Do Nothing: A Life-Changing Philosophy from Celeste Headlee

Annie Cosby
June 18, 2024 | 9 min read

Celeste Headlee was working on a book when she realized that she was overwhelmed and unhappy. She was constantly getting sick and never had enough time for anything.

And she quickly learned that she was not alone. Burnout is real, and it's everywhere.

Like a true journalist, Celeste set out to find out why.

Do Nothing by Celeste Headlee

What Celeste learned was that we modern Homo sapiens live a very different life than the way our species has lived for most of our time on Earth. Through extensive research, she discovered where our unprecedented levels of burnout originated and decided to write a book about it.

Do Nothing: How to Break Away from Overworking, Overdoing, and Underliving is a call to reject the culture of overwork and live more intentionally. It's a call to help change our toxic culture of productivity — the “cult of productivity,” as Celeste calls it.

We chatted with Celeste about the historical evidence that humans are too busy these days and how we can all navigate the modern world in a healthier way.

ANNIE COSBY:How did Do Nothing come to exist?

CELESTE HEADLEE: I was actually working on a different book at the time but found that my life was not working the way it needed to. I was overwhelmed all the time. I was unhappy and getting sick.

I realized I needed to figure it out or I would never finish the book. So I started doing research in my spare time to try to figure out what was going wrong.

Pretty much everybody I talked to about my research would say, “Well, when you find the answer, please tell me!” And that's when I realized I wasn't the problem — I wasn't just one person having productivity and focus problems. It was us.

So it became a book.

AC: You’ve said before that you expected your tech use to be the problem, but you figured out it wasn’t.

CH: I did expect it to be technology. I expected to find that my web-surfing habits and my phone were too distracting for me. So I did some experimentation. I found studies saying that having your phone visible distracts you — and it does, absolutely.

So I would say, “OK, for the next two weeks, if I'm trying to focus, or when I’m sleeping, I will leave my phone in another room.” At one point, I got a dumb phone. I went without my tech for at least six weeks. And it helped.

But it did not solve my problem.

That's when I started to peel back the historical layers. To figure out: “OK, when did this start? When did we first start seeing complaints about this state of overwork, this addiction to busyness and productivity?”

And I found that [complaints] really begin after the Industrial Revolution. That's when we start to see all of these mentions of overwork and complaints of “I don't have enough time.”

Complaints started with the Industrial Revolution

Turns out we lived a very different life for most of the time that Homo sapiens have been on this planet.

AC: Can you speak to some of the habits and specific harms we’re talking about?

CH: We don't have enough time in the world to go into all the harm this lifestyle has caused, but I'll touch on a few things.

One thing, for example, is multitasking. Not only do we know that most people try to multitask, we also know that it’s very damaging to your brain. And when I say damaging, I mean literally.

There have been studies — replicated, peer-reviewed studies — showing that people who try to multitask on a regular basis get shrinkage in their brains.

There have been studies

We know that you are damaging your gray matter, and we don't know at this point if it’s reversible. Unfortunately, we also know that over 70% of people think they're the exception and that they can multitask.

It's really, really hard to get people to stop doing this. I will pass by people's computers and see 80 tabs open.

AC: That feels like a personal attack.

CH: And they have their cell phone sitting on their desk, straight up, looking at the screen so that they know as soon as a notification comes in.

AC: You're describing my workspace.

CH: This is very, very bad for your brain. And we do it because we think we're actually getting more done … when all of the evidence says the opposite. Not only are you getting less done but the quality of the work you're doing is terrible.

That's one of the reasons I use Freewrite to write.

Even minor multitasking affects you. There were tests in which researchers had people simply have email open somewhere in the background on their computer, and their IQ dropped by 10 to 12 points.

AC: That's terrifying, honestly. I think by now we've all heard that multitasking is bad for you, in some vague way, but to hear the details on brainpower is a bit shocking. 

