The Six-Part Series on Intention, Part 5: The Relationship Between Intention and Action

Subtitle:
People do not act because they have an intention; they discover their intention through the act of moving.

In this six-part series, I treat intention not merely as a psychological state, but as a structure through which humans choose their direction toward the world.

In the first part, I consider the definition of intention;
in the second, its distortions;
in the third, its relationship with memory;
in the fourth, its relationship with values;
in the fifth, its cycle with action;
and in the final part, I consider its expansion into human history.

Introduction

People act because they have an intention.

Usually, that is how we think.

I do it because I want to do it.
I speak because I want to convey something.
I move because I want to protect something.
I keep my distance because I want to avoid something.
I stay silent because I do not want to break something.
I reach out because I want to change something.

Certainly, that is not wrong.

There is some kind of intention before an action.
People do not move solely by pure coincidence.

However, the relationship between intention and action is not that simple.

Intention does not just create action.
Action also changes intention.

By trying something, you understand what you truly desired.
By failing, you realize the naivety of your intention.
By continuing, a meaning different from the beginning is born.
By being unable to move, you learn that there was another resistance within you.

In other words, the relationship between intention and action is not unidirectional.

Intention creates action, action creates results, results become memory, and memory creates the next intention.

Within this cycle, people gradually come to know themselves.

Intention does not become action while it remains a mere wish

Intention is the direction of the heart toward the future.

However, people do not move just because there is a direction.

I want to do it.
I want to change.
I want to convey.
I want to protect.
I want to start.
I want to end it.

Even if you think these things, there are times when you cannot move to action.

What is needed here is motivation.

Motivation is the mediating energy that prevents intention from remaining a mere wish and moves it toward execution.

If intention is what decides 'which way to head,'
motivation is the 'power to move toward that place.'

Even if you have a direction, you cannot advance without power.
Even if you have power, you will scatter without a direction.

Therefore, intention and motivation are different things, but they cannot be separated.

Intention is direction.
Motivation is propulsion.
Action is the form those two take when they touch reality.

Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation

There are broadly two types of motivation.

Those born from within.
Those given from the outside.

Intrinsic motivation is born from your own inner interests, values, questions, and passions.

I want to know.
I want to create.
I want to deepen.
I want to try.
I want to get better.
I want to be convinced.
I want to be useful to someone.

These kinds of motives tend to support action for a long time.

This is because they are connected to your own values.

On the other hand, extrinsic motivation is born from rewards, evaluations, recognition, status, and the avoidance of punishment.

I want to be praised.
I want to be recognized.
I don't want to be scolded.
I want to improve my evaluation.
I want a reward.
I don't want to lose out.

This also creates action.

In the short term, extrinsic motivation is strong.
People move if they are evaluated.
People work hard if there is a reward.
People try to avoid things if there is a punishment.

However, if you continue to act solely on extrinsic motivation, your own intention can become thin.

You lose sight of what you are doing it for.
You lose sight of whose values you are acting for.
Even though results are being produced, the inside becomes hollow.

Therefore, what is important is not to deny extrinsic motivation.

It is to see how much it aligns with your own values and intentions.

The source of motivation that supports intention

Whether an action is stable depends on the source of the motivation that supports the intention.

Even for the same action, the sustainability changes depending on why you do it.

An action continued only to be praised by someone weakens when you are no longer praised.

An action continued only to avoid being scolded collapses when the surveillance is gone.

However, an action tied to your own values is easier to continue even when not seen from the outside.

Of course, one cannot live on intrinsic motivation alone.

People live within society.
Evaluation is also necessary.
Rewards are also necessary.
Roles are also necessary.

However, when your actions are driven entirely by external values, you lose sight of your own intention.

Therefore, you need to ask yourself from time to time.

Is this really what I want?

Or am I doing it because someone else wants me to?

Is this connected to my values?

Or is it just an action to be evaluated?

This question increases the stability of your actions.

Sharing intentions within a group

Action is not something that belongs only to the individual.

People also act within groups.

Workplace.
Family.
Friendships.
Organizations.
Communities.
Society.

There, the intentions of each person overlap or diverge.

To act as a group, sharing intentions is necessary.

