"When we label anyone 'bad', we will have more trouble dealing with him than if we could have settled for a lesser label"
About this Quote
Glasser is smuggling a strategic move into what sounds like simple moral advice: stop calling people “bad” not because everyone deserves grace, but because the label booby-traps your ability to respond. “Bad” is a totalizing diagnosis. It doesn’t just describe behavior; it collapses motive, circumstance, and changeability into a single, sticky identity. Once you’ve done that, your options narrow to punishment, avoidance, or self-righteous resignation. You’ve pre-decided the story, and then you have to manage the person inside that story.
The key phrase is “settled for a lesser label.” Glasser isn’t asking for euphemisms; he’s advocating for precision. “Selfish,” “panicked,” “lying,” “out of control,” “in pain,” “protective,” even “unsafe” are narrower, less theatrical words. They keep the focus on specific actions and conditions, which means you can negotiate, set boundaries, or intervene. “Bad” is emotionally satisfying because it gives you instant clarity and moral high ground. It also guarantees “more trouble” because it blocks curiosity and invites escalation: if someone is essentially bad, why would they cooperate, and why would you bother building a plan?
The context is Glasser’s larger project in Choice Theory and Reality Therapy, which treats behavior as purposeful attempts to meet needs. His subtext is pragmatic and clinical: moral labeling is a cognitive shortcut that feels like control but functions as surrender. In family fights, classrooms, workplaces, courts, “bad” turns conflicts into identity wars. Lesser labels keep the problem solvable.
The key phrase is “settled for a lesser label.” Glasser isn’t asking for euphemisms; he’s advocating for precision. “Selfish,” “panicked,” “lying,” “out of control,” “in pain,” “protective,” even “unsafe” are narrower, less theatrical words. They keep the focus on specific actions and conditions, which means you can negotiate, set boundaries, or intervene. “Bad” is emotionally satisfying because it gives you instant clarity and moral high ground. It also guarantees “more trouble” because it blocks curiosity and invites escalation: if someone is essentially bad, why would they cooperate, and why would you bother building a plan?
The context is Glasser’s larger project in Choice Theory and Reality Therapy, which treats behavior as purposeful attempts to meet needs. His subtext is pragmatic and clinical: moral labeling is a cognitive shortcut that feels like control but functions as surrender. In family fights, classrooms, workplaces, courts, “bad” turns conflicts into identity wars. Lesser labels keep the problem solvable.
Quote Details
| Topic | Forgiveness |
|---|
More Quotes by William
Add to List
