Procrastination is officially and narrowly defined as the act of intentional, conscious delay of something that needs to be done (Merriam-Webster, 2019). More specifically, it is the avoidance of completing a task or obligation, or the delaying of starting an action, regardless of the potential negative consequences. In many cases, this can also involve giving up on something or delaying the completion of something right at the very end. A characteristic mechanism of procrastination is often substitution or intentional distraction—not only are we delaying our obligations, but we do so by engaging in other, much less significant or meaningless activities to divert our attention. For example, instead of studying for an exam, we watch “funny clips” on the internet; or, instead of going to the store, we buy groceries and prepare lunch, only to start a video game session or channel-surf on the TV right then, and so on.

Systematic procrastination, or a procrastinating lifestyle, is a pervasive, all-encompassing state of delaying all obligations, characterized by a general avoidance of facing responsibility and a dragging of feet when it comes to starting any action, improving quality of life, or making developmental changes. In short, it is a lack of will and a lack of desire to begin anything constructive, paired with the presence of a will to perform minor or other “substitute” tasks. The individual spends time engaging in meaningless things that require no mental effort (or require a different type of psychic activity), trivializes their own life, denies the seriousness and necessity of obligations, or seeks some other excuse not to be creative, to finish something started, to begin something useful, or to work on themselves.

Such a state certainly resembles what is colloquially defined as “laziness,” or it seems as though the person “can’t be bothered to move.” In truth, that classically defined laziness is indeed a type of procrastination, but not all procrastination can be characterized as laziness. Especially not in cases where a person is doing something else specifically so they don’t have to do what they are supposed to do. That “something else” might even be more strenuous than the original task, but the difference is that the latter is not mandatory, necessary, or constructive at that given moment like the former was. In individuals with a procrastinating lifestyle, we see the case of one great and long-lasting delay of an entire life and everything it entails. From there, we begin to glimpse the core of the problem and realize how it is connected to the harsh inner critic—namely, through dysfunctional internalization, as well as attachment patterns toward others. The problem is as follows:

• Procrastination primarily occurs when there is an objective or subjective (self-imposed) necessity to fulfill an obligation or to begin something. The push to start that “something”—that is, to perform a task—comes from circumstances, other people, or the person’s own conviction that they ought to, must, or need to do so. In this context, the imposition of obligations represents the communication of a controlling and commanding parent, while the delaying of those obligations serves as a way for the inner child to rebel against this attempt at control. These two sides are in constant conflict; an internal struggle ensues, which manifests in outward behavior as “life on hold.”
  

• A second aspect of the reaction to inconsistent, aggressive, and controlling environments (primarily parents) is the sense of learned helplessness. Constant punishment, “double-bind” situations, and undefined demands place the individual/child in a position where they do not know what to expect, nor what to do to “please” their caregivers or their demanding, expectant environment. The individual functions in an operating mode where they expend resources on “resolving” something that is not meant to be resolved (or can no longer be resolved), yet remains constantly “up in the air.” Individuals with insecure-anxious and ambivalent internal working models have essentially been taught that self-reliance does not exist—that they cannot function adequately unless they are passively dependent on another person, because that is what they were taught. Consequently, they will unconsciously expect someone else to always take on the bulk of responsibility for their life, or even to live it for them.
  
• A lack of a “holding” component during early parenting, and later, an inadequate embodiment of a secure base, prevents the child/adult from venturing into uncertain, unknown, or potentially tense situations. A secure base is formed in relationships with close ones during the early days of life, and it is essential for providing an individual with a sense of security at life’s starting point. If this is absent—that is, if the person already feels generally insecure—their decision-making abilities, and consequently their ability to take responsibility for themselves and their lives, are deficient and poorly functional. This reflects in maladaptive ways of coping in contexts where decisiveness and responsibility are precisely what is required.
  

• The obligations that are procrastinated upon are often a source of stress or are perceived as taxing by the individual. Although it may seem paradoxical at first glance, avoiding obligations in this case is actually a technique for dealing with stress—an attempt at stress management. The person, therefore, avoids negative emotions while simultaneously seeking positive reinforcement (a “dopamine hit,” a reward, a sense that “everything is okay”) through actions that trigger pleasant emotions (e.g., watching “funny clips”). This maneuver is based on the use of a series of defense mechanisms (denial, repression, escapism/fantasy, sublimation, and regressive defense). Of course, such behavior is irrational because, sooner or later, delaying obligations will contribute to even greater stress; however, that is precisely where defense mechanisms come in—preventing the person from recognizing this irrationality in a proper way, thereby continuing the vicious cycle.
  

• In individuals with a history of toxic psychology, we observe a pervasive sense of inferiority and a feeling of being an “inadequate child” (and later, an inadequate adult). The individual, consciously or unconsciously, believes they are incompetent, not intelligent enough, “clumsy,” mentally weak, worse than others, of lower value, etc. They also generally view themselves as a “failure” (read: a failure of their parents, or rather, of their demanding environment), and as a result, they possess a highly developed fear that they will fail to achieve or fulfill their intentions. Thus, delaying a task or avoiding an obligation is directly linked to avoiding the risk of potential failure and the negative consequences (toxic shame and guilt) that the “foreseen” failure would impose on them. The person fears engaging in an action because they subconsciously already envision themselves performing poorly, and consequently being criticized by the (internal) parent or their own ideal self—that is, by the environment that “expects” something from them. This is known as fear of failure.
  

• On the other hand, there is also a phenomenon known as “fear of success.” Individuals who have a history of being punished arbitrarily (without specific rules or consistency) create a mental model in which the world itself is an “arbitrary” place (one never knows when punishment will follow). The child is not rewarded after succeeding; instead, a flaw is found: “Well, it’s good that you succeeded, but you could have done better,” or “You did do it successfully, but you have an error here, there, and there.” Thus, an anticipated sense of criticism becomes attached to success because “something is always wrong,” causing the situation itself—which could bring success—to be perceived as a potential minefield for criticism. Consequently, the entire situation is avoided. This is a projection of learned helplessness and the “no-win” situations in which the individual was frequently placed due to the constant use of double-bind mechanisms in relationships.
  
• Fear of success, and the associated phenomenon of post-success depression, are closely linked to parental personality and, consequently, to resulting procrastination. In fact, if a person has dealt with narcissistically toxic individuals, they know that one of their primary traits is pathological envy and jealousy toward others. Jealousy (conscious or, more often, unconscious) regarding a person’s successes will result in covert indirect sabotage, malicious criticism, and passive-aggressive, ambivalent behavior toward positive development. The progress and successes of others are perceived as threats to the ego, representing proof to such an individual of how worthless they are (i.e., reminding them that others are better than they are). Criticism or the minimization of a person’s achievements by another is an unconscious attempt to maintain a stable, pathological, narcissistic self-image. If this happens systematically, it is clear that every subsequent situation where success is possible will gradually become a source of anxiety for the individual, as they feel that their progress constantly threatens someone. This leads to the adoption of a model where success = depression, which prevents any attempts at self-development. This is also one of the primary causes of a general lack of motivation and ambition in life.