CH: And this is not a shaming thing! I'm not saying, “Oh, everybody's dumb.” We picked up these habits because we have been told to do so by experts or because it feels as though it actually makes us more productive.

We read those articles that say, “Here are the five things successful people do first thing in the morning” or whatever, but we never interrogate them.

We never say, “Wait a second, just because Bill Gates is doing this, is it actually better? Am I getting more work done? Am I experiencing better well-being?” The whole point of Do Nothing was to interrogate this, investigate it.

One of the conclusions that not just I found but that researchers have found, too, is that the concept of “being busy” is now a prestige issue.

When you ask people how they are, they'll say, “Busy!” And the busier you are, in our minds, at least, the more important you are.

AC: That’s so true.

CH: And it’s quite recent.

AC: Did you get any critical responses to the book that either disagreed or argued that it's not possible to “do nothing” in our society?

CH: Well, first, a lot of people thought I was telling people to stop working, which is clearly not possible. And that's not what I’m telling people to do. I’m saying: make work your moon and not your sun.

Another criticism, and this one is fair — in fact, I bring it up multiple times in the book — is that not everybody has flexibility in their work hours. I've been there. At one point, I was working several different jobs and was a single parent. I completely understand. Not everybody has flexibility in either what they do, when they do their work, or how they go about it. I tried to include solutions in the book for people in that situation.

Another criticism that is 100% fair is that I didn't talk a lot about the kind of systemic changes that have to happen to solve these problems. Because this is not a problem people can solve individually, not really.

If you look at the clinical definitions of burnout and the causes of burnout, you will discover that none of the causes can be treated through "self-care." None of them.

And so that's fair criticism. This is a book for people, so I’m just trying to provide some things individual people can do that will help in their everyday lives.

We do need a revolution, and I'm fully aware of that.

We need a revolution

But the rest of the criticisms, I think, come from people who are still very, very invested in the cult of productivity. Some of them are even consultants and public speakers who are focused on helping people dig deeper into the cult.

AC: Did the response to the book vary by generation?

CH: Yes, I got a number of messages from Baby Boomers who thought I was giving Millennials and Gen Z a pass to be lazy.

If any of those people are listening at this moment, you are wrong. Millennials and Gen Z don’t work any less hard than you did. In fact, they most likely work harder than you did, statistically speaking, as a young person.

I'm Gen X, and our reputation is kind of that we just don't care. But I have a lot of faith in Millennials and especially Gen Z. Gen Z does not tolerate what we tolerated, and I mean that in the very best way.

We put up with a lot of abusive crap from not just employers but from parents as well. And Gen Z seems to be aware of it, to be cognizant that it is not fair or just, and not be willing to tolerate it — for the most part. I mean, they're part of the system just like everybody else is.

But I have a lot of faith in them. Look at the rise in the union movement. That is being led by Millennials, with the strong support and sometimes leadership of Gen Z. That can be nothing but good!

Baby Boomers are struggling more, I think, and we can tell that by how many of them are staying in jobs well into their 70s and even 80s.

I am going to be the best retired person. If they gave grades, I would get an A+ every semester. I'm going to be the best. 

And I look at somebody who's 75 and still working an office job, and I'm like, “What are you doing?” Of course, I don't mean to — in any way, shape, or form — disparage those who have to. We have a system of inequality in our nation where there are plenty of people who do not earn the amount of money they need to retire, and Social Security doesn't cover that gap. I'm talking to the rest of you, who could retire and won't.

For one thing, these are very often the highest-paid people at their level. And as layoffs of younger people go on around them, they won't retire. That's terrible for the economy, it's terrible for society, but for you, too — it's terrible for you. 

Didn't you work your whole life for this very moment, when you can go live your life?

And I think that's a really good example of how much Baby Boomers are struggling to let go of this identity. Their work has become their identity, so it can be very scary to retire, because then, who are you?