Why are we doing this?
Where are we heading?
What do we prioritize?
What do we avoid?
How much do we tolerate?
What do we call success?

If this is not shared, actions will scatter.

Even if we are in the same place, we are looking in different directions.
Even if we are doing the same work, what we are trying to protect is different.
Even if we use the same words, the premises are different.

As a result, coordination collapses.

Verbalization and tacit knowledge

There are two ways to share intentions.

One is verbalization.

Explaining.
Confirming.
Sharing the purpose.
Clarifying judgment criteria.
Putting priorities into words.

This is extremely important.

Intentions that are not verbalized are interpreted arbitrarily by others.
Arbitrarily interpreted intentions create discrepancies later.

However, verbalization alone is sometimes not enough.

Groups have tacit knowledge.

The atmosphere of the place.
Body movements.
The usual flow.
Gaze.
Silence.
Timing.
Judgments that are understood without being said.

This cannot be fully verbalized, but it is deeply involved in the synchronization of actions.

In skilled workplaces, bodies sometimes move faster than words.

Between people who have built a long relationship, intentions can sometimes be understood with few words.

However, there is also danger in tacit knowledge.

They should understand.
It should be understood without saying it.
Usually, one should do this.

When this 'should' diverges, misunderstandings are born.

Therefore, sharing intentions requires both the precision of verbalization and the synchronization of tacit knowledge.

Conflict of intentions becomes friction in action

When intentions collide, friction occurs in action.

Goals are different.
Priorities are different.
What we want to protect is different.
How we choose means is different.
The risks we can tolerate are different.
What we call success is different.

If this difference is not organized before entering into action, misunderstandings and conflicts occur.

One side wants to hurry.
The other side wants to proceed cautiously.

One side emphasizes results.
The other side emphasizes safety.

One side wants to protect correctness.
The other side wants to protect the temperature of the relationship.

One side seeks change.
The other side tries to protect stability.

Such conflicts are not merely differences in personality.

They are differences in the intentions and values that lie behind them.

Conflict is both a problem and a resource

Conflict of intentions is troublesome.

However, it is not necessarily a bad thing.

Diversity is hidden within conflict.

Another person sees risks that you cannot see alone.
Another person suggests means that you would not choose alone.
Another person protects values that you might overlook alone.

If you simply crush conflict, the group becomes simple.
But if you leave conflict alone, the group breaks.

What is important is to organize the conflict.

What are you trying to protect?
What am I trying to prioritize?
Where are we really different?
Where can we overlap?
Is there another action possible while leaving both intentions intact?

When you descend to this level, conflict is no longer just an obstacle.

It becomes material for creating new actions.

Intention lies between consciousness and the unconscious

Human actions include both conscious and unconscious ones.

Planning.
Choosing.
Judging.
Choosing words.
Moving while thinking about the purpose.

These are conscious actions.

On the other hand, there are habits, conditioned reflexes, and automated reactions.

I find myself avoiding it before I know it.
I find myself using the same phrasing before I know it.
I find myself angry before I know it.
I find myself keeping distance before I know it.
I find myself making the usual choice before I know it.

These are unconscious actions.

Intention lies between this consciousness and the unconscious.

There are intentions you are aware of yourself.
There are intentions you are not aware of yourself.

Strongly conscious intentions give flexibility to action.

It is better not to say it now.
It is better not to step in here.
This way of saying it won't get through.
Let's choose another method.

In this way, conscious intentions enable adjustment.

On the other hand, unconscious intentions make actions faster.

You can move without thinking every time.
Reactions become faster.
The burden is reduced.
It stabilizes as a habit.

Therefore, it is not a simple matter of saying that intentions should just be made conscious.

By making them conscious, the range of choices expands.
By making them unconscious, the efficiency of action increases.

What is needed is the coexistence of both.

Intent evolves through action

Intent is not static.

The intent you start with is not necessarily the one that lasts until the end.

When I tried it, it was different from what I had imagined.
When I continued, I saw a different meaning.
I failed, and revised my goal.
I succeeded, and a deeper intent was born.
As I interacted with others, my intent changed.

This is natural.

Intent is tested by action.

Action touches reality.
When it touches reality, results occur.
Results become memories.
Memories create the next intent.

