by Steve Rose | Apr 10, 2020 | Identity, Purpose, and Belonging
With all of the social distancing measures over the last year, we have been repeatedly told by public health officials that it is our responsibility to stay home and flatten the curve.
You are not responsible for the problem, but you now find yourself responsible for part of the solution.
It can be frustrating, it can be isolating, and it might not seem fair.
Although we may sometimes want to resist the calls to take responsibility, consider the other areas of life where you are not responsible for the problem but still need to be part of the solution.
If you’ve experienced trauma leading to mental health issues, you are not responsible for the problem, but you are responsible for being part of the solution.
The same goes for a heredity illness. You are not responsible for the problem, but you are responsible for being part of the solution.
Falling into a victim mindset only serves to strengthen the problem.
If you or someone you know is struggling with mental health issues, you can check out my resource page for suggestions on how to find help.
What is responsibility?
Responsibility is the ability to respond.
Not paralyzed by fear, plagued by anxiety, or procrastinating, pretending the problem doesn’t exist.
Responsibility means being prepared, but not panicked. It requires planning, but not perfectionistic plots to control the uncontrollable.
Responsibility consists of accepting uncertainty, knowing you will do what you can control, and letting go of the things you cannot.
Responsibility requires a response proportional to the problem, adapting to obstacles as they arise.
The psychologist Jordan Peterson says the physical posture of responsibility is standing up straight with your shoulders back, in 12 Rules for Life:
To stand up straight with your shoulders back is to accept the terrible responsibility of life, with eyes wide open. It means deciding to voluntarily transform the chaos of potential into the realities of habitable order. It means adopting the burden of self-conscious vulnerability, and accepting the end of the unconscious paradise of childhood, where finitude and mortality are only dimly comprehended. It means willingly undertaking the sacrifices necessary to generate a productive and meaningful reality (it means acting to please God, in the ancient language).
Why is responsibility important?
Responsibility is important because it provides a sense of purpose, in addition to building resilience amidst adversity on an individual and societal level.
Like an addiction, sidestepping responsibility may feel good in the short-term, but leads to exponentially worse pain and suffering in the long term.
A tiger metaphor by Steven Hayes seems fitting here.
Imagine you adopted a tiger cub into your home. It is cute, cuddly, and harmless. You notice it begins to purr loudly, and the only way you can make it stop is to feed it red meat. Over the months and years, you keep doing this, but the tiger is now several hundred pounds, requiring whole sides of beef. Rather than a cute purr, the tiger roars ferociously for its meat. You are terrified, so you keep giving him the meat so he will leave you alone. The more you feed it, the larger it gets, and the more trapped you become.
In this metaphor, feeding the tiger symbolizes sidestepping your responsibilities. There is temporary relief, but a long term cost. Each time you avoid responsibility, you are feeding the tiger, making the problem larger, giving up long term freedom and control.
Why do people choose to become trapped in troublesome tiger relations? Jordan Peterson explains one potential reason in 12 Rules for Life:
Sometimes, when people have a low opinion of their own worth or, perhaps, when they refuse responsibility for their lives they choose a new acquaintance, of precisely the type who proved troublesome in the past. Such people don’t believe that they deserve any better so they don’t go looking for it. Or, perhaps, they don’t want the trouble of better.”
Let’s go deeper into how low self-worth prevents responsibility and look at how to build a sense of purpose through responsibility to one’s self, one’s family, and one’s society.
Responsibility provides a sense of purpose
Avoiding responsibility destroys a sense of purpose. Purpose comes from a sense of contribution and connection to something larger than yourself. But first, it is necessary to take responsibility for yourself. By being the best version of yourself, you can then be the most helpful to others.
Being responsible for yourself
This requires taking care of your basic needs. In the recovery community, it is common to use the acronym, HALT. Are you hungry, angry, lonely, or tired? Regularly check in on your current state and address deficiencies where appropriate.
Another way to maintain self-responsibility is to organize the clutter in your physical environment and the chaos in your day-to-day life. Prioritize your sleep, nutrition, and exercise. If all of this sounds overwhelming, start small. As Jordan Peterson says, “Clean your damn room!” But as he also says, “Cleaning up your room involves cleaning up far more than your room.”
Doing something useful for yourself is the first step in reorienting yourself amidst the mental fog of purposelessness. As the fog begins to thin out, you can start to see beyond yourself. This leads to step two:
Being responsible within your family
Once you’re adequately useful to yourself and can help from a place of genuine giving, you can be useful to others close to you.
I mention genuine giving because many people try to be useful to others without addressing their own needs first. This often results in codependent relationships where you do things for others to fill a lack of self-esteem in yourself. It is an experience of toxic shame where we constantly feel the need to prove ourselves and receive external validation. This may feel like “taking responsibility,” but it is often unhelpful and is just feeding the internal tiger, masking underlying issues with self-worth.
See my article The Need to be Needed for an in-depth description of this interpersonal dynamic.
If you’ve worked through these personal areas and can engage in close interpersonal relationships based on genuine heartfelt giving, the next step is this:
Being responsible within the broader society
Being socially responsible can happen in various ways. Right now, it simply means staying home to prevent community spread of the viral infection.