Their work has become their identity

AC: Yeah, just anecdotally, in my own life, I do see a lot of older folks identifying as their job, and I see Gen Z repelling that. I'm a Millennial, so I'm somewhere in the middle, but I'm definitely at the age where I’m starting to feel defined by my career and I don't love it. What advice would you give to break away from that?

CH: The first section of Do Nothing explores how we got here, and how this is not the way human beings have lived for most of our history on this planet. All of that is aimed at changing our psychology.

And the reason that's the bulk of the book is because that's the hard part, right? Helping people recognize that we have a problem and also realizing that this is not your problem. This is our problem. Our whole society has been brainwashed.

That's the hard part

And once you realize that, you'll see it everywhere. It’s like when you get a new car, and suddenly it seems like everyone drives this model of car. But it requires complete change in perspective to see that thing that has been sitting in your vision the entire time.

AC: Do you see this as a specifically American problem?

CH: I examined all over the Western world, but I would love to see African, Asian, and Middle Eastern writers add in their own history and culture to this discussion. From what I found, the worst places in the world for being addicted to productivity are the U.S., Canada, UK, and Australia. Essentially, all of the countries that were colonized or ruled by Britain at some point.

Now, that is not to say that Europe is doing great. They're just doing better. And I will say that they are much more willing to experiment with what Americans see as radical changes, like the four-day work week, a six-hour workday, shutting off company email at 5 p.m. All those things that are a lot healthier for both your brain and body.

But in the end, most countries are following the lead of the U.S. and the UK, meaning that if they have to get up at 4 a.m. to make a business meeting because it's based in New York, they do.

AC: Since writing Do Nothing and moving on to other projects, do you still have to challenge these ingrained notions, or do you find it easier to overcome?

CH: I'm a work in progress like anybody else. It's a daily battle because, like I said, this is systemic. This is society. And the pressure is constant to get just one more thing done.

But my life is a lot better across the board since I started making the changes outlined in the book. I'm not perfect at it. But life is just better now.

I rarely get sick. I have hobbies now — useless hobbies that don't “add to my brand.”

AC: [laughs] You're not going to monetize them?

CH: I don't monetize them! I throw parties. I have a ridiculously active social life. I'm not irritable all the time. I don't snap at people.

That’s my message. It gets better.

It gets better.

--

“Do nothing.” As a command, it sounds a bit ominous. Like a warning. Like you’re a hindrance rather than a help, or circumstances are beyond your control.

But as the title of Celeste's book, it’s an invitation to eschew humanity’s innate urge to do something.

Because that urge to do something – anything — is innate to human beings, right?

No, Celeste argues, it’s not. For most of humanity's existence, we've lived very differently. More slowly. With less work. And less stress. And it's long past time we embraced that humanly urge to do nothing once again.

Find Do Nothing and all Celeste's books, including We Need to Talk: How to Have Conversations That Matter and Speaking of RaceWhy Everybody Needs to Talk About Racism—and How to Do It, wherever books are sold.

Learn Celeste Headlee's Research and Writing Process with Freewrite

 

Recommended articles

More recommended articles for you

September 05, 2024 7 min read

Everyone has a pandemic story because it's hard to forget. I remember the quickness of it all — societal norms flipping, turning, and somersaulting, which still makes my head spin. "Stuff is gonna get weird," I remember telling my friend. "Especially art."

August 29, 2024 4 min read

Right now, the choice for a writer to use artificial intelligence (AI) or not has been largely a personal one. Some view it as a killer of creativity, while others see it as an endless well of inspiration.

But what if, in the future, your choice had larger implications on the state of literature as a whole?

This is the question that’s being raised from a new study by the University of Exeter Business School: If you could use AI to improve your own writing, at the expense of the overall literary experience, would you?

Let’s explore some context before you answer.