Through this cycle, intent evolves.

Success experiences reinforce intent.
Failure experiences revise intent.
A sense of discomfort signals a misalignment of intent.
Conviction helps regenerate intent.

Therefore, action is not only the execution of intent, but also its verification.

Conviction through hypotheses and the regeneration of intent

People become unable to move when there is something they do not understand.

Why did that happen?
Why did that person do that?
Why did I make that choice?
Why did that event occur?

When the chain of meaning is broken, intent also stops.

Events that cannot be understood stop a person's actions.
Anger, disgust, distrust, confusion, and defensiveness arise, narrowing the options.

At this time, people form hypotheses.

Perhaps it was like this.
Maybe that person had these circumstances.
Maybe I actually felt this way.
Maybe that event had this meaning for me.

A hypothesis is an act of giving provisional meaning to an uncertain reality.

And conviction is the restoration of internal consistency that arises when that hypothesis aligns with one's values and context.

What is important here is that conviction is not necessarily the acquisition of truth.

Regardless of whether it is completely correct as a fact, when meaning and value are provisionally aligned, people can move again.

In other words, conviction is not just the destination of understanding.

It is a condition for re-establishing intent.

What happens when you are convinced?

When conviction is obtained, three changes occur within a person.

First, the broken chain of meaning is restored.

I don't know why it happened.
That's why I can't move.

From this state, it shifts to:

I don't know completely, but I can think of it this way.
At least, I can position it this way within myself.

Second, the event is integrated into one's own value structure.

What was it to me?

What did it teach me?
What did it make me lose?
What did it leave behind?
Once that positioning is decided, the event is no longer just confusion.

Third, emotions calm down and the possibility of choice is restored.

Options that were blocked by anger or disgust open up a little.

In a place where there was only rejection, multiple paths return, such as keeping distance, thinking, talking, letting go, or trying again.
At this time, the person returns to being an entity that can have intent again.

Where does motivation come from?

Between intent and action, there is motivation.

Motivation is born from the intersection of internal desires and external circumstances.

Just having a desire inside does not make it a motivation.
Just having a situation outside does not make it a motivation.

When an internal desire touches an external situation, motivation arises.

When you are bored, new possibilities appear.
When you are anxious, opportunities to confirm things appear.
When you want to be recognized, a place to be evaluated appears.
When there is something you want to protect, it is put in danger.
When you have a question, you encounter an event that could be an answer.

At this intersection, people start to move.

Motivation is not a single point.

Physical impulses.
Emotions.
Memories.
Values.
Situations.
Relationships.
Future predictions.

It occurs like a spark in the place where these overlap.

Therefore, there are often multiple motivations.

People seem to be moving for only one reason, but in reality, they are pushed by several layers.

Post-hoc motivation and true motivation

People can explain the reasons for their actions.

However, that explanation is not necessarily the true motivation.

Post-hoc motivation is a reason given after the action to provide conviction to oneself or others.

That was correct.
That was necessary.
That was for the other person's sake.
That couldn't be helped.
I had no choice but to do that.

Such explanations are not necessarily lies.

However, they can be misaligned with the force that truly drove the action.

On the other hand, true motivation is the source of the deep impulses, desires, emotions, and values that triggered the action.

I moved, though I don't know why.
I couldn't stand still.
My body reacted first.
I had already chosen before I could explain.
Thinking about it later, I realized I wanted to protect that.

True motivation is often not conscious.

That is why people explain it later.

Sometimes that explanation is close to the true motivation, and sometimes it becomes a story to protect oneself.

Post-hoc or true?

To distinguish between post-hoc motivation and true motivation, you need to look at the sense of discomfort.

The explanation is tidy.
But it is cold somewhere.

The logic holds up.
But it is not accompanied by emotion.

It is convenient for explaining to others.
But it does not sit well within myself.

In such cases, it might be a post-hoc motivation.

Conversely, there are things that are hard to put into words, but the body remembers.

I was impatient at that time.
I was frustrated.
I was lonely.
I was scared.
I was happy.
I was expecting something.
I didn't want to lose it.
I wanted to protect myself.
I wanted someone to notice.

When you touch this feeling, you get closer to the true motivation.

