people generally think they are okay and good, and they are generally right.
self-criticism is rare.
if someone is being self-critical, guilty, ashamed, etc, that indicates an unusual problem.
implications:
intense self-criticism will be taken as evidence of something actually wrong with the person—either they really did screw up quite badly, or they have poor judgment.
criticism is direct and overt.
if someone objects to what you’ve done, they’ll tell you straight out, and expect that this will clear the air and lead to a resolution of the problem.
“negative” judgments are not necessarily intended, or expected, to be painful; the listener may very well disagree with the judgment or find it helpful feedback.
as a corollary, nobody assumes that an ambiguous comment or facial expression is a hint at criticism or disapproval. The default assumption is that people are fine with you, that you’re fine, and if there’s a problem it’ll become obvious.
pro-self-criticism culture (Puritans):
baseline assumptions:
people are generally deeply flawed; we are constantly screwing up, sinning, etc. this is the universal or near-universal human condition, not something limited to unusually bad people. but it really is genuinely Bad and Not Okay.
people tend to be complacent—by default we engage in far too little self-criticism. We are screwing up without knowing it. We let ourselves off the hook, make excuses for ourselves, ignore warning signs. It takes active, continual effort to be vigilant against our own flaws.
implications:
intense self-criticism and guilt is normative. virtuous people will not think well of themselves. in fact, if someone does think well of themselves, that means they’re lazy and have low standards.
corollary: an intensely self-critical or guilty person is not assumed to be an unusually bad person or to have a mental health problem; they are just doing what we’re all supposed to do!
criticism can be harsh and intentionally painful, because the assumption is that it needs to be “strong enough” to overcome natural human complacency
it’s also common to read criticism into subtle or ambiguous signs. the assumption is that there are always more problems than the obvious ones; it’s never safe to presume things are fine.
people generally are too self-critical. most people are basically fine but torture themselves over minutiae.
complacency—failing to self-criticize enough about genuine faults—is literally monstrous. complacent people are rare, and pathological; we might call them sociopaths. you absolutely would not want to be one, and you’re almost certainly not.
“healing” or “growth” means learning to quiet the overactive inner critic. this is very difficult; people need help with it.
everybody always needs validation and reassurance that they’re ok, and the kindest thing you can do for anyone is give them permission not to worry or self-criticize. the cruelest thing you can do is trigger their insecurities and intensify their (already painful) self-criticism.
implications:
self-criticism is not normative; it’s an affliction we all suffer from and long to be freed from.
like sin in pro-self-criticism cultures, misery in counter-self-criticism culture is seen as Genuinely Terrible, Deeply Not Okay, but also a part of the human condition, not a sign that something has gone unusually wrong with you. you’re mentally ill, like everyone else.
criticism is mild and gentle, or suppressed altogether, because it’s assumed everybody is already torturing themselves and doesn’t need other people piling on.
corollary: it’s common to read a lot of criticism or disapproval into subtle or ambiguous signals because it’s assumed that people are holding back their true negative opinions. The absence of reassurance or validation is considered a sign of severe, harsh disapproval.
relationships:
Barbarians see Puritans as totally excessive, and see Therapy Patients as trying to counteract a problem that one can just...not have.
Puritans see both Barbarians and Therapy Patients as dangerously complacent.
Therapy Patients see Puritans as a familiar enemy—something they understand but reject and want to get away from, like an unhappy childhood home—and see Barbarians as incomprehensible, alien, insane, not-even-human.
“three cultures of self-criticism” https://roamresearch.com/#/app/srcpublic/page/zzRZnCLd_
non-self-critical culture (Barbarians):
baseline assumptions:
people generally think they are okay and good, and they are generally right.
self-criticism is rare.
if someone is being self-critical, guilty, ashamed, etc, that indicates an unusual problem.
implications:
intense self-criticism will be taken as evidence of something actually wrong with the person—either they really did screw up quite badly, or they have poor judgment.
criticism is direct and overt.
if someone objects to what you’ve done, they’ll tell you straight out, and expect that this will clear the air and lead to a resolution of the problem.
“negative” judgments are not necessarily intended, or expected, to be painful; the listener may very well disagree with the judgment or find it helpful feedback.
as a corollary, nobody assumes that an ambiguous comment or facial expression is a hint at criticism or disapproval. The default assumption is that people are fine with you, that you’re fine, and if there’s a problem it’ll become obvious.
pro-self-criticism culture (Puritans):
baseline assumptions:
people are generally deeply flawed; we are constantly screwing up, sinning, etc. this is the universal or near-universal human condition, not something limited to unusually bad people. but it really is genuinely Bad and Not Okay.
people tend to be complacent—by default we engage in far too little self-criticism. We are screwing up without knowing it. We let ourselves off the hook, make excuses for ourselves, ignore warning signs. It takes active, continual effort to be vigilant against our own flaws.
implications:
intense self-criticism and guilt is normative. virtuous people will not think well of themselves. in fact, if someone does think well of themselves, that means they’re lazy and have low standards.
corollary: an intensely self-critical or guilty person is not assumed to be an unusually bad person or to have a mental health problem; they are just doing what we’re all supposed to do!
criticism can be harsh and intentionally painful, because the assumption is that it needs to be “strong enough” to overcome natural human complacency
it’s also common to read criticism into subtle or ambiguous signs. the assumption is that there are always more problems than the obvious ones; it’s never safe to presume things are fine.
counter-self-criticism culture (Therapy Patients):
baseline assumptions:
people generally are too self-critical. most people are basically fine but torture themselves over minutiae.
complacency—failing to self-criticize enough about genuine faults—is literally monstrous. complacent people are rare, and pathological; we might call them sociopaths. you absolutely would not want to be one, and you’re almost certainly not.
“healing” or “growth” means learning to quiet the overactive inner critic. this is very difficult; people need help with it.
everybody always needs validation and reassurance that they’re ok, and the kindest thing you can do for anyone is give them permission not to worry or self-criticize. the cruelest thing you can do is trigger their insecurities and intensify their (already painful) self-criticism.
implications:
self-criticism is not normative; it’s an affliction we all suffer from and long to be freed from.
like sin in pro-self-criticism cultures, misery in counter-self-criticism culture is seen as Genuinely Terrible, Deeply Not Okay, but also a part of the human condition, not a sign that something has gone unusually wrong with you. you’re mentally ill, like everyone else.
criticism is mild and gentle, or suppressed altogether, because it’s assumed everybody is already torturing themselves and doesn’t need other people piling on.
corollary: it’s common to read a lot of criticism or disapproval into subtle or ambiguous signals because it’s assumed that people are holding back their true negative opinions. The absence of reassurance or validation is considered a sign of severe, harsh disapproval.
relationships:
Barbarians see Puritans as totally excessive, and see Therapy Patients as trying to counteract a problem that one can just...not have.
Puritans see both Barbarians and Therapy Patients as dangerously complacent.
Therapy Patients see Puritans as a familiar enemy—something they understand but reject and want to get away from, like an unhappy childhood home—and see Barbarians as incomprehensible, alien, insane, not-even-human.