During regular times, being socially responsible might take place in your work, volunteer roles, or leisure activities.
The key to maximizing your social responsibility is contributing in a way that fits your unique personal strengths. For example, if your strengths are working with people, and you value compassion, developing and applying these strengths allows you to maximally contribute socially.
A lack of fit between your strengths, values, and interests can hinder your level of usefulness in your work, resulting in a low sense of purpose within the role. Finding alignment between your abilities and your role requires first knowing your strengths and cultivating them.
Not cultivating and applying your unique strengths doesn’t just rob you of a sense of purpose, but it also robs the broader society of your potential contributions.
Conclusion
Although you may not be responsible for personal or social issues, you are still responsible for being part of the solution.
Avoiding responsibility comes with a short term gain at a long term cost.
Taking responsibility creates long term resilience and a sense of purpose.
This sense of purpose can be fostered by taking responsibility for one’s self by engaging in self-care. Responsibility can also be developed on a familial and societal level, offering a sense of purpose proportional to your ability to contribute your unique abilities.
by Steve Rose | Jul 3, 2019 | Identity, Purpose, and Belonging
On the go? Listen to the audio version of the article here:
Lately, I have been thinking about narcissism and its relationship to self-esteem. There seem to be some mixed messages going around about whether or not narcissists actually have high self-esteem.
The conventional wisdom is that narcissists are masking an underlying sense of low self-esteem. But when psychologists measure the self-esteem of a narcissist, they actually score very high. So how can we make sense of this?
Digging deep into the research on narcissism, this is what I’ve found:
Narcissists have high self-esteem. But unlike individuals with a secure sense of high self-esteem, narcissists have what researchers call “fragile high self-esteem“. It is a form of high self-esteem dependent on external validation and self-deception.
Let’s take a closer look at the research to unpack what this means. Also, if you or someone you know is struggling with mental health issues, you can check out my resource page for suggestions on how to find help.
How to Recognize Fragile High Self-esteem
Self-esteem can be understood as one’s valuation of one’s own worth. This sense of one’s value can rest on a secure foundation, or it can be fragile and dependant on constant external validation. Fragile high self-esteem can be distinguished by the following traits:
1. Defensiveness: this involves a defensive attitude toward preserving one’s self-image. A narcissistic fixation on image preservation can quickly result in defensive attacks if this image is threatened. Verbal defensiveness is one key indicator of fragile high self-esteem. It may feel like you are constantly walking on eggshells around someone with narcissistic fragile high self-esteem.
2. Validation Seeking: Research distinguishing fragile high self-esteem from secure high-self esteem also points out how fragile self-esteem is dependent on external factors. These factors can include the need for praise, compliments, or recognition. Without this validation, self-esteem begins to erode, triggering a narcissistic individual to seek out new sources of validation.
3. Unwillingness to learn from mistakes: Being able to listen and accept constructive feedback is a trait associated with secure high self-esteem. When self-esteem is fragile and dependant on constant validation, constructive feedback can be easily perceived as a slight against one’s image, often resulting in defensiveness and an unwillingness to accept the feedback.
4. A sense of superiority, dominance, or entitlement: Individuals with fragile high self-esteem often regard themselves as superior to others. This can manifest as attempts to display dominance or displays of entitlement where the individual believes they are owed special privileges.
Narcissism is an Addiction to Esteem
At its most extreme, narcissism can manifest as a narcissistic personality disorder, having severe consequences on one’s life, similar to an addiction. Researchers have actually argued that narcissism functions like an addiction in multiple ways:
The craving for esteem may lead to a cycle of escalating tolerance and occasional, bitter withdrawal. The instability of narcissists’ self-esteem and relationships could be understood as resulting from these cycles.
1. Cravings: Narcissistic cravings include the drive to constantly maintain an inflated grand view of oneself. This is a view of oneself is based on distorted thinking patterns, maintaining a positive self-evaluation that is unrealistic to the person’s interpersonal reality.
Like an addiction, narcissism is generally met with disapproval from others. Although this is the case, narcissistic individuals can distort their perception of what others think of them. In this way, they can falsely believe in the approval of others, effectively giving themselves the drug of validation.
2. Tolerance: Like an addiction, tolerance is also a feature of narcissism. Narcissists constantly seek out ways to raise their sense of specialness. There is never enough. Like an addiction, the person can chase the high provided by the substance into infinity. Opiate overdoses are often the result of this pursuit of the infinite. In the case of narcissism, the infinite pursuit of self-esteem can lead to extreme behaviors.
3. Withdrawal: Like an addiction, narcissists experience withdrawal when their fragile self-esteem begins to collapse. It can provoke aggressive hostile reactions or extreme defensiveness. In the midst of a collapse, some narcissists may even swing wildly between statements consistent with low self-esteem, validation seeking, and defensiveness.
How to Develop Non-narcissistic Secure Self-Esteem
Before considering how to develop secure self-esteem, we need to consider why self-esteem is important. There has been a recent backlash against the self-esteem movement due to its ineffectiveness.
