Expanding on Humans are not automatically strategic, I've noticed similar patterns for people who are working on improving their own and others' mental/emotional states.

We do not automatically…

• Wonder “Who like me has successfully solved this problem — and what did they do?”, then copy the most successful plans.
• Do assignments we "know" would be good for us—or at least work directly on that avoidance when we notice it.
• Discuss success stories of specific people who improved their lives in observable, undeniable ways from 'inner work'.
• Work with people who have produced that result for others before.
• Avoid practitioners who do not track lasting results, and therefore can't know whether they're facilitating lasting results or flaky breakthroughs.
• Avoid practices that seem to have kept people like us (our friends) stuck for many years.
• Follow up to see whether people's lives improved months/years after interventions. — Did they solve real problems in their lives? E.g., Did the dating coaching result in happy relationships?
• Align incentives, so you pay more when lasting results are achieved better and faster, and less otherwise.

.... or carry out any number of other useful techniques.  

Instead, we mostly just do things.  We act from habit; we act from impulse or convenience when primed by the activities in front of us; we remember our goal and choose an action that feels associated with our goal.  We do any number of things.  But we do not systematically choose the narrow sets of actions that would effectively optimize for our claimed goals, or for any other goals. —Anna Salamon

Why?

Well, why does the person who says they want to "learn Chinese" download Duolingo?

Why does the person who says they want to "get fit" confine themselves to activities that maximize fun and social community?

My best guess is they aren't optimizing for results — they're actually optimizing for other things.

—@chrislakin | Writing | Now

Thanks to Kevin Simler and Robin Hanson for discussion.