Non-value As Self-destruction, The Right To Be Assessed As A Path To Health

2024 Author: Harry Day | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-17 15:43

In recent years, psychology has brought us a fashion for valuelessness. It is not “You acted badly”, but “I took your act this way”; it is not “You broke the agreement”, but “I was so angry”; it’s not “Your coffee is disgusting - it has mouse poop in it”, but “I am so impressionable and sensitive that I was upset to see mouse dung in your wonderful coffee”.

For people who grew up in dysfunctional families, this position does additional damage. They already could not have their own opinion, express their thoughts and desires, rely on their values - they were not considered or condemned. They already could not defend themselves and not only speak aloud, but even think that their parents were doing something wrong. They were already "themselves to blame for everything." And now they are also told that mouse tracks in coffee are not an objective reality, which is obviously toxic and which does not need to be taken internally, but only their internal glitch, internal perception, and they have no right to loudly and clearly say about their dissatisfaction., but should only mumble softly "Well, I took it this way" and blame their sensitivity.

There are things that are objectively bad. And we have the right to assess them and express our dissatisfaction. Not everything is our subjective perception, objective reality also exists and it may well be bad in places / times.

If coffee was prepared in an unwashed coffee machine for years from exhausted or rancid beans, there is garbage in the sugar, and the cream is sour - the coffee is objectively bad, this is not a perception, it is a fact. And you do not need to drink this coffee, apologizing for your tender perception. You need to demand to return the money, and write a complaint to the cafe.

Sometimes people sell us low-quality goods and services, employers do not fulfill their obligations, friends behave worse than enemies, and we hum “No, it's not your fault, I took it that way”. We react like fuckers, but psychologized and delicate.

We think the appraisal is evil. We do not give our assessment to anything and anyone. Therefore, we do not transfer the assessments of other people to the address of our actions. We crumble if someone doesn't like our actions, so we don't do anything at all - we don't stick our heads out. But it is impossible to achieve success in society, in career, in business, even in personal life - if you do not go through the stage of getting “bad grades”.

What are the ratings:

1. About your preferences.

"Coffee is sweeter than I like." "I didn't like the style of the book - I don't like black humor."

2. About their values.

"Coffee is sweeter than I drink - I limit my sugar intake." "There are a lot of harsh words in the book, I don't accept that."

3. Concerning Explicit Agreements.

"The coffee is sweeter than I ordered." "The book does not have what the annotation promised."

4. Concerning the values of a certain society, explicit or implicit local standards or rules.

"The coffee is sweeter than we make at home (than my favorite cafe)." "The book does not meet the standards of our publishing house … (followed by a clear list of standards)."

5. Relative to explicitly approved and documented standards and regulations on a “global” scale.

“Coffee does not comply with GOST”. "The text in the book does not correspond to the rules of the Russian language."

6. Concerning the knowledge and experience of the experts.

"This sugar content is not conducive to the development of all flavors of this particular type of coffee." "The book does not fit the style of fiction."

However, expert opinions may vary, be erroneous or inaccurate. In the end, the world may change, and so will the peer review system.

7. About your own implicit and unspoken expectations. This is the only type of assessment that poses problems.

“The coffee is sweeter than I expected,” but when ordering, I did not say how much sugar to put in.“The book did not answer my questions,” but neither the title, nor the abstract, nor the preface promised to answer them.

When evaluation brings problems:

1. If an assessment is given, in which it is not clear with respect to what it was made.

“Coffee is disgusting”, “The book is stupid”. This is more a drain of negative emotions than an assessment.

If someone gives such an assessment to your actions or products and services, you can safely ignore it, not take it personally. Or, if the situation allows, then clarify what exactly is disgusting and stupid in the opinion of the author of the assessment.

Also, for your part, try to give a detailed assessment so that it is clear what exactly is wrong for you and why, what exactly did you rely on - on your preferences, some norms and agreements, or on your expectations.

2. If the assessment is shifted from actions, products, services to the person himself.

"The barista is dumb, he brewed nasty coffee." "The author of the book is an idiot, writes such nonsense."

Similar to the first point: if this is addressed to you, ignore or clarify. For your part, do not transfer dissatisfaction with the product or service to the person.

3. If the assessment is based on the implicit expectations of the person.

"The coffee is not what I expected" - "You disappointed me, you made bad coffee, you were not sensitive to me and did not read my mind."

If someone tells you they are disappointed, don't take it personally. Depending on the situation and the level of relationship with the person, you can either ignore or clarify the situation and ask to talk about expectations before entering into a contract. Do not go to the defense of “I am not guilty” or the aggression of “The fool himself”. If the person is close, you can say “I'm sorry. What can we do to correct the situation and not repeat it in the future? What exactly did you want? Will you be able to pronounce it explicitly next time? " If not close - mentally click your tail and say "eni-beni-slave" (as in the cartoon about Devil 13).

As for the rest, it is normal to give an assessment.

Sometimes it is difficult to distinguish where one's own implicit expectations are, where is objective reality.