The problem with critiques of self-esteem promotion is that they often neglect to define self-esteem. As described above, there are many different ways of defining the concept. Secure self-esteem and fragile self-esteem are radically different manifestations of self-esteem that cannot be equated.
Critiques of self-esteem promotion are accurate when discussing simple tactics like positive affirmations and participation ribbons. These tactics only work to promote fragile high self-esteem.
Rather than developing a fragile false sense of self-esteem, one can develop secure self-esteem through genuine connection with oneself and others.
In The Six Pillars of Self-esteem, Nathaniel Branden presents a concept of secure high self-esteem. He argues that self-esteem consists of the following practices:
1. The Practice of Living Consciously: This involves being more aware of what drives our actions, bringing mindful awareness to these underlying motivations so we can act in accordance with our values. Living unconsciously is like sleepwalking through life. You go through the motions, reacting to negative stimuli with a fight or flight response.
Fragile high self-esteem is built on living unconsciously. It is based on a form of self-deception regarding one’s own sense of self. Rather than seeing the underlying behavioral motives and the impact it has on others, fragile high self-esteem maintains unhealthy relational dynamics.
Ineffective patterns of behavior are maintained because bringing conscious awareness to the reality of the situation would threaten the narcissistic identity. It is easier to simply blame others for any hardships than to take responsibility for one’s actions.
Living consciously involves being able to accept feedback, remaining open to learning about your unconscious motives and shortcomings. It then involves acting mindfully, consciously choosing your reaction to situations, rather than simply reacting in the moment based on fear and anger.
2. The Practice of Self-Acceptance: This means letting go of an adversarial relationship to oneself. In The Confidence Gap, Russ Harris argues self-acceptance is the most important aspect of building true confidence. When we have an adversarial relationship with ourselves, we constantly battle or deny our uncomfortable thoughts or emotions. Self-acceptance means consciously being aware of the things you are resisting, in addition to letting go of this resistance.
Fragile high self-esteem is built on a foundation of denial and resistance. Rather than accepting one’s shortcomings, they are resisted through the armor of false self-worth. Self-acceptance requires letting go of this armor.
3. The Practice of Self-Responsibility: This can be understood by breaking the word into two parts, “response” and “ability”. It is the ability to respond appropriately to situations. For example, if you are responsible for your team at work, it means you must be able and ready to respond to the needs of the team to the best of your ability.
Before taking on responsibility for others, one must first take on self-responsibility. This means being able to respond to your own unmet needs. After being conscious of your own unmet need and acceptance of your situation, self-responsibility means having personal boundaries and working to take care of your own unmet needs so you can develop your skills and ability to be responsible for others.
4. The Practice of Self-Assertiveness: This means being able to speak the truth, as you understand it, rather than trying to deceive yourself or others. A lack of self-assertiveness could mean denying your needs, not communicating personal boundaries, and telling everyone that everything is okay when it is not.
Fragile high self-esteem, on the other hand, is aggressive rather than assertive. Assertiveness comes from a foundation of secure self-esteem whereas aggression comes from fear. Aggression is defensive and biting in tone whereas assertiveness is proactive and neutral in tone.
5. The Practice of Living Purposefully: This means having a sense of purpose. A sense of purpose built on secure self-esteem means having taken care of your own needs, then making yourself useful to others. This is something I explore further in my article, “What Does It Mean to Have a Purpose?“.
Low self-esteem can lead to codependency, which is a false sense of purpose consisting of constantly doing things for other people at the expense of your own needs. It prevents you from developing your potential since you are not focusing on developing your own skills or taking care of your own needs.
Insecure high self-esteem is also a form of false purpose since one’s purpose is completely intertwined with seeking validation and maintaining one’s image.
6. The Practice of Personal Integrity: This means living in alignment with your values. If your behaviors match your values then you are living with personal integrity. By living with integrity, you gain self-worth, knowing you have acted in accordance with your values. Although it may be easy to fool others, you cannot fool yourself. Deep down, we know when we have deceived ourselves.
Conclusion
In the book, Rethinking Narcissism, Craig Malkin argues that genuine connection is the antidote to narcissism. Since this site is dedicated to the power of social connection, this is something I completely agree with. If you are interested in learning more, I highly recommend checking out his book. You can get the audiobook here.
Since narcissistic individuals have fragile high self-esteem, they are always on the defense against potential threats to their self-esteem, creating a barrier to genuine connection.
Codependent persons on the other end of the spectrum have the opposite issue, but the result is often the same. Due to fragile low self-esteem, they often constantly do things for others at their own expense, creating a barrier to genuine connection by not letting others help them.
Rather than viewing narcissism as high or low self-esteem, I have found it useful to distinguish between fragile and secure self-esteem instead.
If you found this article useful, let me know what you liked in the comments section below.
If you have a more personal question and would like to get in touch, feel free to send me a message in my contact section.
by Steve Rose | Jun 18, 2019 | Identity, Purpose, and Belonging
On the go? Listen to the audio version of the article here:
If you’ve been following my work, you may have noticed I’ve transitioned from veteran issues to addictions. I thought I should probably elaborate on this shift in focus and share the underlying theme driving all of my work.
