It’s not an inability to cope with ambiguity, it’s a “I want to know if this is just another arbitrary rule set for a dumb reason but I’m asking because it might be another rule that looks dumb but actually makes sense when you understand the complexities”. It’s also a rejection of the idea that ambiguity should be coped with instead of seeking understanding. “Must accept ambiguity” sounds pretty arbitrary itself, not to mention stupid in this world where those who set rules often don’t have the interests of those they want following them in mind when setting those rules.
Seeking understanding is fine. Someone’s mom would love for you to understand their lifetime of trauma that rule prevents happening to your mom.
Challenging rules to avoid altering behavior, not to understand, is more the point of pathological demand avoidance. It is inherently not about why, it’s about a rule existing.
It’s not an inability to cope with ambiguity, it’s a “I want to know if this is just another arbitrary rule set for a dumb reason but I’m asking because it might be another rule that looks dumb but actually makes sense when you understand the complexities”. It’s also a rejection of the idea that ambiguity should be coped with instead of seeking understanding. “Must accept ambiguity” sounds pretty arbitrary itself, not to mention stupid in this world where those who set rules often don’t have the interests of those they want following them in mind when setting those rules.
We’re describing different things.
Seeking understanding is fine. Someone’s mom would love for you to understand their lifetime of trauma that rule prevents happening to your mom.
Challenging rules to avoid altering behavior, not to understand, is more the point of pathological demand avoidance. It is inherently not about why, it’s about a rule existing.
Exactly!