monkeytraps: Why We Try to Control Everything and How We Can Stop, originally published in 2015. It does not provide research findings, outside expert responses, or a comparison of the essay’s ideas with clinical guidance.
““Inside every ‘yes’ there’s a ‘no.’””
— Steve Hauptman, in the Tiny Buddha essay
Limits of a Personal Essay
The source does not state the essay’s publication date, report any new study, or provide independent evidence for Hauptman’s observations about control and trade-offs. His examples and hospital account are his own descriptions; the essay does not say what tests found or whether the suspected transient ischemic attack was confirmed. It also does not claim that the approach will work for everyone or replace professional support.
No Further Development Reported
The source material reports the essay’s publication but gives no follow-up event, scheduled milestone, or response from Hauptman or Tiny Buddha. Readers can consult the original essay for its full account. Any later research, clinical guidance, or developments in Hauptman’s work are not reported in the material provided.
Key Questions
What is the essay about?
It is about accepting that people cannot meet every responsibility or goal at once. Hauptman argues that choices involve trade-offs and need not be treated automatically as failures.
Who wrote the piece?
Steve Hauptman, identified in the source as a licensed clinical social worker and author, wrote the essay published by Tiny Buddha.
Does the essay report new research?
No. The source presents it as personal reflection and does not cite a new study or research findings.
Was Hauptman’s suspected TIA confirmed?
The essay says a cardiogram showed a blip that his doctor said could suggest a transient ischemic attack, prompting a trip to the emergency room. It does not report the test results or say whether a TIA was confirmed.
Source: rss
Halloween Picks
halloween
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
