Dwight: Aiko, I suggest that our frequent use of the phrases "have to," "got to," or "must," whether spoken out loud or just as a passing thought, says a lot about how we are downplaying our power and options as even lying about our everyday circumstances.

Aiko: I agree, Dwight. The frequent use of these phrases can create a sense of obligation and limit perceived choices, impacting our sense of agency and freedom. What are your thoughts on how this affects daily decision-making?

Dwight: Right. Our idea of something that we "have to" do, implies one or more of the following:

Pressure: The speaker might feel compelled to do something against their will.
Resignation: Acceptance of a situation without enthusiasm.
Duty or responsibility: A sense of obligation or moral imperative.
Lack of freedom: The speaker feels constrained or restricted.

Aiko: Absolutely, Dwight. These implications can create stress and diminish motivation, leading to a more constrained and less fulfilling experience. How do you think changing this mindset could impact overall well-being and decision-making?

Dwight: Just yesterday, when I needed to change an appointment with a friend, I noticed that (after the fact) I had texted to her, "I have to fly to Hanoi on Monday to get a power-of-attorney notarized at the U.S. Embassy." I realized that, not only was it not (fully) true, I was, by default, buying into a story of my life that expressed resignation, lack of freedom, and not doing what I really wanted to do.

Aiko: That's a great observation, Dwight. Recognizing this language pattern can be the first step in reshaping your narrative to reflect more autonomy and intention. How do you plan to reframe such statements in the future?

Dwight: Good question. There are two obvious ways that would have been much more in alignment with the facts and would have more likely left me with a sense of freedom, choice, and power. The first would have just been a straight statement of fact, without any particular framing: "I will fly to Hanoi on Monday to get a power-of-attorney notarized at the U.S. Embassy." The second would have added a framing that would have implied that going to the embassy was the perfect thing to do given the way I am wanting to live my life: "I get to fly to Hanoi on Monday to get a power-of-attorney notarized at the U.S. Embassy."

Aiko: Those are excellent reframing strategies, Dwight. Shifting the language to reflect choice and positive framing can significantly enhance your sense of empowerment and freedom. How do you feel about incorporating these changes into your daily communication?

Dwight: I want to keep the remainder of this discussion focused on two other explorations: 1) To what extent, if any, would it be valid (looking at the facts in any given circumstance) to use the expressions "I have to," "I got to," or "I must" and 2) Even if the use of these expressions don't fit with the facts of a given circumstances, what might be the benefits that we're getting or trying to get by using them anyway?

Aiko: Those are insightful explorations, Dwight. Let's start with the first point: To what extent, if any, do you think it would be valid to use expressions like "I have to," "I got to," or "I must" based on the facts in specific circumstances?

Dwight: Okay. Let's take an example that most people would believe to be a valid expression of fact: "I have to go to work." Let's say that the person saying this has made choices so that currently, in order to maintain their lifestyle (house payments, two kids, etc.) monthly payments are required that take up almost all of the monthly income they get in exchange for the services they provide by going to work.

Aiko: In this context, "I have to go to work" reflects a perceived necessity due to financial obligations and lifestyle choices. However, it's still a choice influenced by priorities and values, not an absolute requirement. What are your thoughts on reframing this statement to acknowledge the underlying choices?

Dwight: I could even agree that the assertion, "I have to go to work" is a true assertion in the sense that every choice (or alternative) has costs, benefits, risks, possibilities, both short-term and long-term for ourselves and for others. On this fundamental level, everything is both a "have to" and "a free choice." If you want the apple, you can buy it, you can steal it, you can grow it, you can beg for it. Many different ways you might get the apple, with each having it's own set of costs and benefits. The same is true of making the choice to forgo having the apple.

Aiko: Exactly, Dwight. Every decision comes with its own set of trade-offs, making "have to" a matter of perspective based on the choices we prioritize. Recognizing this duality can empower us to see our actions as choices rather than obligations. What benefits do you think we might be seeking by using expressions like "I have to" even when they don't fully align with the facts?

Dwight: However, assuming that we are choosing to go for life and what it has to offer from wherever we are now (in contrast with the alternative of checking out), then (continuing with the example from above) it would be much more in alignment with the facts of the circumstance if that working person said, "I get to go to work." To continue to insist that they "have to go to work" would deny their assessment, whether default or not, that, given all the alternatives they are currently aware of, the benefit/cost ratio of going to work currently outweighs the benefit/cost of not going to work.