After reading a few of my articles, it should be fairly clear that the underlying theme is the power of social connection. It has been the central driving force behind my writing for the last ten years.
Although I usually talk about the research on social connection and its various benefits and impacts on our lives, this article will have a bit of a different tone. I want to share a bit of an autobiographical account of the things I’ve learned since I started writing about these ideas.
My interest in the power of social connection started when I began studying sociology. Initially heading into law enforcement, I was fascinated by how criminal behavior is often the result of social forces such as poverty. I started applying to the RCMP (being Canadian and all) and figured I’d just get a sociology degree because it sounded like the most interesting way to spend four years.
Throughout my education, I began to realize that law enforcement is not the solution to the underlying issues facing society. This complicated my goal, but I rationalized it by believing I would change the system from within!
One day, after instructing an aqua-fitness class (very random), a couple came up to me and asked why I wanted to get into policing.
“Great pay, good benefits, and secure retirement,” I replied, quickly realizing how unfulfilling this answer sounded.
After asking me about my real interests, it became clear I needed to pursue sociology further. It was at that moment I decided to apply for the Master’s degree program.
From that moment on, I became obsessed with sociology. Getting into the program, I didn’t know what to study, but I just held onto my underlying conviction in the power of social forces.
At around that time, about ten years ago, I also started my first blog, mainly directed at critiquing religion. I thought I was against religion, but looking back, I was just against the corrupt aspects of the institution and superficial interpretations of sacred texts. Here is an excerpt from one of my early articles:
The story of the last supper is an example of an occurrence that if taken literally, a person must believe they are consuming the body and blood of Christ that is transformed from bread and wine into a divine substance. To believe this is to miss the point. The bread and wine may be sacred, but it is no more divine than it was before it was blessed. The communion represents the importance of community rather than the literal ingestion of Jesus as many Catholic practitioners still maintain.
This is an early glimpse into my interest in the power of social connection. Mystification around the catholic communion ritual was a common theme in my writing. I had spent too many years watching people at church just go through the motions like zombies enacting supernatural cannibalism.
Although the tone in my writing during these years was a bit reactionary and critical, I stood for improving the quality of religious rituals to bring back a focus on social connection.
Throughout the Master’s program in sociology, I became utterly obsessed with theoretical texts. My quest to understand social theory was fueled by a deep existential need to understand the meaning of life (yes… no small task!).
If you ask my mentors at this time, they would likely say the same. I completely believed I was just one insight away from understanding a grand social theory of everything! I was so lost in the theoretical jargon; almost everything I wrote was unreadable.
Here is a sentence from my Master’s thesis:
“Drawing on Michel Foucault’s late work on Christian technologies of the self, this paper asserts the continuity of ascetic ethical practices in the representation of modern fitness.”
To translate, I critiqued the way fitness is represented in the media. Similar to my critique of religion, I argued that the individualistic weight loss television genre blamed individuals for their moral weaknesses. In short, it fostered shame and division rather than community.
Much of my writing at this time became increasingly abstract and impenetrable. I was talking about social issues, but it was making me increasingly antisocial since I couldn’t communicate the message to anyone outside of a very narrow field of study.
Once I began my doctoral studies, I knew I had to change something. I had four years to study anything I wanted, supported by funding and scholarships derived from public sources.
This was big! I felt like I had to do something publically relevant, something that could potentially help people. I couldn’t go on, further isolating myself in an impenetrable web of intellectual language games.
Luckily, right around this time, I was presented with the opportunity to research Canadian veterans. I had never been interested in the military or veterans’ issues before then. Like many sociology grad students, I was generally against the institution.
I leaped outside my comfort zone, seeing this as an opportunity to do something relevant, meaningful, and potentially helpful. I learned everything I could about veterans’ issues, and it transformed the way I looked at things.
I started the first version of this website around that time, committing to communicate my research in clear and accessible language. I wanted to do justice to the issue, receiving full support from the population I had the privilege to study.
The power of social connection became an increasingly evident theme in my writing. I used my articles as brainstorming drafts for my dissertation, growing as I received feedback from readers. If you’re interested in checking out this content, I’ve compiled these articles in the Veterans in Transition section of this site.
Once I finished my dissertation, the power of social bonds couldn’t be more apparent. It was everything. My research helped me learn how veterans struggle with issues beyond PTSD. Rather than merely focusing on mental health issues, I realized we need to focus on social health issues.
Reintegration into a highly individualistic civilian social world can often be its own form of traumatic experience. Going from a tightly bonded military community with a strong sense of purpose to a loosely structured civilian world without a strong sense of urgency can make veterans feel isolated and purposeless. You can see my finished dissertation here.
After studying sociology for nine years, I graduated with my PhD and now needed to make money. I was lucky enough to get offered a part-time teaching position at Eastern Michigan University, but this was not enough. Full-time positions were hard to come by, and being unemployed in the summer was not sustainable, so I began looking for work outside of the university world, something I had almost no experience with since my aquafitness days.
