- When we’ve used a judgment in talking or thinking through a topic that’s either 1) complex or 2) there’s disagreement or confusion those are times we want to “unpack” the judgment
- To “unpack” a judgment we want to substitute the judgmental language with descriptive language. *this skill was developed by Marsha Linehan of DBT*
- For many of us, judgments are hard wired in by our families or by our cultures, so they can be hidden or hard to find. Look for words like “should, shouldn’t, right, wrong, good, and bad”. There is often a judgment built in.
- The new language after we’ve unpacked the judgment will often include a belief, value, preference, opinion, or potential consequence
- Then, we want to try saying (or thinking) about that topic using the new language instead of the judgmental language
- This will reduce conflict, increase understanding between parties that don’t share a perspective, and open up avenues for problem solving. It may also help build connection by finding shared values and concerns
- When we don’t use judgments we start to take ownership of our perspective and that improves communication and relationships too. I can also reduce shame and increase motivation.
- Using a judgment when the meaning behind it is understood by all parties, or everyone is on the same page, is a great use of the tool and enables more efficient communication
- Judgments are not inherently bad (there’s a judgment!) but they are tool, and one we need to use judiciously, with intention, and with awareness.
Often times it makes more sense to say “The weather’s good” than “I prefer sunshine to rain, and my intuition is you do too. This warm weather is a pleasant and comfortable experience for us both”. You probably just rolled your eyes. I get it. That’s obnoxious. We can’t talk like that.
In previous posts I covered what a judgment is and how they limit us. Today, we’re covering what to when we hit one. Feel free to keep saying things like “the weather is good”, using judgmental language when the sentiments under it can be easily deduced, or when everyone is naturally on the same page saves time and energy.
We want to work on using a different approach when everyone is not on the same page (like when there is a judgment in a conflict) or when the meaning is not as easily deduced (like complex, confusing, or new topics). When we unpack the judgment (as I call it) or work to replace judgmental words with descriptive words (as DBT calls for) we can communicate more clearly, reduce conflict, decrease experiences of shame, increase motivation, increase our ability to problem solve, and
increase connection between parties even if they have different perspectives.
When instructing my clients on this I tell them they’ve got to work on finding a way to express what they are trying to communicate without using an evaluative statement (most common are should, shouldn’t, right, wrong, good, or bad – but there are others). I.e. How can you try and express exactly what you were trying to say with words that are not evaluative statements.
Having a judgment is not the same as having a belief, a preference, a value or an opinion. When we remove the judgmental language and unpack the beliefs and opinions that are under it we can get to the bottom of your experience and what may be working (or not) for you, or what may be important (or not) for you or the other person.
While judgments are not inherently bad (there’s a judgment), they are tool, and one we need to use judiciously and with awareness. We can communicate more effectively with one another by reducing our use of judgments and by building insight into the beliefs, experiences, preferences, and opinions that inform them.
Notes:
1. Substituting language is not a one for one. If you remove the word good you cannot find a single word that will replace is. You often need to find a way to re-state the whole premise.
2. I like to use the visual of a flag post when I think of judgments. Think of the flag as marking a spot you need to drill down into to find the substance under the superficial judgment.
3. Let’s take an example: “I’m not good at this”. If we’re not going to use judgmental language, we need to get to the bottom of what’s being stated. This is when it’s time to ask ourselves what we really mean. Some possible examples: Is what we really mean “this is new to me and I expected to get the hang of this quicker”? Or “this isn’t interesting enough for me to keep trying”? Or what about “I can see that others around me are better than me, and I just don’t think I’ll ever get there ” or maybe we mean “the skills required of this task are just not skills I have naturally at this point in my life”. Maybe it means “I don’t want to do this any more” or “I feel defeated”. Unlike “I’m not good at this” all of these statements have natural solutions or next steps (unlike “I’m not good at this” which is a dead-end). Maybe this means the person needs to build more skills, maybe this means they want to stop, maybe this means they need more encouragement, maybe they are struggling with comparisons and need to work more at focusing on their progress rather than others. Whatever statement (or statements) fit – and they will be person and situation specific – there is a clear next step and sense of direction which enables problem solving, support, and movement through an issue.
4. Example: “Lying is bad” I think nearly all of us can agree that lying is (typically) problematic. It misrepresents the truth, deceives others, and can violate trust which hurts relationships. I would argue that it’s far more important to communicate to someone who lies why lying is problematic to help someone understand the consequences and potentially be motivated to change their behavior than to simply leave it as “lying is bad”. We are limited by the statement “lying is bad” because it doesn’t provide enough context for someone who doesn’t understand the impact of lying on the community around them. This is a scenario where it’s more helpful to get descriptive and talk about consequences so someone understands why lying is problematic.
5. Example: “It’s wrong to play video games all day.”. So clearly the speaker is upset about the other party’s decision to spend time on video games, but there is actually a lot to unpack here. Why does this upset the speaker? Is the other person not contributing enough at home? Are they just relaxing after a long day? Is the speaker someone who has a hard time slowing down and finds themselves resentful when they see someone else slow down? Could the video game player be overwhelmed and numbing out their life? Is the person making the statement angry because they feel an imbalance in the relationship? If we don’t unpack what makes it “wrong” we can’t begin to solve and address the underlying concerns – both the possible issues within the player, and the concerns held by the person speaking the statement.
6. Example: “Don’t take away my guns. Gun control is wrong.”. Alternately, “Guns are bad. We need gun control”. (Yes. I’ve chosen a hot button topic for the sake of example. I want to be clear these are examples and are not representative of my beliefs. I am choosing this to illustrate how judgmental language can limit political discourse). We have so little information from either statement about why gun control is bad, or why guns are bad. It’s unclear if we’re talking about safety issues, self-protection issues, fear of not being able to protect oneself, an emotional attachment to ether side – you name it. It’s very hard to problem solve because the statements don’t appear to have much overlap, and we’re not talking about the actual concerns, priorities, fears, needs, and beliefs from either side. If we’re going to address the issue of guns (or other political issues) we need to be be able to clearly articulate our priorities, needs, concerns, fears, and beliefs around them. Then we can create laws that address those topics. We may also find overlap that we weren’t previously aware existed if we can move away from the judgments and get more descriptive with the concerns at hand.
7. Not sure if it’s a judgment? See this post.