The Awful, Very Bad, Horrible, Terrible, No Good, Unacceptable Elements of Life

[DISCLAIMER]

With the exception of a couple years in my youth during which I lived in Aurora, Colorado, I was born and raised in Amarillo, Texas. With the latest estimate of a Texas citizenry comprised of 40.2% Hispanic or Latino people, I suspect this figure was similarly-sized during my youth.

As such, I was raised around a lot of Mexicans. Notably, during the ignorance of adolescence, I befriended Mexican gang members predominately affiliated with the Crips and Sureños. These individuals were associated with La eMe, carteles, and other international criminal organizations.

I am not now, have never been, nor do I foresee myself ever being a validated gang member, known associate, and/or direct affiliate of any criminal organization. Also, I unequivocally denounce any allegation of Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act-related activity.

(Self-obligatory disclaimer aside…) If the field of genetics has any merit and tales of ritual human sacrifice are accurate, then the descendants of Aztecs with whom I made friends were hereditarily capable of butchery (cruel and ruthless slaughter of human beings).

While I can’t speak with any degree of certainty regarding Aztec rule that dominated central Mexico from the 14th to the early 16th centuries, I remember what took place in Amarillo in the ‘90s. Moreover, I’m not dumb enough to commit what I know to writing in a blogpost.

Rather, what I will say is that the progenies of ancient Aztecs viewed death in a different manner than did non-Mexicans up with whom I was raised. Addressing their perspective in terms more eloquent than my own, one source states:

Death was not taken at face value in Aztec religion but was seen as the essence of life itself and the creation of a renewed beginning. It was not the life of an individual that determined his final resting place but his death. This reminds us of the words of the Mexican poet Octavio Paz:

“Tell me how you die and I will tell you who you are.” (Octavio Paz 1967)

Given the perception of death as a natural element of life, my friends didn’t view the loss of life as an ominous force to be ignored or avoided. To hold the latter view would be irrational (not in accordance with both logic and reason). After all, every living being inescapably dies.

To better understand this outlook, consider a modus ponens syllogism (if p, then q; p; therefore, q). If life is impermanent and uncertain (p), then all men, women, and children can die at any time (q). Life is impermanent and uncertain (p). Therefore, all men, women, and children can die at any time (q).

The second premise in this proposition logically follows the first premise. As well, because it’s a matter of truth about reality, the established conclusion of this syllogism is reasonable. Factually, any and every one of us may die at any time. Thus, the proposal is rational.

Along with teachings about acceptance of death from my dad throughout childhood, the rational worldview of my criminally-minded friends was acceptable to me. Thus, the viewpoint I used in my youth didn’t violate the is-ought problem proposed by philosopher David Hume.

This philosophical razor highlights the logical gap between descriptive statements about what “is” and prescriptive statements about what “ought” to be. From the standpoint of Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT), this is a matter of flexible versus inflexible narratives.

Essentially, Hume posited that judgments of a moral variety (e.g., what one ought to do) cannot be directly derived from factual statements about the world (e.g., what is occurring). Fundamentally, one can’t deduce a moral conclusion from purely descriptive facts.

In consideration of Hume’s postulation, my Mexican friends who (may or may not have) committed acts of violence saw the world as it is. Because they weren’t persuaded by the notion of objective morality, they rejected the idea that they ought not to have behaved as they did.

Objective morality is the philosophical idea that some acts are innately right or wrong, based on universal moral principles which exist independently of opinions or beliefs, much like objective facts. For example, murder is the crime of unlawfully and unjustifiably killing a person.

Although murder is classified differently in various countries, states, and localities, it’s a generally accepted objective fact that there’s such an outcome as murder. Yet, whether or not a person concurs with the inherent right or wrong nature of the crime, it may be viewed as moral.

I’m not advocating murder herein. This was the mindset of my friends in childhood. It represents moral relativism which, according to one source, describes “several philosophical positions concerned with the differences in moral judgments across different peoples and cultures.”

As not to bore you with the intricate details of this philosophical matter, consider that: (1) my friends may have been genetically and culturally predisposed to viewing all death as acceptable, (2) willing and/or able to commit murderous acts, and (3) didn’t violate the is-ought problem.

Even if you disagree with their moral framework, that was their outlook. This is a matter of explanation versus justification. An explanation clarifies a situation and a justification argues for its rightness. You may simultaneously understand the former while rejecting the latter.

Nevertheless, you weren’t one of my Mexican gangbanging friends. Your current worldview doesn’t historically impact them. As far as my carnales were concerned, their flexible beliefs about death (i.e., what is) didn’t infringe inflexible opinions on morality (i.e., what ought).