A lucky break came when I got a position doing problem gambling prevention programming. The role consists of being available within the casino to assist people concerned about their gambling, in addition to sharing facts vs. myths of how gambling works. This position was an abrupt reeducation in how to communicate with non-sociologists.
Just like the military, I had never been particularly interested in addiction, nor did I have any experience with it. I decided to enroll in an addiction counseling certificate program at a local college in an attempt to learn how to do front-line work in the field. I soon became obsessed with learning about addiction, just as I had done with sociology (…with a bit less angsty existential fury).
Although I and began building a career in a completely new area, I noticed the same lessons I learned when studying veterans issues applied to addiction. Social connection is a powerful force for recovery and addiction is rooted in isolation. I share this lesson in my article, “The Most Neglected Aspect of Addiction Recovery.”
I recently moved into a treatment focused role within a healthcare setting, focusing on problem gambling as well as internet and gaming addiction. Upon reflection on why I’ve been drawn to this area, I’ve realized it’s because these forms of addiction are especially focused on the “social” theme. My article, “Is Social Media Making Us Less Social?” directly addresses this question. Also, my most recent article, “How to Prevent a Gaming Addiction,” looks at how social isolation contributes to gaming addiction.
Going forward, I plan to continue delving deeper into the same theme that initially sparked my interest in sociology. I’ve focused on many different topics, including religion, fitness, veterans in transition, and addiction. Still, the thread tying it all together is my profound conviction in the power of social connection.
Check out my articles if you share this conviction and want to read more.
by Steve Rose | May 5, 2019 | Identity, Purpose, and Belonging
On the go? Listen to the audio version of the article here:
In an age where we are becoming more connected through social media every day, it sometimes feels like we are also becoming less social.
Why go through all of the inconvenience of meeting up in person when you can simply catch up online?
Within the last decade, technology has profoundly shifted the nature of human communication.
Some say we are “hyper-social,” always connected and communicating with multiple people at the same time. Others would say we have become “anti-social,” glued to our devices, and lacking interpersonal skills. So which is it?
Is social media making us less social?
Social Media is making us less social when used to compare oneself to others, contributing to higher levels of loneliness and lower levels of well-being among frequent users. It can be social when used to connect with others.
Let’s take a look at the research.
Also, if you or someone you know is struggling with mental health issues, you can check out my resource page for suggestions on how to find help.
Social Media Contributes to Social Isolation
The first study looking at this phenomenon was published in 1998, around the time when many people were starting to use the internet.
The researchers followed 169 people during the first two years of their internet use to determine if this new technology made them more social or less social, finding:
“…greater use of the Internet was associated with declines in participants’ communication with family members in the household, declines in the size of their social circle, and increases in their depression and loneliness.”
This was seen as quite the paradox, given that the individuals were using the internet extensively as a communication technology.
A 2004 study comparing internet use to face-to-face interaction found a similar conclusion, stating:
…the Internet can decrease social well-being, even though it is often used as a communication tool.
Has anything changed since then?
Ten years later, a 2014 study on college students suffering from internet addiction found:
Results show that excessive and unhealthy Internet use would increase feelings of loneliness over time…[.] This study also found that online social contacts with friends and family were not an effective alternative for offline social interactions in reducing feelings of loneliness.
In her recent book, iGen, Jean Twenge writes about the generation born after 1994, finding high rates of mental health issues and isolation:
“A stunning 31% more 8th and 10th graders felt lonely in 2015 than in 2011, along with 22% more 12th graders”…[.] All in all, iGen’ers are increasingly disconnected from human relationships.
She argues the increasing level of screen-time and decreasing degree of in-person interaction leaves igen lacking social skills:
“In the next decade we may see more young people who know just the right emoji for a situation—but not the right facial expression.”
A 2016 study comments on this generational phenomenon, stating:
It is surprising then that, in spite of this enhanced interconnectivity, young adults may be lonelier than other age groups, and that the current generation may be the loneliest ever.
The correlation between internet use and isolation is fairly established in the literature. But let’s not paint the whole internet with the same brush.
A 2014 study highlights the psychological costs and benefits derived from social media use, stating:
…online tools create a paradox for social connectedness. On one hand, they elevate the ease in which individuals may form and create online groups and communities, but on the other, they can create a source of alienation and ostracism.
It turns out the answer may be a bit more complicated.
Let’s take a look at the specific factors that make the difference.
Social Media Can Be Social (If used to connect)
A 2016 study with the apt subtitle, “Why an Instagram picture may be worth more than a thousand Twitter words,” finds that image-based social media platforms like Instagram and Snapchat may be able to decrease loneliness because of the higher levels of intimacy they provide.
Another 2016 study, specifically looking at Instagram use, found that it isn’t the platform that matters. It is the way the platform is used that matters.
The researchers studied Instagram use among 208 undergraduate students, finding there was one thing that made all the difference: “the social comparison orientation.”
What is social comparison orientation?
It’s when you compare yourself to others on social media. For example, you may find yourself passively scanning through an endless feed of finely curated photos, wishing you had a different body, a different job, a different life!
It’s the sense that everyone has it better than you, and that you’re missing out on all of the best events, vacations, and products.