The Set Up

The 2024 study recruited 293 writers to write an eight-sentence “micro” story. The participants were split into three groups:

  • Writing by human brainpower only
  • The opportunity to get one AI-generated idea to inspire their writing
  • The opportunity to get up to five AI-generated ideas to inspire their writing

Then, 600 evaluators judged how creative these short stories were. The results confirmed a widely accepted idea but also offered a few surprising findings.

Prompts from AI Can Jumpstart the Creative Process

Right off the bat, the reviewers rated the AI-guided stories as being more original, better written, and more enjoyable to read. (Interesting to note that they did not find them funnier than the fully human-inspired stories.)

This actually isn’t that surprising. Most writers know the “blank page dread” at the beginning of a project. Even as I write this, I can’t help but wonder, “If I had been tasked with writing an eight-sentence story, what the heck would I have written about?”

Many writers share this sense of needing to pick the “right” story to tell. And that uniquely human concept of perfectionism can end up actually inhibiting our creative process.

A prompt, then, can help us quickly clear this mental hurdle. To test this, I’ll give you one, courtesy of ChatGPT: “Write a story about a teenager who discovers a mysterious journal that reveals hidden secrets about their town, leading them on an unexpected adventure to uncover the truth.”

Can you feel your creative juices flowing already?

Since its release, AI has been celebrated for its ability to assist in idea generation; and this study confirms how effective using artificial intelligence in this way can be for writers — some, it seems, more than others.

AI-Generated Ideas Helped Less Creative Writers More

It doesn’t feel great to judge a writer’s creative prowess, but for this study, researchers needed to do just that. Prior to writing their short stories, the writers took a test to measure their creativity.

Researchers found that those considered less creative did substantially better when given AI-generated ideas — to the point where getting the full five ideas from AI “effectively equalizes the creativity scores across less and more creative writers.”

This isn’t the case just for writing. Another study by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship WZ also found that AI tools most benefit employees with weaker skills.

So is AI leveling the playing field between okay and great writers? It seems it may be. But before we lament, there’s one more finding that proves using AI isn’t all perks.

AI-Aided Stories Were More Similar — And Needed to Be Credited

The researchers took a step back to look at all the AI-supported stories collectively. And what did they find?

The AI-assisted stories were more similar as a whole, compared to the fully human-written stories.

Additionally, when reviewers were told that a story was enhanced by an AI idea, they “imposed an ownership penalty of at least 25%,” even indicating that “the content creators, on which the models were based, should be compensated.”

This leads us to that all-important question about AI-assisted work: who owns the content?

According to Originality.AI, an AI and plagiarism detector, “When there’s a combination of AI and human-generated elements, the human elements may receive copyright protection if they meet the requirements.”

So right now, if a writer uses AI to generate ideas — but writes the content themselves — they retain rights to the work.

However, Originality.AI even admits that “the legal system is having a hard time keeping up” with the rapid adoption of artificial intelligence. Time will only tell what AI regulations will look like in a few years.

What Does an AI-Assisted Literary Future Look Like?

The researchers from the University of Exeter Business School study raise an interesting point about what the future landscape for writers may look like. If droves of authors begin using AI to come up with ideas, we may end up with a lot of well-written yet dime-a-dozen stories.

So will human beings choose the easier, but less diverse, path? Or will we stick to fighting through writer’s block armed with nothing but our own brain?

Or, a third option: can we somehow learn to harness AI to supercharge our writing process without sacrificing the wholly unique creativity that infuses human creation?

That’s one question that even ChatGPT can’t answer.

Editor's Note: Artificial intelligence may have already transformed writing, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't be in control of your own words. Read Astrohaus Founder Adam Leeb's statement on AI and privacy.

August 22, 2024 8 min read

While AI has capabilities that range from coding to image generation, the model that excites — and terrifies — writers is the LLM. It won’t be long before we see the world’s first blockbuster novel, written entirely by an LLM. What does this mean for art, and writers in particular? Is it all doom and gloom? The answer is, of course, more complicated than yes or no.