A vast array of books and courses are offered on self-development, self-improvement, and self-realization. Millions of self-help books are sold every year, and the idea of personal development is ubiquitous in education
and business. Our lives seem to be in a state of constant flux and
change, but legions of coaches, therapists, and lifestyle counselors are
on hand to steer us safely through these choppy waters by teaching us self-esteem, authenticity, and the skills of positive thinking. The message often is: Be yourself! Look within yourself for answers, and then you can achieve what you want!
This message might once have been emancipatory. When the
counter-cultures of the 1960s objected
to the oppressive structures of
earlier times by looking inward and seeking self-realization, there was
no shortage of good reasons to throw off the shackles of a rigid society
that placed unnecessary restrictions on personal and human development.
However, as social theorist Axel Honneth argues, while this inward turn
may well once have constituted a legitimate form of resistance to “the
system” (patriarchy, capitalism, etc.), it has subsequently become the
basis upon which the very same system now legitimizes itself.
Our current consumer
society depends upon individuals who are flexible, changeable, and
constantly preoccupied with self-development and reinvention. To stand
still in our society, which is based on growth and consumption, is akin
to dissent. The self-realization tsunami has aided and abetted the
market’s demand for a servile, flexible, and – we might say – stressed
and rootless workforce, which is why, over the last 50 years, all sorts
of ostensibly progressive management
and organizational theories have focused on “the whole person," "human
resources,” and the idea of self-realization through work. “Developing
yourself as a person” is no longer a critical idea, but the very
foundation of a problematic culture of consumption.
Nowadays, real resistance to the system would consist not of turning
inward in search of some authentic self, but in rejecting the whole
concept and finding out how to live responsibly with yourself and others
instead. The sentence “I don’t need to develop myself” is rarely
uttered during performance and development reviews – given the
prevailing orthodoxy, it would be tantamount to heresy. Might what was
previously deemed oppressive perhaps actually be liberating? Might habit
and routine have greater human potential than endless invocations of innovation and change? Perhaps he who dares be like everybody else is the true individualist? Like the famous scene in Monty Python’s Life of Brian,
where the main character, who has been proclaimed the Messiah, lectures
the masses on the need to be themselves and not follow him blindly:
“Look. You’ve got it all wrong. You don’t need to follow me. You don’t
need to follow anybody! You’ve got to think for yourselves. You’re all
individuals!” They must do what they think is right. To which the crowd
responds as one voice: “Yes, we’re all individuals," apart from Dennis,
who says “I’m not.”
Today, most of us are members of this crowd, conformingly affirming
our uniqueness. Paradoxically, Dennis is alone in confirming his
individuality by denying it. Maybe it’s the same with finding yourself:
They who deny that it makes sense to attempt to find yourself may just
be the ones who are most themselves – or at least have some kind of
stable sense of self. Those who reject the whole
find-and-develop-yourself ideology have more chance of putting down
roots and living a life with a certain degree of integrity – with
joined-up and enduring identities – and sticking to what is important in
their lives. We need to be more like Dennis. Let’s try to be decent
human beings instead of chasing a narcissistic dream of uniqueness and individuality.
No comments:
Post a Comment