Students who rated high on social comparison orientation were more likely to widely broadcast their posts in an attempt to gain status. Students who rated low were more likely to use the platform to connect with others meaningfully.
A 2008 study on internet use among older adults supports this distinction, finding:
…greater use of the Internet as a communication tool was associated with a lower level of social loneliness. In contrast, greater use of the Internet to find new people was associated with a higher level of emotional loneliness.
Using the internet as a communication tool can decrease loneliness.
Experimental evidence in a 2004 study, highlights this by measuring a person’s level of loneliness throughout multiple intervals as they engage in an online chat. They concluded:
Internet use was found to decrease loneliness and depression significantly, while perceived social support and self-esteem increased significantly.
Although chatting online can decrease loneliness, what about using social media platforms to post status updates?
A 2012 study conducted an experiment to determine if posting a Facebook status increases or decreases loneliness. Yes, this is an actual experiment.
The researchers told one group of participants to increase their number of status updates for one week. They didn’t give any instructions to a second control group. Results revealed:
(1) that the experimentally induced increase in status updating activity reduced loneliness, (2) that the decrease in loneliness was due to participants feeling more connected to their friends on a daily basis, and (3) that the effect of posting on loneliness was independent of direct social feedback (i.e., responses) by friends.
These results may seem to contradict the previous finding that social media broadcasting is correlated with increased loneliness, but there is a crucial difference: the social comparison orientation.
In this experiment, the researchers did not differentiate between users who had high or low levels of social comparison. The users in the group being told to update their status more frequently were not told to scan their news feeds more often, nor was their social media use manipulated to alter their level of social comparison.
Conclusion
So what is the key lesson here?
Using social media in a way that connects us with others can make us less lonely and more social.
Unfortunately, as social media use increases, we are becoming lonelier.
This trend suggests we may not be using social media in the most social ways, comparing ourselves to others. In addition, we may be sacrificing in-person interaction for the convenience of social media interaction. Both of these factors increase the likelihood of experiencing social isolation.
If you are interested in reading more on the psychology of social media, you can check out my comprehensive post on the topic here: Why We Are Addicted To Social Media: The Psychology of Likes.
In that article, I go deep into the research on what keeps our brains hooked on social media likes and how you can use social media in a healthier way.
by Steve Rose | Apr 21, 2019 | Identity, Purpose, and Belonging
On the go? Listen to the audio version of the article here:
What does success really mean?
The media bombards us with messages that success means having money, power, privilege, or beauty.
Our parents have another idea of what success means, pushing for job security, financial stability, and raising well-adjusted children.
Success means something different for everyone, so what is the true meaning of success?
It means living in alignment with your personal definition of success by staying true to your values and taking meaningful actions toward your own valued goals.
In this article, I dive into the science and philosophy of what success really means and how it affects your level of satisfaction in life.
The Meaning of Success in Modern Society
“I want the money, money and the cars, cars and the clothes… I just wanna be successful.
Trey Songz – Successful
When it comes down to it, “the good life” actually means a life of happiness. But where does happiness come from?
Media definition of success tells us it can be found in material possessions, status, and a life filled with luxury. But as many of us already know, these things can bring pleasure, but this version of happiness is like a bottomless pit, needing to be fueled by ever more stimulus to sustain it, eventually making us miserable.
A report by the Association for Psychological Science confirms this, finding:
“Simply having a bunch of things is not the key to happiness…[.] Our data show that you also need to appreciate those things you have. It’s also important to keep your desire for things you don’t own in check.”
But why do we continue to desire the infinite? Can we ever fill the void?
The answer is no.
Just like someone self-medicating with drugs or addictive behaviors, there is never enough.
Part of the desire for material possessions is the desire for acceptance from others. When the need for acceptance is unmet and we do not accept ourselves, we give up our own version of success for society’s definition.
Chuck Palahniuk says it best in Fight Club:
“The things you own end up owning you.”
Even though you may still feel like you’re in the driver seat of your life, you know deep down that you’re driving down the wrong road.
As the sense of resentment grows, the morphine drip of material comforts, social status, and security numbs this nagging feeling. As stated in Fight Club:
“We buy things we don’t need, to impress people we don’t like.”
Affluent society masks its hypocrisy with a veneer of politeness and good manners. Symbols of material success become symbols of moral success, disguising the state of moral lack. As William James said:
“The moral flabbiness born of the exclusive worship of the bitch-goddess SUCCESS. That – with the squalid cash interpretation put on the word ‘success’ – is our national disease.”
This false image of success keeps us always looking for more.
Bigger, better, smarter, faster, stronger, more attention, more stuff! The more we get, the more we want.
Émile Durkheim characterizes this state of moral flabbiness in the following way:
“Unlimited desires are insatiable by definition and insatiability is rightly considered a sign of morbidity. Being unlimited, they constantly and infinitely surpass the means at their command; they cannot be quenched. Inextinguishable thirst is constantly renewed torture.”
Drinking from the seductive cup of material success will only make you thirstier.
