Accepting the unruly self

Writing here, I only need persuade myself. Others get something from it: if a post has 27,000 views it appeals to people, but I can write a post if I like that might just get thirty, to clarify something for myself. And, I want to explain this to people, because I think it valuable. I tried, and met resistance, because it is counter-intuitive. So now I try again:

Moderately depressed, I can stay in bed until midday, and I have done so, periodically thinking, I ought to get up. I have to do X. X might be going to the supermarket, or doing some housework. I have to get up! I think to myself, panicking a bit, berating myself, then I go back to scrolling facebook. Then at midday I think, oh well, I am not going to do that today, I’ll spend the afternoon with the telly. And I do. This is not a way to endear myself to human society.

Mindful presence is part of it. Put down the laptop, it is just a distraction. I want dopamine, but facebook is a bad way of getting it. Put down the laptop, and I am alone with my thoughts and feelings, that shame, misery and desperation that I will not just GET UP! and do what I have to do. These are not pleasant feelings to face. Yet there are other feelings, not just about my inaction but about the desired action itself.

For a time in the Summer when I found this, I simply needed to acknowledge that I do not want to get up! And that, for me, was enough to get me up. There was some desire, some motivation, to get up and do the thing. Acknowledging the feelings stopping me, valuing and accepting that part of my inner conflict, was enough to make those feelings less insistent. “I do not want to get up!” I would say to myself, joyfully, and get up. The feelings affect me whether I am conscious of them or not, to the extent that I find consciousness overrated. I am not, primarily, a conscious being but an animal being. Somewhere else I have seen the simile consciousness is like a mahout on an elephant, and it’s not entirely clear whether the reins the mahout holds actually do anything.

Now I find I might make a better decision if I ask what, precisely, am I feeling about the X that I “ought” to do. That is, fully and completely acknowledging why I do not want to do it, or at any rate do not want to do it now. Unacknowledged, the feelings are too strong for me, demanding to be heard. Acknowledging them pacifies them. Therefore the counterintuitive suggestion, ask yourself all the reasons why you don’t want to go, what you feel and why you might feel like that, begins to make sense.

Now, I have no idea whether this is a common idea, which community psychiatric nurses routinely suggest to their patients, a more out there idea which has been the subject of an obscure TEDx talk, or completely original. That I have not heard of it is little evidence. Had I a name for it I might google it, but someone might have a different name. A name helps to get an idea accepted. It’s something like radical self-acceptance in the moment. I’ve just come up with the title for this post, thinking as I write, but there may be a better term for the technique. It’s a way of allowing feelings about the medium or long term take precedence. Feelings about Right Now are more insistent, and if I do not know what they are I have no tools for making decisions beyond the present moment. My post title says what I do, but a name expressing pithily what that achieves might be worthwhile.

I bring together the committee of the self, including the bits I don’t like, so they can decide together what to do.

I suggested this to someone, and she dismissed it out of hand, without even the need to explain why it was so wrong because that was obvious. Why would you think about why you don’t want to do something? That only makes you less likely to do it! Well, because those reasons or feelings are in fact stopping you from taking action, and examining them might help you address them. That the idea is hard to explain might show that it is less widespread.

Sixteen years ago a counsellor told me that “ought” is very poor motivation to do something. That is part of this idea.

7 thoughts on “Accepting the unruly self

      • All or nothing at all
        If it’s love, there is no in between
        Why begin then cry, for something that might have been
        No I’d rather have nothing at all

        In the US, aught is much more apt to mean nothing, or zero, or naught..


        • In the UK, aught is outdated, but I thought anything as opposed to nothing, surviving in Yorkshire as owt as opposed to nowt. It’s Old English, says the new SOED, meaning anything, and Middle English meaning in any respect or to any extent. For aught I know.

          But then we say “I couldn’t care less” and the US “I could care less” meaning the same thing but making a lot more sense in the English version.


          • I’m hoping your last sentence was not commentary. 🙂 It’s still wrong in the US to say “could care less’ but many don’t care to even think about it enough to notice. Those people are simply “careless” in their usage. Still, not worth employing “double aught seven” to solve the problem.

            Aught may be archaic, but it’s still pun-worthy. Its double-and-opposite meanings are what made me think of those song lyrics. Singing the song to myself – about myself, and love of self – is not without meaning. If I can’t have or do it all, I most often don’t bother to try, at all. If “ought” is poor motivation to do something, it is even less-so for not having had done something.


            • No, it was not commentary. Sorry if it looked that way.

              In Britain, aught has no opposite meanings. “Quite” has- “quite good” not very, “quite perfect” meaning absolutely perfect. “Quite” for something which can be more or less makes it less. “Quite” for something which logically either is or is not, means entirely. If I respond to your comment “Quite”, I am agreeing.


          • I was only kidding. Had I said, “I’m quite sure that you didn’t mean that last sentence to be commentary,” though, I’m not sure that you would have known whether I was kidding or not, either. I might have also said “I’m NOT quite sure…,” but I don’t know if that would be a double-negative, thus making it a positive statement. I would say that I’m now quite confused, but I am really quite perfectly confused (a redundancy?).

            A friend once remarked that, because I enjoy puns, I must really like Shakespeare. Not quite, until I’ve really understood his language in the first place. Am I quite right or bloody well right about that?

            Liked by 1 person

All comments welcome.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.