Consequently, I grew up exposed to depictions of calaveras, which one source describes as “in the context of the Day of the Dead, is a representation of a human skull or skeleton.” For instance, consider La Calavera Catrina, an image created by the José Guadalupe Posada:

Photo credit, fair use

When further contemplating the matter of death and all the undesirable actions which some descendants of Aztecs may use to bring about an inevitable end to existence (e.g., dissolving a person in a vat of acid while the individual is still alive), I think of a peculiar view of life.

Specifically, I consider the outlook of the late psychologist Albert Ellis who developed REBT. Before addressing his perspective – and my dissenting view – it may be useful to first familiarize you with his psychotherapeutic modality.

REBT uses the ABC model to illustrate that when an undesirable Action occurs and you Believe an unhelpful narrative about the event, it’s your unfavorable assumption, not the occurrence itself, that causes an unpleasant Consequence. This is known as self-disturbance.

In particular, there are four predominate irrational beliefs which people often use to self-disturb: global evaluations, low frustration tolerance, awfulizing, and demandingness. When contemplating these unproductive beliefs, think of the acronym GLAD.

Additionally, from a psychological standpoint, people disturb themselves using a Belief-Consequence (B-C) connection. Of course, this isn’t to suggest that in the context of the naturalistic or physical world there is no Action-Consequence (A-C) connection.

For example, if you were slowly dissolved in a vat of acid (Action), then you would experience an immense amount of pain (Consequence). From an A-C perspective, a slow death of this sort causes extreme distress. Yet, it’s one’s B-C connection that causes psychological disturbance.

For instance, you’re slowly murdered by way of acid (Action) and you Believe, “My captors are worthless [G], and I can’t stand this [L]! In fact, it’s downright awful [A], because this shouldn’t be the case [D]!” With that script, you then feel sadness and fear (Consequence).

Addressing how people upset themselves with unhelpful attitudes, the ABC model incorporates Disputation of unproductive philosophies of life in order to explore Effective new beliefs. Whereas rigid beliefs cause self-disturbance, flexible beliefs result in an un-disturbed condition.

In addition to the ABC model REBT uses unconditional acceptance (UA) to relieve self-induced suffering. This is accomplished through use of unconditional self-acceptance (USA), unconditional other-acceptance (UOA), and unconditional life-acceptance (ULA).

Whereas the ABC model is a scientific approach to wellness, UA serves as a philosophical method for un-disturbing yourself. I view the former as an abortive approach to disturbance and the latter as a preventative method. Of course, not all REBT practitioners use the same style as I.

With my approach to REBT, I incorporate author Stephen Covey’s concepts regarding the circles of control, influence, and concern, as well as an area of no concern. UA maps onto the circle of control (USA), circle of influence (UOA), and circle of concern and area of no concern (ULA).

The circle of control encompasses only oneself, the circle of influence encapsulates elements which may be subject to one’s sway, the circle of concern engrosses most matters one can imagine, and the area of no concern relates to all content which isn’t yet imagined.

Provided you understand the two major techniques of REBT, allow me to address Ellis’s view on awfulizing. For context, “awful” is defined as extremely disagreeable or objectionable. According to the American Psychological Association (APA), to synonymously catastrophize is:

[T]o exaggerate the negative consequences of events or decisions. People are said to be catastrophizing when they think that the worst possible outcome will occur from a particular action or in a particular situation or when they feel as if they are in the midst of a catastrophe in situations that may be serious and upsetting but are not necessarily disastrous.

The tendency to catastrophize can unnecessarily increase levels of anxiety and lead to maladaptive behavior. The verb, as well as its synonym awfulize, was coined by Albert Ellis.

In an interview, Ellis one stated, “So if the worst happened and you were the only one in the whole damn world left, it still wouldn’t be awful, you’d still manage to enjoy yourself and go on. And you wouldn’t whine and scream, which is what neurosis really is. ‘It shouldn’t be the way it indubitably is” (page 43).

Ellis’s view aligns with Hume’s is-ought problem. If you’re slowly dissolved in acid (i.e., what is), then using a self-disturbing narrative (i.e., what ought to instead be the case) wouldn’t be the rational thing to do. From an REBT theoretical point of view, I comprehend this.

However, pragmatically speaking, I maintain that some elements of life (i.e., the awful, very bad, horrible, terrible, no good, unacceptable experience of being slowly dissolved in acid) defy this proposition. Because Ellis is no longer alive, I can’t offer a realistic demonstration to him.