This classic sociological wisdom is backed by contemporary science. In a 2016 article on income and happiness, the author’s state find that happiness does increase as income rises, but gains diminish after a household income of $80,000 a year. These gains reach zero at $200,000 a year.
Therefore, having a reasonable level of financial security reduces negative emotions, but the pursuit of infinite wealth does not contribute to happiness.
This finding has also been replicated on a broader level, looking at the correlation between a countries wealth and the happiness of its citizens. In this 2010 article, the authors state:
“…over the long-term, usually a period of 10 years or more, happiness does not increase as a country’s income rises.”
Similar to the previous study, happiness does decline in a state of economic contraction, likely due to a sense of financial insecurity. But in the long term, the pursuit of infinite wealth does not increase a countries happiness.
Let’s now turn to lessons from classic literature.
In The Death of Ivan Ilych, Leo Tolstoy gives a tragic account of a man who wasted his whole life conforming to an empty social norm. On his deathbed, Ivan Illych comes to question the whole of his life. Had he been merely going through the prescribed motions? In the society depicted, success comes at the cost of meaningful human relations.
As stated by Psychologist Mark Freeman in his 1997 publication in Cambridge Journal’s Ageing & Society:
“Tolstoy’s book is about many things: the tyranny of bourgeois niceties, the terrible weak spots of the human heart, the primacy and elision of death. But more than anything, I would offer, it is about the consequences of living without meaning, that is, without a true and abiding connection to one’s life.“
A true and abiding connection to one’s life means living beyond the superficial success game.
Psychological science also backs this up.
In The Harvard Grant Study, the researchers studied the same group of men for nearly 80 years, trying to uncover what leads to a happier life, finding:
“Close relationships, more than money or fame, are what keep people happy throughout their lives, the study revealed. Those ties protect people from life’s discontents, help to delay mental and physical decline, and are better predictors of long and happy lives than social class, IQ, or even genes.”
Veterans returning from deployment know this better than anyone else.
Upon returning from a world where every decision means the difference between life and death, they are quick to diagnose our society’s individualism.
As one Canadian veteran I interviewed states:
“It’s hard to care about things you should care about in civilian life.”
Another states:
“There was just an overwhelming sense that nothing mattered”
Bryan Wood, a U.S veteran, mirrors this sentiment in his memoir, Unspoken Abandonment. After witnessing the profound tragedy of war, his sense of what mattered in life was uprooted. Referring to the conversations of co-workers he states:
“I couldn’t believe the kind of silly bullshit these people thought mattered in life. I couldn’t believe I once thought these same things were important.”
Another states:
“You’re used to doing things that mattered, and suddenly your life is simply digesting bullshit and consuming instead”
Consumer culture leads us away from the true and abiding connection to one’s life that comes with following our own definition of success.
To learn more about how my research on veterans informs my understanding of success in civilian life, you can check out my article, 6 Things Veterans Can Teach Us About Life.
A Deeper Understanding of Success
“Ambition makes you look pretty ugly”
Radiohead
Imagine you are at a funeral.
A close friend of the deceased steps up to the pulpit and proceeds with the following eulogy:
He was a hard worker… highly organized and independent, a skilled communicator who could work well with others, detail-oriented, and was able to work efficiently in a fast-paced environment.
He was a wise man, never received a grade lower than an A-, balanced a full course-load with extracurricular activities, and maintained a full scholarship throughout college.
He was a loving man. He loved the sweet taste of victory every time he closed a deal.
He was a committed man. He was always committed to the bottom line and he could consistently increase profits by 30% each quarter.
You would be startled by this friend who completely neglected the things that actually matter.
Rather than a eulogy, it would look as if the friend were speaking on behalf of the deceased for a postmortem job interview.
But if these things don’t actually matter, why do we spend the majority of our time focused on building these resume virtues while neglecting the eulogy virtues?
In The Road to Character, David Brooks illustrates how we are living in an age increasingly dominated by the resume virtues. He argues that our increased focus on building our resumes has distracted us from deeper virtues.
These deeper virtues include a deep and abiding philosophy of life, the ability to love compassionately, and the ability to commit oneself to the discipline of service to a larger moral cause.
So what’s wrong with ambition and the desire to get ahead?
Nothing is wrong with having ambitions; the problem is having an unbalanced level of ambition associated with the resume virtues, while completely neglecting the eulogy virtues.
Consider a person who goes to professional conferences for the sole purpose of building their resume and promoting their personal brand.
They pass from person to person, handing out their business card, trying to weasel into conversions with prestigious figures. They operate on an autopilot “what can I get” mentality, spamming everyone who is deemed useful.
A thin veneer of self-importance masks their inner-fragility, but no one is fooled. Like Radiohead said in Paranoid Android, Ambition makes you look pretty ugly.
As a lecturer in sociology at Eastern Michigan University, I have seen this resume-focused culture among students who feel crushed by the pressure to constantly perform to the point where anything lower than an A seems like a failing grade.
Many students have come to view their education as an obstacle to overcome so they can look impressive on paper in order to attain high paying jobs. But this is not necessarily their fault. The impersonal bureaucratized education system uses GPAs and standardized tests to sort through a large number of applicants.