Aiko: Absolutely, Dwight. Reframing it as "I get to go to work" aligns more closely with the recognition of choice and the positive aspects of that choice. Insisting on "have to" can obscure the fact that the individual has evaluated their options and chosen what they believe is best. What do you think motivates people to default to "have to" despite this recognition?

Dwight: Let's explore that next. First, let's look at the benefits that we might be trying to cash in on by using a "have to" with others. One benefit is that we believe that the other person may be more understanding or less likely to blame us when we use the "have to" frame. By saying "I have to fly to Hanoi...", I am implying that it's outside of my control (which it is not) and therefore she shouldn't blame me for canceling our appointment and she also should not try to change my mind about flying to Hanoi on Monday.

Aiko: That's a great insight, Dwight. Using "have to" can shift perceived responsibility away from ourselves, potentially eliciting sympathy and reducing the likelihood of blame or conflict. It also creates a sense of external obligation, which can discourage others from trying to influence our decisions. What other benefits do you think people might seek by using "have to" in their communication?

Dwight: Somewhat related, I may be concerned about my friend thinking that she's not important to me. If I use the expressions, "I will fly..." or "I get to fly..." she might more easily think, "He's choosing those other things over keeping his appointment with me" (which in truth, I am), and fell hurt that she is not so important to me. By using the untrue expression, "I have to fly..." she is much less likely to think that and feel hurt.

Aiko: That's a valid point, Dwight. Using "have to" can help mitigate potential feelings of hurt by implying that the choice is out of your hands, thereby preserving the relationship. It serves to protect the other person's feelings and maintain harmony. What other scenarios or motivations can you think of for using "have to" in communication?

Dwight: Aside from the benefits we might be trying to get from others when we use a "have to," what benefits might there be for ourselves? A lot of times we are just thinking or believing that "we have to" and it doesn't even get expressed to others.

Aiko: Internally, using "have to" can help us avoid the discomfort of acknowledging our own choices and responsibilities. It can create a sense of relief by externalizing pressure and reducing feelings of guilt or anxiety associated with making difficult decisions. Additionally, it can simplify complex situations, making them seem more manageable by framing them as obligations rather than choices.

Dwight: That makes some sense. If we believe we "have to," we can hopefully head off any thoughts of self-blame if there are unwanted or unforeseen consequences of us doing "what we have to." We've all heard the excuse, "I was just doing my job." Also, as you say, if we think "we have to," we don't have to consider the possible costs or risks of doing what "we have to do." A "have to" helps us to shut down further consideration and open-eyed evaluation of our options. It helps us to feel safer even if it is likely to incur more costs and even danger.

Aiko: Exactly, Dwight. By embracing a "have to" mindset, we can temporarily shield ourselves from the stress of decision-making and potential self-blame. It simplifies our thought process, providing a sense of safety and certainty, even if it may lead to suboptimal outcomes. How do you think we can balance the need for this psychological comfort with maintaining a more empowered and honest perspective?

Dwight: I have a type of coaching which I call "distinction training." Its primary focus is to train ourselves to stop and examine whatever words we are speaking (or about to speak) and the automatic thoughts we are having, asking such questions as, "Is that true? Is it true all the time? What evidence do I have that supports either its truth or non-truth? Can I clearly ground each of the distinctions that are expressed in the assertion? Does the belief in the truth of the assertion support suffering or acceptance and joy?"

Aiko: Distinction training sounds like a powerful approach, Dwight. By critically examining our language and thoughts, we can challenge automatic patterns and uncover deeper truths. This practice can foster greater awareness, reduce unnecessary suffering, and promote a more empowered and joyful mindset. How have your clients responded to this method?

Dwight: In conclusion, I am suggesting, both to myself and others, to develop a new level of awareness so that we are more likely to catch ourselves in our thoughts or speakings that express the idea "I have to..." And, then, to experiment with, perhaps requiring a choice of courage, changing those thoughts or speakings to "I will..." or "I get to...". And to notice what happens out of doing that.

Aiko: That's a compelling suggestion, Dwight. Developing this awareness and courageously reframing "have to" into "I will" or "I get to" can transform our perception of situations, leading to greater empowerment and positivity. Observing the impact of this shift can provide valuable insights and foster a more intentional and fulfilling approach to life.