Doing is Not Being! REBT and General Semantics

A global rating of another's worth is when a quality or characteristic or behaviour is abstracted from all the competencies and traits possessed by an individual and is then used to assess a person's entire personhood. For example, deciding a person is 'bad' because they do something we don't approve of e.g., they didn't wave back!

When discussing this with a teacher colleague, she notes that there are several fellow educators she works with who label some students in negative global rating terms, suggesting that ‘that’s the way they are’ and that they will not change.

These observations concur with my own experience as a teacher and counsellor, where a ‘fixed mindset’ mentality affects how some teachers behave towards their students, projecting a conditional acceptance of the other attitude, defining student worth in a negative way.

The word is not the thing. Alfred Korzybski

Albert Ellis, who created Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy, spoke of unconditional other acceptance, the belief that a person's essential worth is unconditional where one quality, 'good' or 'bad' cannot define them. Similarly, Carl Rogers spoke of unconditional positive regard for the other person. 

What's the point of this and how does it relate to teaching practice? 

We have been taught via feedback that we can 'be' whatever someone deems us to be, unintentionally perhaps, in total ignorance but we have internalised these irrational and debilitating ideas as they are reinforced as a matter of course through language.

Consider the expression 'why are you angry? Can't you calm down!' This may be said in an empathic or in accusatory fashion or otherwise but what does it mean?

I've worked with kids who believe they are their anger, that their total being is characterised by this unacceptable, in their eyes, affliction that they shouldn't have. There's something wrong with them and they feel guilt and shame and extreme sadness. 

We are not the word assigned us Alfred Korzybski of General Semantics theory reminds us. The kid 'is' not 'an angry' kid but a person who feels angry at times. 

Hi there! 

It is advised that as mentors to others in the capacity of educator or parent we pay attention to what we say and the possible meaning it may convey; are we asserting you 'are' a 'bad' person for doing what you did e.g., swear at someone, or a person who did what can be assessed as a 'bad' thing. Doing is not being!

Food for thought.

 

The Word is Not the Person! General Semantics

Alfred Korzybski of General Semantics says that we ought to be more thoughtful about the language we use and to be mindful of the messages we are trying to convey. Too many and inappropriate words can confuse understanding and he suggests that we develop a scientist sensibility (Korzybski, 2000) for listening. He talks about creating a verbal pollution free zone by asking three questions that encourage specific answers. They are:

1. What do you mean?

2. How do you know?

3. What did you leave out?

Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy, created by Dr. Albert Ellis, incorporates Alfred Korzybski's ideas in his approach to psychotherapy and can be applied in counselling practice when working with young students.

Mary is an early childhood student who is not travelling OK. The teacher says she is self-critical and doesn't want to do things. 

We talk about Brain Friend and Brain Bully thinking. BF makes OK feelings and behaviours and BB causes us to feel not OK and we don't act as we could e.g., to try new things

We talk about Mary and how's she's been feeling and agree they are not helpful feelings she feels. She also says that she hasn't been doing her work and the teacher is wondering why. We talk about how BB thinking could be making her feel bad and she says she thinks 'I can't do this. I'm dumb.'

Maybe BB is tricking her into believing that she is totally dumb and hopeless. So, we say out loud together, 'I am dumb and hopeless.' We agree that it’s a Brain Bully way of thinking and so we decide to work on this together and we use the questions introduced above starting with #1

What do we mean?

We both answer this together and say things like 'because I am too scared to try, I am dumb and stupid.' Then we ask ourselves the question:

How do we know?

We say 'we are stupid because we are too scared to try. The teacher says we are not progressing and she tells mum she feels concerned so it must be true.' We think this kind of thinking is Brain Bully trying to trick us. We say together, 'BB is trying to trick us,' so we ask ourselves:

What did we leave out?

We talked about all the things we can do and made a list and we agreed that this proves we can't be totally dumb and just because we might feel worried about failing at something it is not true to say we are no good and that we shouldn't try.

We said that we'll work at the things we aren't so good at but we'll try to remember all the things we can do which we forgot to remember!

The word is not the person so why can a child believe they are the word 'dumb' when all the evidence suggests otherwise?

Food for thought.