Thus, I invite you to contemplate this matter. Hypothetically speaking, if some vatos kidnapped, beat, and tortured you, and then slowly dissolved you in a vat of acid to where you ultimately looked something like La Calavera Catrina, would you believe it wasn’t an awful event?

Let’s look at this logically and reasonably. I want to afford you an opportunity to draw upon every ounce of pragmatic rational thinking you can muster. Consider the aforementioned scenario through use of a hypothetical syllogism (if p, then q; if q, then r; therefore, if p, then r):

If you were tortured and then slowly dissolved in acid (p), then you would experience extreme suffering (q). If you would experience extreme suffering (q), then a mere semantic shift within your mind would mean that the event wasn’t awful (r). Therefore, if you were tortured and then slowly dissolved in acid (p), then a mere semantic shift within your mind would mean that the event wasn’t awful (r).

That proposal follows logical form. Yet, do you consider it reasonable? There’s a method of empirically testing the conclusion. Although, I don’t recommend it! Personally, I maintain that some elements of life are indeed awful; albeit, these are relatively rare instances in life.

Bear in mind that the APA definition of catastrophize and awfulize states that exaggerated negative consequences when thinking of a worst possible outcome may occur, or experiencing events which be serious and upsetting but are not necessarily disastrous meets the criteria.

If you’re literally beaten and slowly murdered by members of a drug cartel (or anyone, for that matter), do you believe it’s a matter of rationality (the quality or state of being rational) to conclude that what’s happening in that moment isn’t actually awful? I don’t!

For now, allow me to set aside the referential index shift I’m clearly using when addressing “you” while actually alluding to Ellis. Let’s allow a dead man’s words to speak for themselves. In an interview, Ellis stated “nothing is awful, terrible, it’s just a pain in the ass, that’s all it is” (page 49).

I argue that while relatively limited in scope, some elements of life are awful, terrible, etc. While I don’t consider death itself to fall into this category, severe circumstances which cause an end to one’s existence can be quite awful (i.e., being slowly dissolved in a vat of acid while still alive).

You are welcome to disagree. Still, I find it a peculiar matter for Ellis to have boldly claimed that “nothing” was awful. If you still aren’t convinced by his own testament thus far, then I offer one final view from Ellis, as the following dialogue unfolded during his interview (page 51):

Ellis: It’s never awful. Nothing is awful or horrible in the universe. Do you know why?

Interviewer: I’d like to question you on that, because I do think murder is a little bit horrible, don’t you? Or not?

Ellis: Not even genocide.

Interviewer: That’s not horrible, genocide is not?

Ellis: Nothing is horrible because “horrible” means that people don’t think when they use these words.

Interviewer: So it’s a language problem?

Ellis: Partly. Korzybski, the head of general semantics, said years ago “horrible” means it’s very bad, and let’s agree that murder and rape and incest and terrorism and war are very bad.

Interviewer: Do you actually agree to that? Do you actually agree to that, that that’s very bad?

Ellis: Yeah, but awful and horrible means it’s so bad that it should not exist, and whatever exists, exists.

Interviewer: I agree with you on that. That seems to be a very existential point, don’t you think?

Ellis: That’s right.

Strictly from an existential view, if Ellis wouldn’t carve out an exception to his peculiar perspective regarding genocide (the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group), then I’ll agree to disagree with him on this matter. I believe genocide is awful.

In closing, not all professional practitioners of REBT agree with everything that any of us has to say. Besides, I don’t agree with everything that anyone says. I’ll take a hard pass on being slowly dissolved in a vat of acid while still alive, and genocide is pretty damned terrible.

If you’d prefer to learn about REBT from someone whose view is more aligned with Ellis’s, then I invite you to seek out information that better aligns with your subjective interests and goals. For your sake, may you never cross paths with an ese who’ll put your absolute beliefs to the test!

If you’re looking for a provider who tries to work to help understand how thinking impacts physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral elements of your life—helping you to sharpen your critical thinking skills, I invite you to reach out today by using the contact widget on my website.

As a psychotherapist, I’m pleased to try to help people with an assortment of issues ranging from anger (hostility, rage, and aggression) to relational issues, adjustment matters, trauma experience, justice involvement, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and depression, and other mood or personality-related matters.

At Hollings Therapy, LLC, serving all of Texas, I aim to treat clients with dignity and respect while offering a multi-lensed approach to the practice of psychotherapy and life coaching. My mission includes: Prioritizing the cognitive and emotive needs of clients, an overall reduction in client suffering, and supporting sustainable growth for the clients I serve. Rather than simply trying to help you to feel better, I want to try to help you get better!