Post-hoc motivation is explanatory.
True motivation is convincing.

Neither is unnecessary.

Post-hoc motivation is sometimes necessary to explain to others.
True motivation is necessary to understand oneself.

When both are present, self-understanding deepens.

Detecting motivation

To see your own motivation, you first need to recall the action.

Why did I do that at that time?
Why did I choose those words?
Why did I stay silent there?
Why did I approach that person?
Why did I leave that place?

Next, look at the reason that comes to mind first.

It might be a superficial explanation.
It might be a socially acceptable reason.
It might be a story to protect yourself.

Then ask:

Are you really convinced by that?
Is there warmth in that explanation?
Is there any sense that something doesn't quite fit?

If there is discomfort, return to the physical sensations or emotions just before the action.

Were you impatient?
Were you angry?
Were you anxious?
Were you happy?
Were you bored?
Were you lonely?
Were you scared?
Were you expecting something?

Give that feeling a name.

I was seeking security.
I wanted to fill my loneliness.
I wanted to be recognized.
I was afraid of losing.
I wanted to break the boredom.
I wanted to be a correct person.
I wanted to protect the other person.
I wanted to confirm my place.

Furthermore, see if there is a value judgment behind that.

I cannot forgive this.
I want to protect this.
I don't want to lose this.
This is how it should be.
If it's not like this, it's not me.

When you touch this far, you know the internal necessity of the action.

Ah, was I driven by this reason?

That feeling is close to the true motivation.

If you look at the action, you can see the quality of the intent

Intent can be spoken in words.

However, what truly shows the quality of intent is action.

There are people who say they are kind but deprive others of their freedom.
There are people who say they are correct but look down on others.
There are people who say they want to protect but dominate others.
There are people who say they love but do not consider the other person's circumstances.

The intent of the words and the intent of the action are misaligned.

Conversely, there are people whose actions are sincere even if they cannot put it into words well.

They are clumsy but do not run away.
They do not say much, but they are there when needed.
They have no flashy words, but they keep their promises.
They have few kind words, but they respect the other person's freedom.

Action is the actual form of intent.

Therefore, intent is verified by action.

Not what you said, but what you actually did.
What you chose, what you avoided, and what you repeated.

The quality of intent appears there.

If you polish your intent, the quality of your actions will also change

If you want to change your actions, you need to look at your intent.

Even if you change only the surface, if the intent has not changed, the same habits will appear in different forms.

Even if you only make your words polite, if the intent to dominate the other person remains, it becomes polite domination.

Even if you only increase your smiles, if you are not interested in the other person, it becomes superficial kindness.

Even if you only learn the form of an apology, if the intent to justify yourself remains, the apology becomes an evasion of responsibility.

Even if you say you are keeping your distance, if the intent to test the other person remains, it becomes manipulation through silence.

Therefore, to polish your actions, you need to polish your intent.

What do I want to do?
What am I afraid of?
What do I want to protect?
What am I trying to make the other person carry?
Does this action really align with my values?
Or am I just trying to process my anxiety?

This question changes the quality of action.

Conclusion

The relationship between intent and action is not a simple cause and effect.

I act because I have intent.
That is not all.

Because I acted, I can see my intent.
Because I acted, my intent is tested.
Because I acted, my intent is revised.
Because I acted, the next intent is born.

Intent and action are circulating.

Intent is direction.
Motivation is the driving force.
Motivation is the spark born at the intersection of internal desire and external situation.
Action is the form in which all of that touches reality.

And the results of action become memories, memories update values, and values make you choose the next intent.

People move because they thought of it.
But at the same time, by moving, they know what they were thinking.

Therefore, action is the exit of intent, and at the same time, it is the mirror of intent.

If you look at your own actions, you can see the quality of your intent.
If you polish your intent, the quality of your actions will also change.

And when the chain of meaning is restored through conviction, people can have intent again.

Being able to have intent again means being able to move again.

Intent is not something that exists before action.
It is something tested in action, understood after action, and updated for the next action.

That is the relationship between intent and action.

Related Articles

What is Intent?

The Relationship Between Intent and Bias

The Relationship Between Intent and Memory

The Relationship Between Intent and Value

Human History Beginning with Intent