We commonly and unknowingly model stress as a direct function of an event: F(s) = E. Phrases like "that event was stressful," "that job interview was stressful," or "start-ups are stressful" imply stress is an objective property of the event itself, fixed to a job interview as much as its physical location. This subconscious belief, evidenced by our language, suggests stress is inherent to the event, inevitably affecting anyone who encounters it, now or in the future. The natural corollary of this, of course, is that reducing stress is impossible. In this post, I’ll propose a more accurate and useful way to model stress. 

I. The Stress Equation

First, let me disprove the old model. If stress were solely a result of the event (F(s) = E), then a single event—like catching a flight—would produce identical stress levels for everyone. Yet, we know this isn’t true. Instead, stress depends on two factors: the perceived importance of the event (PIE) and our stress response to that importance (R_s). A better model is F(s) = PIE * R_s^[1].

Events themselves aren’t inherently important. We feel stress over what we deem important, shaped by our individual values and pursuits. For instance, a student aiming for grad school may stress more about the upcoming exam than a student just trying to graduate. Same external event of the exam, but different levels of perceived importance (PIE). Typically, the more important something is, the more stressed we’ll be, although that is not always the case.

Another interesting observation is how stress seems to have a maximum intensity regardless of a situation's objective importance. Consider a high schooler trying to spit game with their crush—which, for argument's sake, isn't objectively significant. I wouldn’t be that surprised if I found out the high schooler experienced more stress than say, Eisenhower did on D-Day. Both parties perceive their situations as important, but the high schooler's less refined response capability results in a higher R_s variable. Stress behaves somewhat like a gas, expanding to fill available space—the most pressing matters in any life phase tends to reach a similar "stress ceiling" regardless of objective consequences.

If I look at my own life, I can see that stress doesn't scale linearly with even my own subjective perceptions of importance. I've felt irrationally stressed about trivial matters like buying train tickets or making overnight oats. This highlights the crucial role of the R variable—our mind and body's response to PIE—which varies significantly from person to person and even within a person – day to day, and moment to moment. The response (R)—how we relate to that importance—works in combination with the perceived importance of the event to ultimately decide our stress response.

II. Reducing Stress

We often assume that as importance rises, a stressed reaction must follow. But these can be decoupled. Sam Altman, in a podcast with Joe Hudson, captures this well: "People say you need to be detached. It doesn’t mean you don’t care. It means you do whatever you can, you control what you can control, and then beyond, the outcome is going to be what the outcome is… I don’t think I have a magic answer there other than it sort of came to me over time, and now I both really care and feel quite detached." Here, "really cares" reflects high PIE, while "detached" shows a tempered response (R_s). If R_s approaches zero, stress can vanish, even when the perceived stakes—like shaping AI’s future—are large.

Naturally, PIE and Rs tend to be strongly correlated, rising and falling together in lockstep. However, "X is important" is merely a thought. The stress response follows separately, depending on how we relate to that thought. I can calmly state "the future of AI is very important" or declare the same with my mind aflame. The calm approach effectively reduces the response (R_s) variable, potentially to zero, and therefore the total stress response. This mechanism resembles meditative practices where fine-grained perception allows you to observe a thought as just a thought, separated out from the impetus towards becoming stressed.

The response variable (R_s) actually has many more ways than one might imagine to be zero. Only if it points in a particular direction, gaining magnitude across the stress response direction does it gain value and stress get produced. Yet there are numerous directions it can point. For example, something like running a startup that a lot of people view as important, and become stressed out about can be framed in many other ways such as – fun (R_f), meaningful (R_m), or awe (R_a), devoid of any stress. I heard someone talk recently who from the outside looks like he’s building a startup, but in his mind it seems that it’s more just an extension of his extreme love for building legos and gadgets he’s always had. It’s possible “fun” is the only word and feeling that comes to mind when he works. We can redirect our responses to important events toward positive vectors like fun, meaning, or awe while also decreasing the stress vector. 

Another way in the past I've reduced total stress was decreasing how important I perceived the event (PIE). I've done this sometimes when stressed by zooming out and taking the perspective of the "grand scheme" of things, where everything feels inconsequential. Stars and the vast universe are your best friends here. This is more of an intellectual exercise and can work quite well by pulling me out of the grips of whatever "story" I'm telling myself that's stressing me, relaxing me with the realization of, essentially, "it's not that deep".

However, I wouldn't recommend this approach—zooming out to cosmic insignificance—as the primary stress-reduction strategy. While it offers immediate relief, the effect is often temporary. The calm tends to evaporate once you re-engage with your pursuits. This happens because when we're actively engaged in day-to-day activities, we naturally shift back to perceiving them as important—perhaps this perception is even necessary for us to take any action at all. 

The temporary perspective shift serves a valuable purpose, though. It reveals the subjective nature of importance and loosens the grip of stress-inducing narratives. Much of our stress stems from the implicit belief that stressors are objectively important and inevitably require a stress response. The real skill lies in holding something as subjectively important without triggering stress. The cosmic zoom-out helps develop this ability by showing how what stressed us moments ago can suddenly feel insignificant. This provides concrete evidence that stress resides in our minds, not in situations themselves, contrary to what we implicitly believe when caught in our narratives.

III. Conclusion

How should we speak about "stressful events"? Maybe instead of, “buying a plane ticket is stressful”, something like, "buying a plane ticket made me stressed." But the word "made" implies inevitability and still cedes too much power to the event, as if the event is like a parent making a child do something. I guess that rolls off the tongue a little easier than a phrase like, "My mind and body’s response to my subjective perception of the event’s importance produced the stress I feel."

To conclude, nothing that is stressing me needs to be stressful. Even if I hold the thing to be important, I don’t need to be stressed. It’s also only subjectively important. The inability to titrate my stress levels to my liking and even zero it out at any moment is simply a skill issue.

1. ^{^}

   Technical Note: The Stress Equation

   The formula F(s) = PIE * Rs contains important nuances necessary for its accuracy. PIE (Perceived Importance of Event) encompasses both conscious and unconscious elements. We might intellectually evaluate something as unimportant, yet if our body or subconscious assigns it high importance, our total perceived importance remains significant, potentially amplifying our stress response. "Perceived," to be technically precise, doesn't refer only to conscious perception but encompasses all processing your "being" does—conscious, subconscious, and physiological.

   Importantly, high PIE doesn't automatically generate the negative mental experience we recognize as stress. The response variable (Rs) determines whether that importance translates to conscious stress. Our physiology might display classic stress markers—elevated heart rate, dilated pupils, increased blood pressure—yet our subjective mental experience could remain calm or even adopt a comical attitude toward these physiological changes. In my experience, the nervous system is actually often the main driver in total stress by both overreacting at unconscious, bodily levels, and intellectual evaluation (increasing PIE) and predisposing the response variable toward the stress direction.