What if I pick up a T-shirt in a store and the seams are diverging in my hands? Is there a standard somewhere that describes the quality of the seams of a T-shirt? I dont know. But I know it is of poor quality. This is not my subjective, it is a fact. If it costs 100 rubles, I can buy it to paint the fence in the country and throw it away. If it costs 1,000 rubles, I can write a review about the store that it sells an expensive, low-quality product.

It is more difficult with matters such as psychotherapy. If the therapist gets irritated and raises his voice, but at the same time says that he is calm and this is just my perception? Is it really my projections and transferences, or the therapist's unethical behavior that he does not recognize? Is there a standard somewhere that states that the therapist should not raise his voice? Or is it an implicit standard of therapy? Or my “stupid” expectations? In the field of therapy, it is very convenient for the psychologist to push everything onto the client's processes and avoid responsibility. I urge you to discuss what is happening with the therapist, but ultimately believe yourself and your feelings - “On the basis of what subjective and objective facts do I conclude that the therapist is irritated and raises his voice? what happens to me at this moment? why exactly does it not suit me?”.

If there is an expired product in the shop window, this is really bad. It is the responsibility of the store. It is normal that we give this a negative assessment, this is not our glitch, not our tender perception, this is a mistake of the store employees.

The question is, what to do next? Inwardly, resentment is more dear to yourself. Thinking that the store is bad and not going to it anymore - well, you can, but why? It is worth checking the expiration date of the goods before purchasing. It is worth informing the store employees about the problem. You can ask the employees why this happens in their store, if it is important for you to understand the reason so as not to be angry with them. You can write a store review to alert other customers.

Consumers have the right to evaluate the product and service. How much it meets their needs and values. And how much it meets the desired quality standards.

If you are a manufacturer, the main way to get your product to be well received in the market is to get and respond to feedback.

You can tell which category the grades fall into. If this is a category of personal preferences and values, then perhaps you are positioning your product in an inappropriate way or are promoting to an audience that is not interested in your product. If these are questions of objective assessments of quality, then, as they say, no offense, but work on improving the quality.

It is very difficult to develop and promote a product if you are only waiting for positive feedback and subjective messages “I am sad when I see your product”.

The painful reaction to the assessment comes from the child's part of the personality, which shifts the assessment of the action to the assessment of oneself “I made a bad product, so I’m bad and they will stop loving me, I have no right to live, I have no right to do something”.

In any relationship with people, we perform actions. And it's okay that we can make mistakes or do something bad or do something bad. It's okay for someone to judge our actions as bad. It is also normal that we can evaluate people's actions as bad, unprofessional, unworthy, and hurtful.

The question is what to do next. Report a problem. Discuss. Try to understand the motivations of the party who did "bad" and the reaction of the party who assessed these actions as bad. What exactly is bad? How to fix? How to prevent it again?

We are so afraid of being evaluated because we are afraid of being rejected. We are afraid from our childish part of being abandoned and unworthy of love.

But as an adult, we can already cope if someone ends the relationship with us.

Both we and our partners have the right to choose with whom to be - whose actions suit, whose not. We can end a relationship if someone’s actions are not good enough to continue the relationship. We have the right to ask partners to admit responsibility for bad actions and compensate for damage. But we are also responsible for our bad actions. But a bad deed does not mean that a person is bad.

Why Inappropriate Nonjudgment Leads to Self-Destruction:

1. We deny objective reality, we are not in contact with reality, we are in illusion.
2. We cannot defend our borders. Due to the fact that we do not see the objective reality. Indeed, we drink coffee with traces of cars, if someone says that everything is ok with this coffee, it just seems to us that something is wrong. Indeed, we buy low-quality goods and forgive low-quality services, we remain in low-quality relations.
3. We take the blame upon ourselves - our peculiarities of perception, our internal problems. And we are strengthened in the belief that “something is wrong with me”, since I do not like it, since I react this way.
4. We do not give ourselves the right to our own system of values and the choice of our reality in accordance with our needs and desires.
5. We are afraid of other people's assessments and sit in a dark corner, not showing ourselves - our expertise, our feelings, our projects … Ultimately, we simply do not live.

Remember the fairy tale about the naked king? Sometimes the king is really naked, this is not our glitch. And it is important to say this, to say it out loud.

Why allowing yourself to be judged ultimately helps:

1. If we know what assessment is and how it works, if we allow ourselves to assess what comes into our life, then we are not afraid of other people's assessments, we can manifest ourselves and cope if someone gives a negative assessment.
2. We can adequately assess reality and filter out what does not suit us.
3. We can protect our borders, not drink coffee with poop and not waste time, money, energy on people, goods and services with which we are not comfortable, we can ask for compensation for the damage caused.
4. We can explain to people what is wrong and why, and find a solution, come to an agreement that suits all parties.
5. We build our self-assessment in a healthier way: we focus on our values and objective facts. We can receive feedback from the world and change something in our actions so that we are in tune with the world, but preserve our values.