Thread: The 'S' word

I have, over the course of the years, developed an allergy to the word 'should.' It seems to cut off the blood flow to the brain and route it to the autonomic reflex system. 'This should work' -- so we don't need to test it. 'They should have done X' - so let's bad mouth them without investigation. 'We should do Y' - because conventional wisdom, which so far has not put a lot of $$ in our pockets, says so.

It is not my intention to contradict or criticize anyone. I simply (another 'S' word!) state that when I hear the 'S' word being used, I immediately go into high alert and apply extra attention to the words that follow.

Why is this posted here? Because I find being hyper-sensitive to the 'S' word to be a very helpful business practice, especially when reading posts on dance business threads. The word 'should' is sometimes used in the context of a thoughtful idea, but many times it is not.

Yes! I think I know what you mean, and I concur.
"Should" is usually directed toward someone else, and gives that blame, emotional, not-me, tone. It leads away from accountability.
Reprimands & lectures also come to mind. For me, a good business approach changes the "shoulds" to: that didn't work/fit very well, I need to reexamine [or whatever].

Unfortunately, English uses the same word to connote "the state of possibility" ("You should be able to find someone selling a gold costume in your size before your upcoming gig."), "need to" as a neutral pronouncement of standard obligations or necessities ("You should insist your students purchase legal copies of their music."), and "ought to" as a nagging/judgmental/guilt-inducing statement ("You should cover your stomach when you dance if you're overweight."). The advantage to this ambiguity is that sometimes the word needs all of those meanings at once ("Audrena should be able to give you a refund after a year if you still don't have the costume you ordered.").

OTOH, mental over-reliance on "should-statement" thinking (habitually obsessing on what you or someone else "should" or "shouldn't" do) is considered one of the classic cognitive dysfunctions in the Beck/Ellis model--not that that has anything to do with good business practices as a dancer.

Originally Posted by Tourbeau

OTOH, mental over-reliance on "should-statement" thinking (habitually obsessing on what you or someone else "should" or "shouldn't" do) is considered one of the classic cognitive dysfunctions in the Beck/Ellis model--not that that has anything to do with good business practices as a dancer.

Ah, but it does. Good business practices are good business practices, and victim thinking harms judgment.
Good points on the ambiguity.

Originally Posted by Tourbeau

OTOH, mental over-reliance on "should-statement" thinking ... is considered one of the classic cognitive dysfunctions in the Beck/Ellis model--not that that has anything to do with good business practices as a dancer.

[Belly laugh]

My co-workers have come around to my way of thinking on this. It's a bit like Bull**** Bingo; they now say 'S Word!' when one of us lets the 'S' word slip. I observe that the use of the word almost always flags a bit of self-hypnosis on the way to an unexamined conclusion. We now have 'honorary' S words, identified on the fly. Handy when talking with other teams.. the use of the S word often = potential problem or downright bull****.

"Should, ought and maybe
Are gonna drive you crazy."

And here's the rub on the ambiguous examples, as I see them:

"You should be able to find someone selling a gold costume in your size before your upcoming gig." Unless the speaker knows where gold costumes in several sizes are to be purchased, this invokes an artificial sense of security, not a state of possibility. The non-S word version is: "If a gold costume for the next gig is your goal, I suggest you try x, y and z ASAP. But be prepared to use your red one as a backup."

"You should insist your students purchase legal copies of their music" does not supply enough info to be truly neutral; it relies more on the hypnotic reflex than self-interest, legal or moral obligations. "Help your students understand they are legally obliged to purchase music from a legitimate source, and that spending money within the BD community strengthens the community" engages the teacher's and the students self-interest, if nothing else.

"Audrena should be able to give you a refund after a year if you still don't have the costume you ordered" is likely to leave the recipient with a false sense of hope but no clue as how to proceed... a perfect symptom of an 'S' word. More practical advice is needed. "I agree that Audrena owes you a refund. She has been good about refunds to me. Contact her at XXX-XXXXX."

We have not yet discussed the S Word Sinister, a frequent context. Any of the above statements might actually have a subtext of: "It's a real problem but you are not paying me to help you solve it so buzz off." This is often coupled with a second subtext of: "Anyone with half a brain knows how to solve that by themselves" which has the delicious possibility of lowering the recipient's self-esteem so that she is less able to solve the original problem.

"You should be able to find someone selling a gold costume in your size before your upcoming gig [if you go to NYC or spend forty hours ordering and returning costumes from various online vendors while maxing out your credit card. Buzz off]."

"You should be able to find someone selling a gold costume in your size before your upcoming gig [if you had half a brain in your head and weren't a total uninformed amateur]."

Context is everything, and there are only so many words in English to express verbal aspects of possibility, suggestion, and obligation. Even within the example of the gold costume, the mere words without context and intonation don't indicate if you meant the statement as a negative or a positive. Is it a patronizing declaration that any idiot with an Internet connection would possess the capability to canvass sites looking for a costume that most major vendors stock in multiple sizes, or a reassurance that if you wanted to find a costume, you'd have better luck finding a gold one (even if you wear an odd size), than a periwinkle one with orange-and-green fringe? The written word isn't the ideal medium for conveying subtleties of expression and intention.

I dunno. Here's an article about how the grammatical uniquenesses of various languages affect the development of thought processes. http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/boro...y09_index.html

I don't have a problem with "should", in your examples it's shorter than the longer alternatives. I find using "should" a shortcut & sometimes just a softer directive. But then I'm a terse talker & writer, and southern to boot -

Originally Posted by Tourbeau

Here's an article about how the grammatical uniquenesses of various languages affect the development of thought processes. http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/boro...y09_index.html

I am probably wandering from my own topic here, but I agree with this article. In my own life, and all life long, I have experienced profound alterations in understanding and perception (not always for the better) when exposed to new words that described what I was 'feeling.'