The more you “should” on yourself, the more you pushback on your own advice. 

Dr. Mitchell Perry


Have you ever noticed how often people will talk to us about a problem, and we begin to tell them what they “should” do about it? Even after hearing our sage advice, irrespective of how practical, logical, and sensible it might be, they dig in their heels and resist what you claim they “should” do.

We also do this to ourselves. Have you noticed yourself saying, “I should do this” or “I really should avoid doing that,” and then you steadfastly resist whatever it is you’re telling yourself to do? Have you ever noticed how miserable people feel whenever they compulsively keep doing whatever it is they think they “should” do, rather than what they want to do?  It seems there are so many things they should do, say, think, feel, quit, start, etc., that they seldom get around to enjoying anything.

If all of this sounds familiar, you are an unknowing participant in the “should bind.”  What you may have failed to consider is that whenever you encounter a “should,” you have immediately created an obstacle to any progress or success.  A “should” is a put-down, designed to point out how stupid the person is who receives it.

Suppose you have a friend who is overweight and out of shape.  For a long time, you have been watching your friend overeat without exercising.  You are now concerned about his physical condition because these eating habits are jeopardizing his good health and longevity.  So, you say, with admirable intentions:  “John, you should lose weight.  You should diet and exercise because you know your current weight is unhealthy for you.”  Notice how your friend handles these remarks!  He appears affronted and upset and simply refuses to heed them regardless of their validity.  Why?  What you have really told him is that he is stupid – if he was smart, he would have already lost the weight!  The “should” was, in reality, a put-down that resulted in a typical resistant stance.

You “Should” on yourself too!  You may notice too that whenever you tell yourself you should diet and exercise, you are reluctant to do what you “should” do.  List all of your own “shoulds.”  They may be overwhelmingly abundant and sound something like this:

I should lose weight.  I should stop smoking.  I should exercise. I should spend more time with my kids.  I should finish my degree.  I should call my mother.  I should be more patient.  I should listen.  I shouldn’t feel guilty.  I shouldn’t worry. I shouldn’t take things so personally.

Perhaps your list appears endless.  Notice whenever you should on yourself out loud, you begin to feel badly, defensive, resentful and resistant?  There is a complete absence of motivation.

Sometimes, as parents, we tell our children what they “should” and “shouldn’t” do, feel and behave.  Though our intentions are honorable and we have the utmost concern for their welfare, we become confused when often our children meet our advice with resistance.  Why is that?  In actuality, we have put them down rather than helped them out.  For instance, suppose your daughter is too frightened to swim and you say:  You shouldn’t feel afraid.  You have really told your child that her feelings are stupid and invalid.  She will still feel afraid but now she also feels inferior and stupid because her fear has been undermined.

More closely examined, the “shoulds” are purely guilt producers.  The feeling generated by any “should” remark is initially guilt but this is quickly turned to resentment then resistance.  I have seldom known anyone who really liked being dealt “shoulds” on a regular basis.

An even more self-defeating “should” is placed in the past tense, namely, “I should have done this,” or “You should have remembered…”  To constantly berate yourself over what you should or shouldn’t have done is unbelievably destructive.  Why?  Because it is impossible to alter the past!  It has already happened and is past the point of change.  To continually beat yourself up about it is reactive and destructive.  Progress and improvement are impossible leaving room only for guilt and self-hate.

What is a solution to “Shoulding” on yourself and others?

I heartily encourage you delete all “shoulds” from your vocabulary and substitute them with “mights” and “wants.”  Remember that the first thing people will do when they feel forced is resist.  The “shoulds” are a form of force.  People resist vehemently.  Removing the “shoulds” from your dialogue will provide less force, thereby resulting in less unnecessary resistance.  There are three ways to rephrase the overused “should” in your daily conversations.  Each has a different level of intensity.  They are:
“You might… ”
“I urge / encourage / suggest / recommend you consider… ”
“I want you to… ”
Notice if you say to your overweight friend, “John, you might want to lose weight,” “I would encourage you to consider losing weight,” or “I want you to lose weight.”  He will feel much less resistant to your suggestion and more motivated to start losing weight because essentially he still has the option to refuse your advice without losing face or feeling stupid.  You, of course, select one of the three options depending on your style, the closeness of the relationship, and the desired level of impact.

In addition, removing ourselves from the tyranny of the “shoulding” on ourselves by substituting the “wants” and “mights” is a beneficial change.  If you say to yourself, “I should lose weight,” it is likely you will feel badly that you have yet to do it.  On the other hand, if you say, “I want to lose weight,” it is more likely you will diet because your resistance is down, and your levels of guilt and bad feelings are diminished.

Remember, ultimately you are only going to do what you want to do.  You will be impressed with how much more you can get done with less resistance when you concentrate on changing those “shoulds” to “wants.”  I encourage you to take your list of “shoulds” and change them to “wants.”  Then read them aloud and notice how you feel different immediately!

In summary, the “shoulds” create resistance, when either self-imposed, or levied on others.  Wipe out all the “shoulds” and consider the “mights” when speaking with others, and use the “wants” when speaking to yourself.  You will be quite surprised with the positive results.

I encourage you to take a look at my 3-minute video on “The Shoulds.”  Click here: https://jmperry.com/videos.html then forward this to many in your network!

Today’s Tickle

Let’s face it… English is a crazy language.

There is no egg in eggplant, nor ham in hamburger; neither apple nor pine in pineapple. English muffins weren’t invented in England or French fries in France. Sweetmeats are candies while sweetbreads, which aren’t sweet, are meat. We take English for granted. But if we explore its paradoxes, we find that quicksand can work slowly, boxing rings are square and a guinea pig is neither from Guinea nor is it a pig.

And why is it that writers write but fingers don’t fing, grocers don’t groce and hammers don’t ham? If the plural of tooth is teeth, why isn’t the plural of booth, beeth? One goose, 2 geese. So one moose, 2 meese? One blouse, 2 blice? First, second, third, fourth or oneth, twoth, threeth, fourth? One index, 2 indices? One kleenex, 2 kleenexes?

Doesn’t it seem crazy that you can make amends but not one amend? If you have a bunch of odds and ends and get rid of all but one of them, what do you call it?

If teachers taught, why didn’t preachers praught? If a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat? Sometimes I think all the English speakers should be committed to an asylum for the verbally insane. In what language do people recite at a play and play at a recital? Ship by truck and send cargo by ship? Have noses that run and feet that smell? Park in the driveway and drive in the parkway?

How can a slim chance and a fat chance be the same, while a wise man and a wise guy are opposites? You have to marvel at the unique lunacy of a language in which your house can burn up as it burns down, in which you fill in a form by filling it out and in which, an alarm goes off by going on.

English was invented by people, not computers, and it reflects the creativity of the human race, which, of course, is not a race at all. That is why, when the stars are out, they are visible, but when the lights are out, they are invisible.

PS. – Why doesn’t ‘Buick’ rhyme with ‘quick’

Previous PostNext Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Yes, I would like to receive emails from JM Perry Learning Technologies. Sign me up!

By submitting this form, you are consenting to receive marketing emails from: JM Perry Learning Technologies, 4203 Foothill Road, Ventura, CA, 93003, https://jmperry.com. You can revoke your consent to receive emails at any time by using the SafeUnsubscribe® link, found at the bottom of every email. Emails are serviced by Constant Contact