Myth Mode and Function Mode

Three months ago I started returning to one theme. Not as an idea, but as an observation that kept resurfacing in different conversations and situations. It wasn’t tied to one person or one context. It showed up across work, projects, learning, and everyday discussions.

I began noticing a recurring structure in how people think about their lives and decisions. Not as a flaw, but as a pattern that felt stable and strangely effective. It often created a sense of movement, even when very little was changing on the outside.

Over time, I started distinguishing between two modes of thinking, which I began calling myth mode and function mode.

Myth mode is a state where thinking operates as a story. In it, a person explains — to themselves and to others. Events, causes, past experience, and internal states are carefully linked together. There is a lot of language about meaning, correctness, readiness, and values. Decisions often exist as intentions or potential steps. The explanation itself creates a sense of movement and lowers inner tension. The story holds things together and makes the pause tolerable.

In myth mode, a person can feel “in process” for a long time. They may read, analyze, refine, rework plans, and return repeatedly to questions of motivation. All of this looks reasonable and often genuinely helps with uncertainty. The difficulty does not show up immediately, because internally something is always happening.

Function mode feels different. Here thinking is less occupied with explanation and more with interaction with external conditions. Deadlines, constraints, and consequences appear. Language becomes more concrete, sometimes rougher. Speech begins to rely less on a feeling of readiness and more on facts and the cost of delay. This mode rarely feels comfortable, because it protects the internal picture much less.

The difference between these modes is easy to notice in simple situations. In myth mode, someone may spend months gathering information while feeling progress. In function mode, additional data stops mattering once the next step no longer depends on new input. In myth mode, one can repeatedly return to the question of “why,” trying to feel the right moment. In function mode, attention shifts to what will actually happen if the step is not taken.

It matters that myth mode is not a mistake. It serves a protective function. It reduces anxiety, preserves identity, and helps tolerate uncertainty. In many situations it is genuinely necessary. The difficulty begins when this mode becomes constant and starts replacing interaction with reality.

In research on decision-making, there are observations that prolonged time spent in analysis without external constraints stabilizes the system. Tension decreases, but along with it decreases the likelihood of an irreversible step. Thinking begins to serve the function of holding the current state in place.

The shift into function mode rarely happens because of new understanding. More often it is triggered by external constraints: deadlines, losses, or consequences that cannot be reinterpreted. In those moments, language tends to change on its own. It becomes less elegant and more precise. This often feels like a loss of comfort, but it also restores a sense of contact with what is actually happening.

I’m not sure universal conclusions belong here. This feels more like a fixation of a difference that is easy to miss from the inside. Myth mode can help someone hold together for a long time, and then quietly begin holding them in place. Function mode does not feel caring, but it is the one that allows something to shift in the external world.

Have you ever stopped to wonder which mode you are living in right now?