[I am currently reading this book and intentionally making notes as I read, instead of hauling them all at the end — and so this is a (public) draft. The full list of highlights can be found here.]

In the context of learning more about ADHD and general therapy practices, I wanted to delve into cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). But I found compelling arguments to consider ACT instead (which, supposedly, one reads as the word act and not as an acronym). There are lots of interesting points, but for a general temporary summary, I'd highlight passages in which ACT is presented in the light of evolution science, and as a tool that might, ultimately, have consequences in gene expression.

In the first part of the book, a few key ideas are stressed:

- turning towards the pain is important and necessary, and it constitutes a non-avoidant approach to therapy, in opposition to some other approaches (although it appears in CBT too).

- being psychologically flexible, as opposed to rigid, is one of the goals of ACT.

- the concept of Relational Frame Theory (RFT) is introduced, and many connections are made — for example, a hypothesis on RFT and the sense of self, and when and how a sense of self arises. Our minds, used to symbolic thinking and problem-solving strategies (the latter possibly further validated by some theory practices), try to use the logical strategies in our own life, as if distress were something to be solved; but this is not effective, and it leads to stress.

- there is no state of unconditional happiness or relief for suffering, and it is important to accept that (again, stressing the importance of embracing the pain and discomfort).

- ACT grounds some of its process in the concept of pivots — sudden changes of direction — that are in reach of everyone.

First pivot: Defusion