| I've been listening to a psychology podcast, and they label every "should"-statement as a cognitive distortion. > While I do read articles here and there, it’s far less than I should. Formulating it as a "should" abstracts away who wants it, and makes an artificially abstract norm out of it. But what is actually? It's probably just something that the author wants. Not doing something I want feels less bad than not doing something I should. There are lots of things that I want and don't get or don't do, I'm already used to that. It's a bit like the passive voice in writing, it hides who does something, or should do something. Some "should"s are also what we think that others want us to do, often just assuming that without asking. And so on. If you assume that every "should" is a thinking error, some go away, some become "want"s. It's a good first step, I recommend it. |
Yep, and to take it further, I'd argue this kind of thinking is a reflection of any shortcomings that you think others perceive in you. It's an inadequacy complex.
You think about others saying: "Bill doesn't read enough. He isn't intelligent enough. He isn't informed enough. He spends too much time doing other things..." -- says who? Sometimes this can come from loved ones or colleagues priding themselves in their own hobbies or activities. Other times it can come from past criticism you've received from friends or family.
There is so much freedom in doing something for yourself (because you know it's right) versus pleasing others, when it doesn't really benefit others.
As an example, I don't cave to the pressures of working out because I know I'd only be doing it to impress others. I'm at a healthy weight, but I play recreational sports instead to get my exercise, because I enjoy doing it. I also benefit from socializing with others and being outside doing something competitive.