Positive thinking vs. reframing vs. defusion

Limitations of forced positive thinking and cognitive restructuring in ACT

ACT is often confused with "positive thinking" approaches or classic CBT cognitive restructuring, but their mechanisms are distinct and sometimes opposite.

Forced positive thinking ("I have to think everything will be okay") often fails because the human mind is designed to detect problems, not ignore them.

Trying to cover up a negative thought with a positive one is like painting over a damp wall: the stain comes back and the effort of repainting is exhausting.

Moreover, it can be disabling; if someone is suffering and is told "be positive," they may feel misunderstood and guilty for not achieving it.

Cognitive restructuring (debating irrational thinking with logic) is a valid tool, but it has limitations.

If we spend all day debating with our mind to prove it wrong, we remain trapped within the language game. We are still giving too much importance to the content of thoughts.

For people with very analytical or ruminative minds, logical debate becomes just another compulsion: "I have to find the perfect counter-argument to make me feel good". ACT proposes to get out of the debate altogether.

We don't try to win the argument against the negative mind; we try to stop arguing.

We recognize that the mind is producing "radio negativity" and learn to keep working while the radio plays in the background, without trying to change the station.

Philosophical difference: changing the content vs. changing the relationship

The fundamental distinction between second generation (CBT) and third generation (ACT) approaches is the goal of the intervention.

CBT seeks to change the content of the thought: replacing "I am useless" with "I have had successes in the past."

ACT seeks to change the relationship to the thought: keep "I am useless" but strip it of its power to direct behavior.

The premise is that it is much easier and faster to change our relationship to what we think than to change the thought itself.

If a thought is a pair of distorted glasses, restructuring attempts to graduate the lenses to see better.

Defusion attempts to take off the glasses and look at them, realizing that they are just an object that you can put on or take off.

By changing the function of the thought (from being an absolute truth to being a simple verbal event), the need to modify its content disappears.

This is especially useful with thoughts that are painfully true (e.g., someone with a chronic il