Deric Hollings, LPC, LCSW

References:

1Casper3. (2009, January 25). Carnale. Urban Dictionary. Retrieved from https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Carnale

AEI. (n.d.). About Albert Ellis, Ph.D. Albert Ellis Institute. Retrieved from https://albertellis.org/about-albert-ellis-phd/

APA Dictionary of Psychology. (2018, April 19). Catastrophize. American Psychological Association. Retrieved from https://dictionary.apa.org/catastrophize

Chicano Historian. (2007, March 13). Ese. Urban Dictionary. Retrieved from https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=ese

Hollings, D. (2024, May 22). A philosophical approach to mental health. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/a-philosophical-approach-to-mental-health

Hollings, D. (2025, August 26). A preventative approach to self-disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/a-preventative-approach-to-self-disturbance

Hollings, D. (2024, May 24). A scientific approach to mental health. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/a-scientific-approach-to-mental-health

Hollings, D. (2023, September 13). Acceptance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/acceptance

Hollings, D. (2025, October 19). Adhering to invisible scripts. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/adhering-to-invisible-scripts

Hollings, D. (2025, May 25). Agree to disagree. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/agree-to-disagree

Hollings, D. (2025, August 26). An abortive approach to self-disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/an-abortive-approach-to-self-disturbance

Hollings, D. (2024, November 15). Assumptions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/assumptions

Hollings, D. (2024, August 7). Awfulizing. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/awfulizing

Hollings, D. (2022, May 17). Circle of concern. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/circle-of-concern

Hollings, D. (2024, July 11). Concern and no concern. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/concern-and-no-concern

Hollings, D. (2024, March 19). Consequences. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/consequences

Hollings, D. (2023, April 22). Control. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/control

Hollings, D. (2024, October 27). Correlation does not imply causation. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/correlation-does-not-imply-causation

Hollings, D. (2022, October 31). Demandingness. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/demandingness

Hollings, D. (2022, October 5). Description vs. prescription. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/description-vs-prescription

Hollings, D. (2022, March 15). Disclaimer. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/disclaimer

Hollings, D. (2025, March 12). Distress vs. disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/distress-vs-disturbance

Hollings, D. (2025, December 4). Empirical dispute. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/empirical-dispute

Hollings, D. (2024, April 21). Existentialism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/existentialism

Hollings, D. (2025, December 13). Explanation and justification. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/explanation-and-justification

Hollings, D. (2025, March 9). Factual and counterfactual beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/factual-and-counterfactual-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2023, September 8). Fair use. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/fair-use

Hollings, D. (2024, May 17). Feeling better vs. getting better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/feeling-better-vs-getting-better-1

Hollings, D. (2024, January 27). Genocide. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/genocide

Hollings, D. (2023, October 12). Get better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/get-better

Hollings, D. (2023, September 13). Global evaluations. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/global-evaluations

Hollings, D. (2024, August 9). Healthy concern. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/healthy-concern

Hollings, D. (2025, September 22). Hey you! You’re losing your mind! Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/hey-you-you-re-losing-your-mind

Hollings, D. (n.d.). Hollings Therapy, LLC [Official website]. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/

Hollings, D. (2025, March 16). Hypothetical syllogism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/hypothetical-syllogism

Hollings, D. (2025, October 30). I don’t agree with everything that anyone says. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/i-don-t-agree-with-everything-that-anyone-says

Hollings, D. (2025, January 26). Ignorance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/ignorance

Hollings, D. (2024, October 21). Impermanence and uncertainty. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/impermanence-and-uncertainty

Hollings, D. (2024, January 2). Interests and goals. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/interests-and-goals

Hollings, D. (2025, April 23). Judgment. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/judgment

Hollings, D. (2025, October 13). Knowledge, wisdom, understanding. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/knowledge-wisdom-understanding

Hollings, D. (2023, September 19). Life coaching. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/life-coaching

Hollings, D. (2023, January 8). Logic and reason. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logic-and-reason

Hollings, D. (2025, November 8). Logical consequence: Does it consequentially follow? Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logical-consequence-does-it-consequentially-follow

Hollings, D. (2022, December 2). Low frustration tolerance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/low-frustration-tolerance

Hollings, D. (2025, March 16). Modus ponens. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/modus-ponens

Hollings, D. (2023, October 2). Morals and ethics. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/morals-and-ethics

Hollings, D. (2024, September 27). My attitude. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/my-attitude

Hollings, D. (2025, August 2). My philosophy. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/my-philosophy

Hollings, D. (2024, November 3). Neurotic anxiety and fear. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/neurotic-anxiety-and-fear

