Speaking is doing. This is one of the most significant insights to come out of 20th Century philosophy of language. In J. L. Austin’s landmark book on How to Do Things with Words, a series of lectures delivered at Harvard University in 1955, Austin wrote: “The phenomenon to be discussed is very widespread and obvious, and it cannot fail to have been already noticed, at least here and there, by others. Yet I have not found attention paid to it specifically” (Lecture 1). What Austin had in mind was the false assumption that ordinary language is primarily about describing facts out in the world, whereas such describing is only one of many types of speech acts that we can perform.
The case of speaking to oneself is a good example of what Austin was talking about because much of what we do when we speak to ourselves goes beyond describing facts and largely goes unnoticed by us. When taking a stroll, you feel a few drops of water on your cheek, and your internal voice exclaims, “It’s starting to rain, and I don’t have an umbrella!” In saying this to yourself, you are not merely informing yourself of a fact. Instead, you are inferring from the drops of water you feel on your cheek that there will be torrents of other drops soon to follow. You are predicting that you will be drenched without an umbrella to protect you. You are expressing dismay over the content of these inferences and predictions. You may also be catastrophizing about it. “How awful that my nice dry body and freshly laundered clothing will momentarily be drenched by a torrential rainstorm!”
It is easy to talk to yourself (and others too) without realizing what you are doing when you do so. One broad class of speech acts we tend to perform when we talk to ourselves is that of rating or judging things, including ourselves, others, and the external world. Rating or judging means evaluating, positively or negatively. Clearly, in the wet-cheek scenario, you are negatively rating the wet-cheek perception because you are forecasting torrential rain, which you strongly negatively rate. After all, you strongly rate getting soaked negatively.
Here are some very common negative (evaluative) speech that we use when speaking to ourselves, without paying much attention to what we are doing: catastrophizing (as in the rain example), demanding perfection (“I must never make mistakes”), damning oneself, others, or the world (“I am such a loser”), and disavowing the capacity to do or forebear (“I can’t stand it”). Speaking this way may receive little inspection with no attempt to critically assess their rationality. We just speak to ourselves and as a result very often drive ourselves needlessly into self-destructive or defeating states of anxiety, depression, guilt, and anger.
Obviously (but still often taken for granted), the first step is to become aware of your problematic speech instead of simply engaging in it with little awareness or concern for what you are doing—to yourself! The second step is to assess the speech for what it is: a needless, self-defeating hindrance to your well-being. The third step is to address it. This is where positive counteractive speech can help.
Philosophical Antidotes
Another major insight gleaned from contemporary neuropsychology is the way the brain processes abstract, philosophical language. Abstract language distracts us from momentary negative thoughts and feelings while philosophical language, such as growth, meaning, transcendence, tolerance, peace, empowerment, and freedom inspires hope and rational thinking. In my clinical experience, clients who resonate with a philosophical idea during imagery exercises (first imagining something that upsets them and then shifting their focus to the philosophical idea) feel a sense of relief from the torment they experienced.
Combined with literary metaphors, such language can be particularly uplifting and can have antidotal properties against negative, self-destructive thoughts and emotions. “Feelings come and go like clouds in a windy sky. Conscious breathing is my anchor” (as conveyed by Thich Nhat Hanh) can help counteract the internal self-talk of someone catastrophizing about their situation. This concise and pithy counteractive affirms a Buddhist philosophy of courage according to which you have the power to let go of self-destructive fear by mindfully focusing on your breathing.
I say this act of philosophical affirmation can help a person to let go of their fear, however, it may not work for everyone. Another person may be less disposed toward mindful antidotes and react more favorably to existential speech: “Life is never made unbearable by circumstances, but only by lack of meaning and purpose” (as conveyed by Viktor Frankl).
Philosophical counteractives to self-defeating speech, such as catastrophizing, damnation, demanding perfection, and capacity disavowing, are intimately bound up with one special type of philosophical language, that of virtue. Performance of the above Buddhist counteractive by someone who has been catastrophizing about their future, can help build courage in the face of fear. Similarly, the performance of the above existential counteractive by someone who finds purpose in overcoming a challenging situation can support emotional self-control in the face of this challenge. (A table of negative speech with the corresponding virtues that counteract them can be found here).
What antidotes would work for you? This depends on what type of philosophical perspective resonates with you. There are several common possibilities:
- Existential Antidotes
These antidotes emphasize finding your own meanings, personal responsibility, or freedom to choose, despite the inherent uncertainty and risks in life (for example, “Every day is a chance to create a new self”—Rollo May). - Stoic Antidotes
These focus on accepting that there are things you cannot control (for example, other people’s attitudes and reactions) and maintaining inner peace through reason and discipline (“Living according to nature means realizing that human reason is our guide and emotions are our servants.”—Cleanthes). - Pragmatic Antidotes
These offer practical solutions through effective, action-oriented strategies (for example, “”Speak to yourself as you would to a close friend.”—Kristin Neff - Ethical Antidotes
These focus on the moral significance of how you respond to life situations (for example, “Cultivate compassion for yourself and others”). - Mindfulness-Based Antidotes
These encourage being present in the here-and-now, observing your negative thoughts and feelings instead of judging them; letting them go rather than clinging to them (for example, “Let go of judgment and embrace the world as it is”—Tara Brach). - Theistic Antidotes
These draw strength from faith in a higher power or divine providence, often tied to religious traditions, including both Eastern and Western ones (for example, “Faith is taking the first step even when you don’t see the whole staircase” —Martin Luther King). - Humanistic Antidotes
These stress human dignity, self-empowerment, empathy, and personal growth in the face of life’s challenges (for example, “The curious paradox is that when I accept myself just as I am, then I can change”—Carl Rogers).
Which sort/s of antidote resonates with you the most? Getting in touch with your inherent philosophical predilections can open the door to powerful ways of reframing your present life challenges. For more food for thought, this toolbox of philosophical antidotes may prove helpful in constructing your personal antidotes that work for you.
In sum, keying into self-destructive speech when you talk to yourself is essential to overcoming this. Next is to find resonant antidotes to these irrational modes of speaking. Then, by performing (speaking) and applying (acting in line with) them during your daily life, you can work toward replacing these unhealthy ways of self-relating.
