Have you ever watched Fiddler on the Roof?
Remember how Tevye argues with himself whenever he faces a difficult decision? On the one hand, there's a perfectly good reason to do something. On the other hand, there's an equally convincing reason not to.
Take his daughter Tzeitel, who wants to marry Motel, a poor tailor, rather than the financially established butcher Tevye has agreed she should marry.
On the one hand, Motel is a good young man whom Tevye has known for years, and Tzeitel loves him. On the other hand, the butcher offers the promise of financial security.
Tevye wants his daughter to be happy. He also wants her to have a secure future. Neither desire is unreasonable.
In psychology, we call this ambivalence: experiencing conflicting feelings or motivations about a decision or change.
And we don't need to be facing a marriage proposal to experience it.
Perhaps you want to change jobs but worry about losing financial stability. Perhaps you want to exercise more but also need time to rest. Perhaps you're considering a new opportunity but aren't sure you have the time or energy to pursue it.
We sometimes interpret these internal arguments as indecision or a lack of motivation. But what if both sides represent something important to us?
One approach used in health coaching is motivational interviewing, or MI. Rather than telling someone which option is better, MI helps them explore their own reasons, values, and motivations.
Imagine, for a moment, that Tevye were sitting across from a coach.
Instead of telling him which man his daughter should marry, the coach might ask what matters most to him as a father.
Is it financial security? His daughter's happiness? Preserving family traditions? Maintaining harmony with his wife?
Perhaps all of them.
The conversation might then turn to his strengths. What has helped him navigate difficult family decisions before? Has he faced situations where two important responsibilities seemed to conflict? What did he learn from those experiences?
These questions wouldn't necessarily make his decision easy. But they might help him understand why he's struggling and what he wants to do next.
And that's an important distinction.
When we're arguing with ourselves, we often focus on finding the correct answer. We make lists of advantages and disadvantages, revisit the same arguments, and sometimes criticize ourselves for not making up our minds.
But understanding what each side of the argument represents may be more useful than trying to silence one of them.
There's another interesting moment in Fiddler on the Roof. Tevye is willing to reconsider some traditions, but when his youngest daughter, Chava, marries outside the Jewish faith, he reaches a boundary he is unwilling to cross.
His internal debate doesn't always end in compromise.
And neither does ours.
Sometimes exploring our values leads us to change our minds. Sometimes it helps us recognize a boundary. Sometimes we discover that the difficulty isn't deciding what we want, but figuring out whether we have the resources and capacity to act on it.
The purpose of exploring ambivalence isn't to make every decision easier or to convince ourselves that we should always compromise. It's to better understand what matters to us and how those priorities influence our choices.
The next time you find yourself arguing with yourself, consider asking a different question.
Instead of “Why can't I just make up my mind?” try asking, “What is each side of this argument trying to tell me?”
You may discover that the argument isn't getting in the way of understanding yourself.
It may be where that understanding begins.
Art Reflection
Think about the last time you faced a difficult decision and found yourself arguing with yourself.
Use art to explore that experience. What were the competing thoughts, feelings, or priorities? How did you eventually reach your decision?
Looking back, how does your process compare with the questions explored in this article? Is there anything you might approach differently today?