Hollings, D. (2024, June 2). Nonadaptive behavior. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/nonadaptive-behavior

Hollings, D. (2024, March 13). Objective morality. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/objective-morality

Hollings, D. (2023, April 24). On truth. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-truth

Hollings, D. (2024, November 18). Opinions. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/opinions

Hollings, D. (2025, April 9). Perception, action, and will. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/perception-action-and-will

Hollings, D. (2024, May 26). Principles. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/principles

Hollings, D. (2023, September 15). Psychotherapeutic modalities. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychotherapeutic-modalities

Hollings, D. (2024, May 5). Psychotherapist. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychotherapist

Hollings, D. (2022, March 24). Rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT). Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-emotive-behavior-therapy-rebt

Hollings, D. (2025, August 13). Rational versus irrational thoughts and beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rational-versus-irrational-thoughts-and-beliefs

Hollings, D. (2024, July 18). REBT flexibility. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rebt-flexibility

Hollings, D. (2025, December 20). Referential index shift: The I–you switch. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/referential-index-shift-the-i-you-switch

Hollings, D. (2023, February 17). Revisiting the circle of control. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/revisiting-the-circle-of-control

Hollings, D. (2024, January 4). Rigid vs. rigorous. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/rigid-vs-rigorous

Hollings, D. (2022, November 1). Self-disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/self-disturbance

Hollings, D. (2022, October 7). Should, must, and ought. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/should-must-and-ought

Hollings, D. (2025, June 11). Stop the violence. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/stop-the-violence

Hollings, D. (2023, September 6). The absence of suffering. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-absence-of-suffering

Hollings, D. (2022, December 23). The A-C connection. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-a-c-connection

Hollings, D. (2022, December 25). The B-C connection. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-b-c-connection

Hollings, D. (2025, October 22). The construct. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-construct

Hollings, D. (2022, December 14). The is-ought problem. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-is-ought-problem

Hollings, D. (2025, February 28). To try is my goal. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/to-try-is-my-goal

Hollings, D. (2025, January 9). Traditional ABC model. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/traditional-abc-model

Hollings, D. (2024, October 20). Unconditional acceptance redux. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/unconditional-acceptance-redux

Hollings, D. (2023, March 11). Unconditional life-acceptance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/unconditional-life-acceptance

Hollings, D. (2023, February 25). Unconditional other-acceptance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/unconditional-other-acceptance

Hollings, D. (2023, March 1). Unconditional self-acceptance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/unconditional-self-acceptance

Hollings, D. (2024, September 29). Well, well, well. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/well-well-well

Hollings, D. (2025, April 12). What’s the big idea? Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/what-s-the-big-idea

Iguaz, D. (1993). Mortuary practices among the Aztec in light of ethnohistorical and archaeological sources. Institute of Archaeology, University College London. Retrieved from https://student-journals.ucl.ac.uk/pia/article/93/galley/135/view/

Miller, A. (2012). Albert Ellis on REBT with Albert Ellis, PhD. Psychotherapy.net. Retrieved from https://www.psychotherapy.net/data/uploads/51102f7bd269e.pdf

Posada, J. G. (n.d.). Calavera de la Catrina (Skull of the Female Dandy), from the portfolio 36 Grabados: José Guadalupe Posada, published by Arsacio Vanegas, Mexico City, c. 1910, zinc etching, 34.5 x 23 cm [Image]. Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Posada2.Catrina.jpeg

Sur 13. (2006, May 2). Vato. Urban Dictionary. Retrieved from https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=vato

Ura, A. (2023, June 21). Hispanics officially make up the biggest share of Texas’ population, new census numbers show. The Texas Tribune. Retrieved from https://www.texastribune.org/2023/06/21/census-texas-hispanic-population-demographics/

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Alfred Korzybski. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Korzybski

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Aztecs. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aztecs

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Calavera. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calavera

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Crips. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crips

Wikipedia. (n.d.). David Hume. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hume

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Day of the Dead. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_of_the_Dead

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Drug cartel. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_cartel

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Genetics. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetics

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Human sacrifice in Aztec culture. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice_in_Aztec_culture

Wikipedia. (n.d.). José Guadalupe Posada. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Guadalupe_Posada

Wikipedia. (n.d.). La Calavera Catrina. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Calavera_Catrina

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Mexican Mafia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_Mafia

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Moral relativism. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_relativism

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Octavio Paz. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octavio_Paz

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Philosophical razor. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_razor

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Stephen Covey. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Covey

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Sureños. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sure%C3%B1os