It’s 2 AM. A thumb hovers over a smartphone screen, switching between a crisis report from thousands of miles away and a banking app showing a low balance. Heart racing, breathing shallow—your body treats both as identical threats.
One you can act on. The other you cannot.
The Problem With Caring About Everything
Modern information streams treat everything as urgent: wars, scandals, friend drama, overdue tasks, political battles, permission slips—delivered in one undifferentiated feed.
Human attention evolved for immediate, local threats. When we process global catastrophes with the same intensity as personal problems, cognitive systems overload. The result: freeze or burnout.
Not greater awareness. Paralysis.
The Real Question
Not “How do I care more?” but “What actually deserves my finite energy?”
Most anxiety targets issues unchanged by worry. Meanwhile, problems requiring action go neglected because we’re exhausted from everything else.
A Filter Worth Testing
Before letting something occupy mental space, ask:
“Does ignoring this make it worse?”
No? It’s a Hazard—information that drains you without offering leverage. Distant tragedies you can’t influence. Controversies you’re not involved in. Someone else’s crisis that isn’t yours to solve.
Yes? It’s an Unpleasantness—your unpaid bill, the conversation you’re avoiding, the appointment you need. Problems where attention and action change outcomes.
The strategy: firewall Hazards. Not from indifference, but because engaging helps neither them nor you.
Scope boundary: This framework addresses information overload for those with agency to choose attention allocation. For people directly experiencing the crisis—the war, the oppression, the displacement—ignoring literally worsens outcomes. This optimizes individual function during overload, not universal ethics. Some collective problems demand sustained attention despite personal cost.
Escaping Panic Binaries
Under stress, minds often present false dichotomies:
- Quit the job today or stay trapped forever
- Fix the relationship now or lose it
- Solve this massive problem immediately or fail completely
This is distorted thinking, not reality. Reject the binary. Look for the third path:
- Stay at the job while quietly building an exit
- Create emotional distance while clarifying what you want
- Take one small step while accepting gradual progress
The third option—survive while preparing—breaks paralysis.
Making Abstract Worries Concrete
You can’t “fix the economy” or “secure your future” or “solve society’s problems.” These are narrative constructs, not physical objects.
But you can identify one action within 48 hours:
- Money worry → What’s the smallest step by Wednesday?
- Career anxiety → Can I list five actual skills in 20 minutes?
- Everything overwhelming → What’s one surface I can clean now?
This converts diffuse anxiety into executable tasks.
Matching Tools to Problem Types
Different problems need different approaches:
- Logistical (scheduling, tasks): Use checklists and timers
- Uncertainty (future scenarios): Map “if this, then that”
- Emotional (grief, transitions): Allow time and ritual, not problem-solving
Mismatching the tool fails. Emotional problem + logistics approach = failure. Simple task + existential framing = failure. First step: classify the problem correctly.
What About Collective Problems?
The filter asks “Does ignoring this make it worse?” But some issues—climate, systemic injustice, community safety—fall into a gap: you can’t solve them alone or immediately, yet they’re not irrelevant Hazards.
These are Long-Horizon Actions. They require contribution, not solution.
Handle them differently: containerize instead of firewall. Schedule recurring time (weekly “civic hour”) for calls, donations, organizing, or deep learning. Outside that container, disengage without guilt. This prevents both doomscrolling paralysis and burnout—turning panic into sustainable stewardship.
Doomscrolling climate news at midnight produces high anxiety and zero impact. Scheduled engagement produces contribution without collapse.
The Unresolved Challenge
These tools work only if you remember them during panic—when your nervous system screams that everything is urgent.
No reliable solution exists yet. Observation suggests successful application may build reflex through repetition—each time makes the next slightly easier.
One starting point: Next time panic rises, pause and ask:
“Is this mine to carry, or am I just carrying it?”
Often you’ll find you’ve shouldered burdens that were never yours.
Open Questions (Ω)
Ω: Adoption Friction — How do individuals reliably access mental frameworks under acute stress? Research on habit formation under pressure, mindfulness cuing, or stress-resistant mental tools needed.
Ω: Empirical Grounding — The Hazards/Unpleasantness distinction aligns with Covey’s Circle of Influence/Concern and research showing information overload degrades mental health. However, direct validation of this specific filter’s efficacy is lacking. Does selective attention reduce anxiety short-term? What are long-term effects on collective engagement?
Ω: Harm Potential — Does systematic firewalling of distant problems risk isolating marginalized communities or eroding mutual aid networks? Under what conditions does individual psychological relief enable versus hinder collective response capacity?
Ω: Collective Action Boundary — The framework optimizes individual function but many problems (climate, systemic injustice) require sustained collective attention. How do we distinguish paralyzing overconcern (doomscrolling paralysis) from necessary concern that motivates coordinated action?
cafebedouin.org 