In science, language that is imprecise, and non-descriptive is avoided. Similarly, when trying to support personal growth, long term change, and healthier relationships, not being precise and using judgmental language is problematic. Our everyday language is filled with dismissive, judgmental, and insulting words like stupid, lazy, and greedy. Such words express hostility, essentially taking a jab at someone we find disappointing, annoying, or even angering. These and similar words, ill-defined and loaded with aggression, are unlikely to contribute to a constructive dialogue.
Some may regard the word non-judgmental as a proxy for excusing behaviors which should be condemned. Undeniably, some behaviors cause pleasure and happiness while others can cause sadness and pain, but to categorize behaviors which cause happiness as “good,” “righteous,” and “moral” and those which cause pain as “bad,” “wrong,” or “evil,” is of no use in bringing about greater incidence of the former and less of the latter.
Judgmental categorizations are counter-productive to the promotion of desirable behaviors because instead of providing useful descriptive information, they simply assign blame.
Responding to problems without sufficiently describing them makes effective analysis and solutions elusive. We can imagine a child who maybe suffering with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder whose behavior is dismissed as “lazy”, or “wild” — as a result the ADHD remains unaddressed. We can imagine a deeply depressed person who instead of getting advised to seek effective treatment is simply told that they need to stop feeling sorry for themselves. These misreadings and misunderstandings are likely to occur wherever loaded judgmental language is common.
Learning to think and communicate in nonjudgmental terms is a major step toward becoming our desired selves, and can significantly support our having more satisfying relationships.
Let’s consider an example of how this works-
Lilly and Tina have been good friends for years. Imagine that Tina was home alone recovering after breaking her leg while skiing. Knowing that Tina wasn’t going to have much other company, it was Lilly’s intention to spend time with Tina regularly during her recuperation but during the three weeks that Tina was home Lilly only visited her once. Lilly had told Tina that she would be back soon, but, each day there seemed to be another issue preventing her return.
The repeated postponements caused Tina to feel increasingly disappointed. Ultimately, she questioned the relationship. Also, not having been there for Tina as she had intended, caused Lilly to question herself, thinking “What’s wrong with me that I didn’t get to Tina when she needed me?”
While it is completely understandable that such questions would arise, where one goes next has significant consequences. If Tina uses judgmental terms like “lousy friend” or if she makes broad characterizations like “Lilly turned out to be an unreliable person” the challenges in their friendship will not be addressed in a way that produces desirable results. If Tina wants to get a better understanding of why Lilly didn’t come through in her time of need, she needs to speak to Lilly in a manner that doesn’t threaten her with reproach. It is okay for Tina to express that she was disappointed, but only after making sure that Lilly felt safe from being ridiculed. Otherwise, Lilly might feel compelled to defend the behavior that she herself regrets.
In response to what occurred, Tina may reasonably feel numerous hurtful feelings — disappointment, sadness, anger, perhaps even a feeling of having been betrayed. With feelings like these it is easy to understand how Tina might be inclined to be accusatory in her approach. And while it might feel satisfying to vent her frustration, if Tina’s true goal is to keep their friendship and improve it, Tina will need to express the way she feels in a manner that invites Lilly to explore what happened. This is where it is important to discern between expressing how we feel verses acting those feeling out.
It is the difference between saying to someone “I feel angry” verses screaming at them “How dare you treat me this way?” While the latter may feel more satisfying in the short run, it does little to set up the condition for reconciliation. To be most supportive of their relationship Tina, if she can, needs to convey her feeling and leave the dramatic expression behind. Otherwise, Tina’s acted out feelings could have a cascading effect, making it increasingly harder to communicate.
While the way that Tina approaches Lilly is critical in determining how their communication proceeds, the way that Tina thinks about the situation is pivotal in determining her approach. This is where applying Naturalistic Support can be significant.
Viewed through the lens of the naturalistic model, Lilly behaved in the only way her determinants would allow. Theoretically, had their roles been switched, with Lilly recovering and Tina promising to visit, and if Tina had the exact same determinants (genes and experiences) as did Lilly, then necessarily, she would have acted exactly as Lilly did. In actuality, since Tina and Lilly are different people with unique determinants, acting in the same situation Tina might have behaved very differently than Lilly did. But that difference in their behaviors has nothing to do with Tina being a better person.
A primary idea in Naturalist Humanism is that there are no better or worse people, there are only people with different circumstances. The unavoidable conclusion is that Lilly deserves no blame. This is not to suggest that Tina’s disappointment and frustration is in any way unreasonable. Her hurt feelings are understandable, but how she thinks about her experience can either cause her additional painful, or it can help her put things into a more accurate and less hurtful perspective.
To think about Lilly’s behavior without understanding that, given her determinants, how she behaved was the only way she could have is to disconnect the event of her behavior from all of the events which led up to it. It would be like observing a small sliver of a large complex tapestry and then trying to make sense of the fragment without ever viewing it in context.
Thinking about Lilly’s behavior with regard to its determinants can help Tina converse with Lilly in a way that helps them both learn important information. The result could be that their overall relationship becomes closer than it had been previously. Additionally, encouraged to explore her feelings, Lilly may gain awareness which helps her make progress towards becoming the person she wants herself to be.
Of course Tina and Lilly’s attempt to honestly communicate could have a different outcome. For example, what if, after a decent effort at honest communication, it ultimately appeared that only one party was able to communicate in a cooperative manner. That may make further communication too frustrating.
And depending on what is learned from their communication, it is also possible that Tina may decide she no longer wants to have a close a friendship with Lilly. Sometimes people determine that their needs are mutually exclusive, or that they just can’t get what they want from a relationship.
The degree to which we invest ourselves to work past obstacles in a relationship will naturally be proportionate to how deeply two people are connected. If Tina and Lilly were family, or life partners, the degree to which they would be willing to work to get past obstacles is likely to be far greater than if their relationship were less serious. But whatever the outcome, if Tina is able to view the situation through a Naturalistic Support lens she will save herself from ruminating painful thoughts, and anger.
Lilly could be questioning her own behavior. She likes to think of herself as a friend who can be counted on. And if becoming a more reliable friend is her goal, it is particularly un-helpful for Lilly to admonish herself with a judgmental voice. In response to what happened, it wouldn’t be surprising if Lilly had thoughts like “I’m such a flake!” or “I guess I’m really a crappy friend.” While such thoughts may feel appropriate, self-deprecating thoughts like these will not help Lilly get closer to being the friend that she wants herself to be.
In order for her to gain valuable insight from the situation, she needs to think clearly and explore the parts of herself that did not want to visit Tina. To accomplish that she can’t indulge such self-punishing thoughts, Lilly can however, consider some productive questions. It could be that Tina’s disability evoked feelings Lily had involving a prior experience, or feelings about her own fragility, affecting her ability to be around Tina in such a state. Perhaps Tina has had one crisis after another and her current dilemma was just one too many problems for Lilly to handle.
Dynamics such as these might have been operating, but Lilly might not have been conscious of them and viewing the situation through a judgmental lens would only distort her observations.
As she reflects, Lilly should acknowledge that she has shown support and kindness to friends in the past and it’s on those parts of her personality that she needs to build. Self-deprecating judgmental thoughts are not only unproductive, they can lead to deluded thinking. For example, to avoid painful feelings Lilly could rationalize that she had good reasons for not visiting Tina again and that if anyone has a problem it is Tina, who is making her feel guilty. Even if their relationship cannot be repaired, if Tina and Lilly can avoid judgmental thinking and language, the skills that they practice will support future relationships and their own personal growth