Worry isn't Exonerating
The very fact that you think about it... means you think about it
A common conversation:
A: I just feel like a bad person lately.
B: The fact that you worry about it, means you aren’t.
In fact, when someone confides a feeling of moral deficiency, B’s reply is overwhelmingly common. As a meme, B’s rejoinder is remarkably fit; it’s almost like a little antibiotic. A has implicitly revealed they’re in a rumination spiral, where the behavior of fretting deepens the fretting. They worry they’re bad, and feel like their state of worry is evidence that they’re bad, so they feel worse and worse. B lets them recontextualize the rumination to be self-defeating: now the fact that they’re worried is actually evidence that, since they’re paying attention at all, they aren’t so bad.
So, yeah. What a cheering thing to say, and hear! Too bad it’s balderdash.
Why it’s Balderdash
Exhibit A for the prosecution: narcissists. Per Wikipedia:
Despite outward signs of grandiosity, many people with NPD struggle with symptoms of intense shame, worthlessness, low self-compassion, and self-loathing. Their view of themselves is extremely malleable and dependent on others' opinions of them. They are also hypersensitive to criticism and possess an intense need for admiration.
In other words, narcissists - people who behave badly enough that there’s a personality disorder about it - frequently worry that they’re bad. In fact, the obsessive worrying that they’re bad is part and parcel of their condition; it’s certainly not evidence that they’re actually fine!
I don’t think this situation is unique to narcissists, or even to the broader cluster B of personality disorders. Rather, narcissism is an extreme case of normal human behavior. Sometimes when people fret about their behavior, it’s because they’re anxious worriers who’ve done nothing wrong. But other times, people worry about their behavior as a load-bearing defense mechanism that actually props that behavior up: think of the person who says “guess I might as well just kill myself” when moderately criticized by their significant other.
This brings me to a more gestural class of evidence: unless you’re very lucky, you have probably known at least one person prone to fits of voyeuristic self-flagellation. Even if you haven’t, perhaps you’ve known someone who is like this specifically when drunk, or otherwise inhibited. But these people are genuinely not doing very well, and often are engaged in various sorts of bad behavior! The fact that they want reassurance doesn’t mean they’re secretly fine.
What are Alternatives?
Since “thinking about being bad” is neither necessary nor sufficient for being good, B’s reply is weak. What, then, should a good friend say?
Part of the appeal of “the very fact that you worry…” is the allure of meta. Going up a level of abstraction makes it easier to fudge details, and feels vaguely profound. But not all meta approaches are wrong! I can think of at least three good ones.
Meta One: Self vs. Other
If someone confesses they think they’re bad for some reason, ask them to consider how harshly they’d judge someone else for that same offense. If they would give someone else a pass, then there’s a clear cognitive distortion. If they wouldn’t, then either they’re correct to judge themselves, or they’re too harsh in general. That’s a productive conversation to be had.
Meta Two: Structural Analysis
If you’re close to the guilt-ridden wretch, you can give a gentle invitation to psychoanalysis. Ask them what purpose feeling bad is playing for them, what loads it might be bearing? Is it distracting them from some project? Running interference for some other bad feeling? The key here is to ask, rather than opine. Even if you’re a mind reader and get someone’s baggage exactly right, it’ll probably be unwelcome if you declare it.
Meta Three: Scaling Laws
Invite the scrupulous chap to meditate on the scale of their offenses. How big a deal is whatever they’re ruminating about, really? Are there other choices that are obviously more important? Crucially, this gambit can work even if they’re making those choices badly, because if they don’t feel that bad about doing something 10 times worse than whatever they’re obsessing over, the obsession seems absurd by comparison. If someone doesn’t feel bad about buying factory farmed chicken, it’s silly for them to ruminate on how their cat could have killed a bird when she was last outdoors.
The Object
When all else fails, there’s always the object level. If someone feels bad about eating meat, you can engage with them on the reality of actual, real factory farming.1 If someone feels bad about being a jerk at work, you can ask them in detail how they think they’ve been a jerk, without first writing them a blank check that they probably haven’t been that bad. Actually talking about someone’s self-reported failings is exhausting and usually thankless, but once in a blue moon someone feels guilty for a decent reason, and it’s worth a frank discussion.
Which to Choose?
If you forbid yourself the silver bullet of “your worrying absolves you”, there’s a simple flowchart. If you’re confident that your interlocutor’s feeling is misplaced, start with the meta level. Help arm them with tools to realize their emotional mistake. If you think they might actually have misbehaved, go for the object level. And whichever approach you choose, be ready to switch between the two.
In any case, though, it ain’t the worrying that helps. Don’t reinforce it!
Can you tell yet what I, personally, sometimes ruminate about?