How Stoicism Can Help You Tackle OCD Intrusive Feelings
By: Ross Carver-Carter
Tags: Mental Health, Ocd, Health, Philosophy, Self

How Stoicism Can Help You Tackle OCD Intrusive Feelings

It was the philosophical inspiration for CBT after all

As an OCD sufferer, I am well aware that many, if not all of us, have intrusive thoughts, but that it is our beliefs about these thoughts that make them so debilitating. In short, the OCD sufferer is taught, quite rightly, that they are not what they think. Recently, however, my OCD has started focusing on feelings of anger and rage. These feelings often lead to intrusive thoughts and come on just as suddenly, but I assign far more weight to feelings of anger than I ever do to thoughts of harm.

Moreover, my harm OCD is often exacerbated by feelings of rage and anger. It makes them far more convincing; if I have an argument and momentarily feel like hurting someone, this is far more distressing than having a mere thought. For those unfamiliar with harm OCD, it is a common subtype of the disorder where sufferers have frequent and disturbing thoughts about harming themselves and others. What’s more, usually, intrusive thoughts about harming others do not exist in isolation; intense feelings of anger give power to the thoughts. As a result, I often find myself feeling guilty about feelings.

It turns out that there is a scientific term for having a feeling in response to a feeling: meta-emotion. If you feel guilty about feeling happy, someone didn’t get a job, for instance, or if you feel guilty for feeling angry at a spouse, then this is a meta-emotion. An article from the Greater Good Science Centre at University Of California Berkeley quotes author Douglas Adams to demonstrate meta-emotions in action:

“For a moment he felt good about this. A moment or two later he felt bad about feeling good about it. Then he felt good about feeling bad about feeling good about it and, satisfied, drove on into the night.”

So how can OCD sufferers handle these “intrusive feelings” or momentary urges that they feel ashamed at having had afterward? And do our feelings always reflect our desires, more so than a thought, for instance?

I believe the answer lies in an ancient school of thought. Let me explain. CBT has its roots in the ancient Hellenistic philosophy of Stoicism; in fact, CBT’s premise that it is our belief about events and thoughts that make us afraid, as opposed to the event or thought itself, is pulled straight from the Stoic handbooks. As Donald Robertson notes, writing in The Guardian:

“T he pioneers of CBT, Albert Ellis and Aaron T Beck, both describe Stoicism as the philosophical inspiration for their approach.”

It is a good place to seek answers for how to respond to “intrusive feelings” also. The answer that the Stoics give is both clear and convincing; in short, the Stoics argue that we all receive myriad feelings, images, and ideas in response to events, which they call “First Movements” or impressions, and that these are neither good nor bad in and of themselves. These impressions are likened to physiological responses like shivering in response to cold or sweating in response to heat.

For example, if you learn that your friend has been betrayed and have a sudden thought or feeling about wanting to hurt the person that did this, the Stoics do not believe you are vengeful just yet. According to the Stoics, we are judged by how we act upon these images, urges, and feelings using our rational faculties. In short, the Stoics differentiate between our natural emotional responses to events and our rational decisions on what to do with them. They argue that we are only morally culpable for the latter.

For example, if someone hits you, and you momentarily feel like hitting them back or worse, but decide against it and calm yourself down, the Stoics do not call this anger, but a First Motion which was tamed. Likewise, if you have a sudden urge to betray someone for financial gain but shun this momentary “impression,” the Stoics would not believe you to have been treacherous. Put, you are not defined by thoughts- or by momentary and responsive feelings- but by how you respond to these feelings.

For me, at least, this has provided no small measure of comfort. I have often been seized by a feeling that runs contrary to all my moral beliefs and felt wretched for having had the emotion. Now, I see, I need not worry too much as long as I didn't entertain it.

In his book Lessons in Stoicism, John Sellars elucidates the concept of “First Movements” perfectly:

“All humans experience what Seneca calls ‘First Movements’. These are when we are moved by some experience, and we might feel nervous, shocked, excited or scared, or we might even cry. All these are quite natural reactions; they are physiological responses of the body, but not emotions in the Stoic Sense of the word. Someone who is upset and momentarily contemplates vengeance, but does not act on it, is not angry according to Seneca, because he remains in control.”

According to the Stoics, we only become angry if we allow ourselves to be seized by the emotion or act upon the desire. Seneca puts it more simply:

“Fear involves flight, anger involves assault”.

Or, to simplify it further: Actions speak louder than feelings.

Furthermore, I can give you an example of a “First Movement” in action. Walking home from the gym, a group of young boys, each on a bike, rode towards me jeering and smiling, deliberately blocking the path in an attempt to intimidate. As suddenly as an intrusive thought, and confronted with 3 derisive faces, I had a feeling or urge to hit one of them. The feeling was intense, palpable even, but after the moment had passed, I felt extremely guilty for having it.

At the time, I didn't seem to have a choice in the matter; it was as intuitive as a shiver in response to cold or a flinch in response to an incoming object. What am I to make of that feeling? According to the Stoics, I shouldn't make that much of it at all because anger didn't get the better of me. Instead, I took control of the passion, and thus I am not morally culpable for it any more than I would be for an intrusive thought which wasn't accompanied by anger.

So, next time you feel shame about a feeling you had, don’t beat yourself up about it too quickly. The virtuous man isn’t one who doesn’t have “First Movements,” but one who responds soberly to them. Moreover, like intrusive thoughts, accept that feelings, particularly “First Movements,” are often unwanted and sudden.

Lastly, feeling guilty about a feeling often leads to virtuous action; in this sense, they can help us discover what we stand for. If you feel a certain way and then later feel ashamed for having had this thought, instead of beating yourself up about the feeling, do the right thing instead, and that is what defines you as a person.

In short: you are not what you think. And according to the Stoics, you are not what you feel either.