#1 ·
I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the concept of "friction" in our modern lives. We live in an era that is fundamentally designed to remove it. Everything—from ordering a meal to booking a flight to accessing almost any substance or service—is engineered to be as frictionless as possible. We want the "one-click" life. We want the delivery driver at the door before we’ve even finished deciding what we want. We have essentially conditioned our entire society to view any form of barrier, delay, or hurdle as an inherent evil or a failure of progress.
But lately, I’ve started to wonder if we’ve lost sight of the value of a little bit of resistance.
There is a specific kind of psychological safety that comes from having boundaries. I look at how we treat different types of substances and products, and I see this massive, widening gap between what is considered "too dangerous to be sitting on a shelf next to the milk" and what is considered "totally fine to grab while you're filling up your tank." On one hand, we have these incredibly strict, heavily policed barriers around certain things, and on the other, we have a complete free-for-all with things that can be just as transformative or destabilizing for a person’s mental state.
I don't think people realize how much our environment dictates our impulses. If you are someone struggling with impulse control, or someone trying to maintain a certain level of stability, the sheer accessibility of certain things can be a nightmare. It’s not just about "good" or "bad" substances; it's about the context of availability. There is a massive difference between having to go to a specialized shop or a medical professional to acquire something, versus being able to pick it up as an afterthought while you're already out running errands. That extra step—that moment of pause where you have to actually make a conscious decision—is often the only thing standing between a momentary impulse and a life-altering mistake.
When we strip away those layers of regulation and convenience, we aren't just "liberating" the consumer. We are also removing the guardrails that protect the most vulnerable among us. I have friends and family members who have walked incredibly thin lines in their lives, and looking back, I can see how much easier their path would have been if certain things hadn't been so casually available in high-traffic, everyday locations. It’s not about prohibitionism for the sake of being a moralist; it’s about the architecture of our surroundings.
I find myself feeling a bit skeptical of the "everything should be legal and easy to get" crowd. It’s a nice sentiment in a vacuum, but in the real world, where human psychology is messy and often unpredictable, that lack of friction can be devastating. There is a certain mercy in a regulated environment. It provides a buffer. It creates a space where a person can think, "Wait, do I really want this?" before the transaction is already complete.
If we continue down this path of making everything instantaneous and hyper-accessible, are we actually improving quality of life, or are we just making it easier to fall? I think we need to start talking more about the "safety of the hurdle."
Do you think we've gone too far in removing the "friction" from our daily lives, or is total accessibility the ultimate goal of a free society?
But lately, I’ve started to wonder if we’ve lost sight of the value of a little bit of resistance.
There is a specific kind of psychological safety that comes from having boundaries. I look at how we treat different types of substances and products, and I see this massive, widening gap between what is considered "too dangerous to be sitting on a shelf next to the milk" and what is considered "totally fine to grab while you're filling up your tank." On one hand, we have these incredibly strict, heavily policed barriers around certain things, and on the other, we have a complete free-for-all with things that can be just as transformative or destabilizing for a person’s mental state.
I don't think people realize how much our environment dictates our impulses. If you are someone struggling with impulse control, or someone trying to maintain a certain level of stability, the sheer accessibility of certain things can be a nightmare. It’s not just about "good" or "bad" substances; it's about the context of availability. There is a massive difference between having to go to a specialized shop or a medical professional to acquire something, versus being able to pick it up as an afterthought while you're already out running errands. That extra step—that moment of pause where you have to actually make a conscious decision—is often the only thing standing between a momentary impulse and a life-altering mistake.
When we strip away those layers of regulation and convenience, we aren't just "liberating" the consumer. We are also removing the guardrails that protect the most vulnerable among us. I have friends and family members who have walked incredibly thin lines in their lives, and looking back, I can see how much easier their path would have been if certain things hadn't been so casually available in high-traffic, everyday locations. It’s not about prohibitionism for the sake of being a moralist; it’s about the architecture of our surroundings.
I find myself feeling a bit skeptical of the "everything should be legal and easy to get" crowd. It’s a nice sentiment in a vacuum, but in the real world, where human psychology is messy and often unpredictable, that lack of friction can be devastating. There is a certain mercy in a regulated environment. It provides a buffer. It creates a space where a person can think, "Wait, do I really want this?" before the transaction is already complete.
If we continue down this path of making everything instantaneous and hyper-accessible, are we actually improving quality of life, or are we just making it easier to fall? I think we need to start talking more about the "safety of the hurdle."
Do you think we've gone too far in removing the "friction" from our daily lives, or is total accessibility the ultimate goal of a free society?