The power – and deep structure – of regret

  I just finished reading Daniel Pink’s book, “The Power of Regret.” Based on interviews with a large sample of ordinary people about what they regret, he identifies four categories and shows how a person’s response to regrets in each category can precipitate self-understanding and corrective action that can be life changing.  The four categories he identifies are Foundation (regrets about educational and career decisions), Boldness (regrets about failure to take a chance or act on an opportunity – which includes career and romantic risks), Moral (regrets about acting or failing to act in a way consistent with one’s ethical and moral values), and Connection (regrets about failing to sustain a close relationship or repair a relational breach).  I’m not sure this list is complete, though I suppose the categories I would add could be fitted into one or another of these.  For example I would add Kindness / Cruelty, though I suppose that could fit into the “moral” category.

Near the end of the book he interprets these regrets in terms of other social psychology research, relating each category of regret to a basic human need.  The following table appears on page 150: 

        What it sounds like The human need it reveals 

Foundation If only I’d done the work stability   

Boldness         If only I’d taken the risk         growth   

Moral If only I’d done the right thing Goodness   

Connection If only I’d reached out Love

Here I think his analysis falls a little short.  Regrets related to boldness often pertain to a human need for experiences and excitement (ilynx is a term used by play theorists) – and this is not necessarily related to growth – also, Pink fails to address regret about being too bold or being bold in an inappropriate situation.  Regrets related to foundation also apply to the need for social status and self-realization – and stability should be understood to include security and safety.  Morality is probably related as much to the need for social acceptance as to a need for goodness.   

These are relatively minor caveats about an interesting and useful book, which I heartily recommend.