Monday, January 18, 2010

The Words You Use

Recently I have had a few spammers flaming my blog, so I have had to begin moderating my comments. I will still approve dissenting opinions, as long as they are thought out, and constructive. I am not one to stock the pond with only true believers; I just don’t want my readership to be exposed to the kind of silliness the internet can breed. It is a shame that I had to do this, but that is the risk you take being on the internet. Now, I know most of you that do read approach me personally with comments and discussion, which is fine, but as always feel free to make comments. And as always, just you being on the page increases my numbers, which makes me look good, and increases my visibility on search engines and the like. So I thank each and every one of you for your patronage.

As far as my progress goes, every day that passes, I get just that much closer to getting my Bachelors of Science in Psychology. It will be very soon, and by next fall I will be sending out my grad school applications. It is exciting to look at the possible doctoral programs that I am eligible for. Many of them will take me to a far-away place for a great deal of time. I am actually kind of overwhelmed with all of the prospective directions I could move in. I have a particular passion for personality psychology, but there are other focuses that peak my interest. So as the day of sending out my doctoral program applications approaches, it becomes a process of comparing schools and weighing options.

Anyway, let us move onto the psychology discussion. While I do find other aspects of psychology interesting, I am drawn more toward that of REBT and other kinds of CBT. As you may have noticed, a great deal of my posts have been heavy on the cognitive behavioral side of personality theory. I do in fact appreciate other avenues, but this is my personal blog, so I decided to discuss topics that I find the most alluring, and psychotherapy, REBT, and interpersonal relationships are what I find to be the most fascinating.

One of the central pillars of the REBT ideals is the continuing internal struggle against irrational beliefs. These irrational beliefs come in a lot of forms, and one particular form that Ellis took issue with was what he called “musterbation.” In his book “How to control your anxiety before it controls you,” Ellis describes this musterbation as the “absolutistic Musts, Shoulds, Oughts, and other Demands” that we make on ourselves. Some of the most common, and most problem causing musts are directed at one’s self (e.g. “I MUST be clever, smart, successful, etc. . . . or it is awful”), directed at others (e.g. “Others MUST treat me well, fairly, pay attention to me, or I can’t handle it), and directed at the environment (e.g. “Life MUST be easy and without complications, otherwise I cannot cope”). These are the kinds of internal statements that can create the foundation for irrational beliefs.

‘Must’ statements are not the only kind of irrational statements. Almost any definitive statement can work its way into creating irrational beliefs. One kind of irrational statement that I have personally noticed often abused is “need.” Many people tell themselves that they need things that they in reality do not, that things need to be a certain way when other ways are functional, and that certain components in life are required to make it of value. The ‘need’ definitive can often be used interchangeably with the ‘must’ definitive, but there are a few subtle distinctions that make the two differ. The difference that I would like to point out is that ‘need’ is more often used by people to impose their own desires onto others, and in doing so, wrap up their own wellbeing into that of the other individual’s. An example of this would be when someone evinces that a friend “needs a man/women to complete their life.”

These statements are often visceral and automatic, like a reflex. They enter our minds as reactions to events, and without intervening circumstances, they can persist and foster irrational base beliefs that we begin using to make decisions. With conscious effort, we can resist these unnecessary musts. This aids us in becoming minimally anxious. We can replace phrases such as “I MUST achieve x” to a more flexible and amendable “achieving x would be preferable, and the realistic consequences of not achieving x is y.” Replacing MUST and NEED with ‘it would be preferable’ gives us an option of failure, and the notion that when things do not go as we prefer, it is not the end of the world. In this way, we can rationally weigh options, instead of attempting to live up to unreasonable expectations that we lay on ourselves, and catastrophizing when we as humans inevitably fail at something. When we do this, we open a door for discussion and questioning of what we desire, and what we find preferable. We can analyze evidence provided, weigh the consequences, and consider all avenues of action. This allows us to not live by definitive, irrational beliefs based on visceral reactions, but to operate on reason and consideration.

Above and beyond the “war on musterbation,” as Ellis called it, I think internal word choice can matter. It may blur the line between psychology and philosophy, but I think that the practice of e-prime may have psychological benefits, much as the semantics and word choice that Ellis talks about do. The e-prime form of the English language sets out to eliminate all definitive wording. If one were to use e-prime, they would eliminate all words derived from ‘to be.’ Is, are, am, is not, and all words that imply strict, rigid, and definitive existence, become replace with “appears to” and “seems to.” This use of language reflects a lack of absolutism, can help with the expansion of scientific thinking, and create a psychological environment of skepticism of perception that can be healthy. One classic example of e-prime is the example of a man observing a field of grass. He can say to himself “the grass is green” and rely completely on his senses, or he can say “the grass appears green,” thus taking information from his senses, while also using rationality to leave open the possibility that his senses are wrong. Like I said, this idea floats a bit closer to philosophy, but it is one worthy of a bit of consideration. The biggest problem with e-prime is the difficulty. I do try to use it sometimes, but it is a very difficult habit to keep up, and I am not very good at it currently.

In the future I will try to post little discussions between my bi-weekly bigger posts. Also, I promise after I finish with Ellis’s personality traits I will explore other territory. Anywho, come back next time for Ellis and Healthy Personalities #4: acceptance of uncertainty. And later down the pipe I will be talking about perception and Gestalt psychology.

1 comment:

Sarah B. said...

I agree that people use the word "should" and "need" much too often, and that once in the habit of using them frequently, it is difficult to change ones way of thinking. I feel that these "shoulds" and "needs" stem from societal pressures all around us. I was recently talking to a friend about how it seems that some people actually appear afraid to define what is right for them as an individual and give in to a generalized expectation. A person may be viewed as highly successful by the majority of the population and that same person may reflect and say, "Sure...but this isn't what I wanted my life to be like." I apologize if my thoughts seem oversimplified. Overall, it is my opinion that the use of words such as "should" and "need" destroy our ability to be flexible and creative human beings.