Psychotherapist Steve Hauptman, LCSW, author of Monkeytraps: Why We Try to Control Everything and How We Can Stop, has spent years examining how individuals struggle against the limits of reality. Through his clinical work and personal reflection, Hauptman explores the underlying mechanisms of what he terms "control addiction." Rather than viewing control as merely an aggressive or domineering personality trait, Hauptman defines it as an innate psychological drive to make reality cooperate—a persistent effort to compel people, circumstances, and outcomes to conform strictly to personal needs, expectations, and desires.
To illustrate the psychological tension generated by this drive, Hauptman points to an encounter with a speed-cuber—an individual capable of aligning all six colored faces of a Rubik’s Cube in under sixty seconds. While acknowledging the individual’s skill, Hauptman views the solved cube as an unrealistic metaphor for human life. For most people, existence feels less like a solved puzzle and more like an insoluble mechanism where attempting to bring order to one side inevitably causes disorder on another.
In daily routines, the challenge of maintaining total order becomes quickly apparent. Balancing professional commitments, household responsibilities, personal relationships, creative endeavors, health management, and leisure continuously demands choices. Attending to client needs or domestic chores often leaves little room for creative work or family time. Similarly, maintaining professional reading can displace recreational reading, just as strict adherence to dietary goals conflicts with the enjoyment of spontaneous meals. Hauptman emphasizes that individuals are constantly making trade-offs throughout the day, as it is mathematically and physically impossible for anyone to accomplish everything simultaneously.
This friction between expectation and reality extends beyond personal schedules into broader societal and psychological patterns. When individuals attempt to force life to meet rigid expectations, external reality often pushes back. This dynamic is a central theme in classic and contemporary cautionary narratives, from the historical legends of King Midas and Ebenezer Scrooge to modern cultural stories like Jurassic Park. In each instance, deliberate efforts to assert absolute dominance over outcomes trigger unforeseen consequences and a compounding loss of stability.
Through his clinical observations, Hauptman identifies three underlying paradoxes that govern human attempts at control. The first paradox posits that the greater an individual’s psychological need for control, the less in control that individual ultimately feels. The second paradox demonstrates that the harder a person attempts to control others, the more those actions invite reactive attempts at counter-control, creating a cycle of mutual restriction.
The third paradox, which directly aligns with the Rubik’s Cube metaphor, dictates that gaining control in one specific domain inevitably requires surrendering control in another. Despite the logical clarity of this principle, individuals frequently resist accepting that trade-offs are unavoidable.
This dynamic is evident across a wide range of common human experiences. In clinical settings, the third paradox manifests when mechanisms designed to manage one area of life inadvertently destabilize another. For example, an individual may rely on alcohol to regulate challenging internal emotions, only to lose control over their relationship with the substance itself. In a professional context, an executive may achieve high status and organizational success at the direct expense of meaningful connections with a spouse, children, and extended family.
A similar outcome occurs when a parent directs their entire identity and focus toward raising children, only to discover that the primary marital relationship has eroded through neglect. Likewise, an individual suffering from depression may spend years suppressing emotional distress to project an image of stability to the outside world, only to eventually experience total physical and mental exhaustion that renders them unable to function.
For many people, the secondary damage caused by over-control stems not merely from the tradeoffs themselves, but from the tendency to interpret incomplete or unmanaged domains as personal failures. Within Hauptman’s framework, an unaligned side of the puzzle is frequently viewed as evidence of inadequacy. Leaving domestic chores undone to focus on writing can produce guilt over a messy home; conversely, spending time on chores can create anxiety over neglected creative work. Choosing to indulge in a meal brings regret over fitness goals, while abstaining can foster a sense of deprivation.
Learning to navigate these competing demands requires a cognitive shift from viewing unmanaged tasks as failures to recognizing them as the natural cost of deliberate decisions. Every choice to commit time or energy to one priority inherently involves a decision to set another aside. An affirmative response to one obligation functions as an implicit negative response to another.
Despite the self-evident nature of this principle, accepting it remains difficult due to a persistent psychological resistance to boundaries. Part of the human psyche resists limits, desiring outcomes without sacrifice and seeking choices that carry no operational cost. This mindset insists on retaining all options simultaneously, reacting with frustration or resentment when reality enforces natural constraints.
The practical application of accepting these limitations often occurs unexpectedly during moments of sudden disruption. Hauptman shares an experience from a routine medical examination, during which an electrocardiogram revealed an abnormality suggesting a potential transient ischemic attack, or TIA. Despite feeling physically fine, he was instructed by his physician to report immediately to an emergency department for evaluation.
Upon arriving at the hospital, Hauptman was placed on a gurney and situated in a facility hallway for four hours while medical staff conducted diagnostic tests. The sudden hospitalization required cancelling six scheduled client sessions, communicating with a concerned spouse over the phone, and facing potential medical expenses, all while remaining entirely idle in an uncertain environment.
In previous years, such an event would typically trigger intense anxiety, frustration, and an active struggle against the loss of agency. However, faced with total lack of control over the immediate circumstances, Hauptman experienced a shift in response, choosing to take an hour-long nap on the gurney while awaiting test results.
This response demonstrated a functional acceptance of reality as it unfolded. By recognizing that the immediate situation could not be altered through frustration or resistance, the impulse to demand a different outcome gave way to practical surrender.
Moving away from control addiction does not require resolving every competing demand or successfully aligning every aspect of life. Instead, emotional stability arises from recognizing that life cannot be solved like a structured puzzle. By releasing the expectation of total control and accepting the inherent trade-offs of daily decisions, individuals can navigate unpredictability without viewing natural limits as personal failures. Ultimately, acknowledging that no one can do everything provides a practical foundation for psychological resilience and peace of mind.
