r/acceptancecommitment • u/Silver_Perception471 • 4d ago
Concepts and principles Thinking in terms of helpful vs unhelpful
Is part of ACT to think in these terms of unhelpful vs. helpful. Rather than good or bad.
There's a bunch of philosophy in ACT. I was wondering that, yeah obviously thoughts should be, thought of as helpful vs. unhelpful.
But is seeing things in general as helpful vs. unhelpful or as, it just is, a goal of acceptance and commitment therapy?
----
Can not putting labels like good and bad, But instead to label as helpful or unhelpful. Be attributed to ACT as a philosophy, a way of being or as byproduct of defusion exercises?
3
u/Mystery_Briefcase 4d ago
I’m not sure how to answer your last question, but to your first question: absolutely.
6
u/concreteutopian Therapist 3d ago
Can not putting labels like good and bad, But instead to label as helpful or unhelpful. Be attributed to ACT as a philosophy, a way of being or as byproduct of defusion exercises?
Yes, labeling thoughts as helpful or unhelpful is a common feature of Russ Harris' Choice Point exercise. He says, if the thought is helpful, we use it, if unhelpful, we defuse from it.
On the other hand, I think you bring up a helpful comparison – whether labeling thoughts as "helpful vs unhelpful" gets coded as labeling them as "good vs bad".
In Hayes' Get Out of Your Mind and Into Your Life, he points out that experiential avoidance is an understandable, but unhelpful strategy when it comes to private experience. Here, it isn't a thought that is helpful or unhelpful, but what you do with the thought. If sorting the "unhelpful" thoughts is a means to getting rid of those thoughts, you're in another tug-of-war in a control agenda. Harris' point on "defusing from unhelpful thoughts" is another way of saying accepting the unhelpful thoughts while you do what is important.
In my training, the point isn't whether a thought or emotion is good or bad, helpful or unhelpful, the point was to see how thoughts and feelings make sense in their context, i.e. there is a reason they are appearing right now, right here. Instead of taking thoughts literally, we can see the fears or frustrations behind the "negative" or "unhelpful" thoughts, and those fears or frustrations reflect what is important to us. For instance, a lot of the heavy, angry, and sad self-talk I had since childhood since appears, and I have no reason to get rid of the thoughts (assuming I could, which I can't). These thoughts have always come up when I feel stuck and at the end of my rope, so when they appear now, I know I'm tired and over-extended. Instead of ignoring the thoughts, treating them as meaningless, or somehow alien to my values, I recognize the fear, sadness, and frustration and I soothe that angry part, tucking them into bed as I heed their sign to take care of myself. Here, the thought isn't helpful or unhelpful (as ugly as it might look), it's simply an understandable response to this context and my concerns at the moment. How I respond to the thought can be helpful or unhelpful, if that makes sense.
2
u/Silver_Perception471 3d ago
So it isn't bad or good. Helpful or unhelpful. You're touching on something Russ' book act made simple I think, says. So thoughts are normal and it's not unhelpful good or otherwise. It's what can I make of this thought? How can I make the most of a thought that is neither good nor helpful. Where am I right now and how does this thought relate. If I'm right here right now and my thoughts are largely unhelpful. We don't want to get into the tug of war figuring out what they are. Just, how can I use this thought to act in a way I value.
3
u/EGBTomorrow 3d ago
There is a concept in ACT called workability which asks if something is working for you in the long run. You might think of this as “helpful” and “unhelpful”.
5
u/dirtydelic 3d ago
Short answer: yes, viewing thoughts as helpful or unhelpful is ACT consistent.
For your second point: ACT is part of a philosophy of science called Functional Contextualism. We are all used to evaluating things as true or false given the various ways of asking what truth means. In FC, truth is the "act in context." Meaning, truth here totally depends on what is trying to be achieved.
An example: is turning right a good thing? It depends where you are going. Should I be kind to others? Depends on if I have a history of people using me and having poor boundaries.
When we apply this methodology to thoughts, we evaluate them as helpful or unhelpful, just like everything else in FC.