As you have seen, your SHOULDs are arbitrary. They are not right just because you hear them in your head! One sensible approach to SHOULDs is to explore the costs and benefits of maintaining them. In other words, what are you SHOULDs really doing for you? Are they helpful or unhelpful? Are they worth keeping?
Lets look at an example. Below is a Cost-Benefit analysis of living with a perfectionistic SHOULD about stuttering:
“I SHOULD BE FLUENT AT ALL TIMES”
Advantages:
-When I'm fluent, I'll feel like I'm doing what I'm supposed to be doing
-I'll work very hard to be fluent
Disadvantages:
-If I'm not fluent I'll feel guilty and blame myself.
-I'll very often feel like a failure and be upset
-I'll never be able to achieve my goal of ALWAYS being fluent, so I'll be disappointed lot of the time
-I'll be irritated, sad and anxious most of the time when I have to speak
As you can see, there are lots of serious disadvantages to this SHOULD. It is setting the person up for failure, shame and frustration. Consider the following syllogism:
(A) Human adults with a history of stuttering tend to be dysfluent from time to time
(B) I’m a human adult with a history of stuttering
(C) Therefore, I SHOULD stutter from time to time
Huldra Forsvant (Theodor Kittelsen)
Huldra Forsvant (Theodor Kittelsen)
3 comments:
Thanks for the post. I couldn't agree more. There is something that is really functional about recognising and accepting 'dysfluency' in us (not only in speech, but in all aspects of life). It brings perspectives and perhaps deeper empathy of our surroundings.
I wouldn't say that you "SHOULD stutter from time to time" but rather say that you "SHOULD expect that you may stutter from time to time".
Option one brings a curse on yourself; option two allows for the grace to not beat yourself up about it.
Thanks, AY.
Laetitia, that's a good point. I think that is basically what they mean though - I should expect to stutter. But you put it well- I agree.
Post a Comment