This system produces grade-obsession, overshadowing self-cultivation, and character development. Simply memorizing a set of factual bullet-points for the exam has become the main goal for many students. This type of ambition is neither in the best interest of students or the broader society.
The real world does not want someone who simply knows a lot of facts; we have Google for that. The real world wants people who understand how to use knowledge to solve problems.
In order to solve the world’s problems, we need people who are self-aware, emotionally intelligent, and have a disciplined sense of commitment to serving a larger cause.
These are the characteristics associated with the eulogy virtues. These are the characteristics that will save us from ugliness.
Aristotle gave us a version of the good life that is not only sustainable, but it also promotes true happiness.
His first principle is that all things aim at “the good”. Like archers directing an arrow toward a target, “the good” is the ultimate target of our actions. The problem is that this ultimate aim is often interrupted.
As Jean Vanier states in Made for Happiness: Discovering the Meaning of Life with Aristotle:
Today, as always, many people are not interested in the target, that is to say, the ultimate end of their actions. They are prompted by what everyone wants — as if their family, society, and the media were determining their development. Of course they want success, pleasure, recognition, but without really knowing why. They are caught up in short-term projects that prevent them from thinking about the purpose and meaning of human life.
Aristotle tells us that the key to redirecting our life toward “the good” is to use our reason to direct our passions and chaotic desires toward virtue. Jean Vanier gives the following metaphor of reason taking the reins of the passions:
Like runaway, riderless horses, they await direction. Man’s proper task is to take hold of the reins and guide them, to orient these desires, with all their fulminating energy, towards the sought-after end.
The problem is that this is far easier said than done.
How to Build a Better Version of Success
If you are addicted to the socially construed definition of success, it is not easy to simply suppress your deep emotional attachments to this way of life.
Our minds are driven by our emotions.
Contemporary moral psychologist, Jonathan Haidt, empirically demonstrates that David Hume’s passion-driven conception of human reason is more in line with reality.
Rather than a rider taking the reigns of a horse, Haidt says reason is more like a rider on an elephant.
Although reason can nudge us in a specific direction, the emotions, represented by the elephant, overwhelmingly drive our behavior. Since reason is not sovereign, this idea flips Aristotle’s method of virtuous self-development on his head, forcing us to train our emotions rather than our reason.
How does one go about training their emotions?
In the case of psychological disorders, emotion-focused cognitive-behavioral therapy or present-centered breathing techniques may be beneficial.
But beyond the case of psychological disorders, a morally virtuous character is not built from within. Rather, the virtuous character is built between the individual and society.
In The Happiness Hypothesis, Jonathan Haidt gives two possible methods of facilitating this type of interaction:
What is the meaning of life? The question is unanswerable in that form, but with a slight rephrasing we can answer it. Part of the answer is to tie yourself down, commit yourself to people and projects, and enter a state of “vital engagement†with them. The other part is to attain a state of “cross-level coherence” within yourself, and within your life. Religion is an evolved mechanism for satisfying these needs. We can find meaning and happiness without religion, but we must understand our evolved religious nature before we can find effective substitutes.
So to recap, the archer whose target is “the good life” is not merely distracted by emotions, but driven by them.
Training the emotional elephant can take the form of individual therapy, but must take the form of vital social engagement to build a virtuous character.
Developing this character is its own reward, producing happiness throughout the process. Therefore, happiness is not to be confused with”the good life”.
If “the good life” is the target, happiness is the vehicle by which one works toward it. Happiness is facilitated by social forces that promote moral commitment such as work and community life.
Johnathen Haidt also raises the important question of how a diverse society can promote a common morality:
Is virtue its own reward? Yes, but in the modern West we’ve lost the ability to grow most virtues in good soil, and we’ve reduced virtue to just being nice. Where did we go wrong, and how can we forge a common morality in a diverse society?
Fundamentally, man’s desire toward “the good life” is the desire to have a common purpose found in community.
Individualistic social contexts have a tendency to leave this desire unfulfilled. This results in the pursuit of status, encouraged by the success ideolog, as highlighted at the beginning of this post.
Luxurious lifestyles and status symbols can give us the thrill of temporary pleasure, but it is ultimately a bottomless pit, always demanding more.
True happiness comes from a life of virtue, nourished by a moral social context that provides purpose and direction, promoting our lives together.
For a deeper look at the meaning of purpose, you can check out my article, What Does it Mean to Have a Purpose.
How A Company is Redefining Success
“We asked ourselves what we wanted this company to stand for. We didn’t want to just sell shoes. I wasn’t even into shoes – but I was passionate about customer service.”
Tony Hsieh
It is no secret that the key to Zappos’ success is its unique company culture. The turning point occurred when founder Tony Hsieh changed their guiding principle from profits to service.
In Delivering Happiness, Tony outlines his insights into company culture throughout his entrepreneurial career. Taking insights from the field of positive psychology and applying it to his organizational setting, Tony has been able to create a cult-like environment that inspires individuals through service.
Although the concept of service has its roots in the religious-life of ritual, the sociologist Émile Durkheim argued that occupational groups would take over this function in the modern era. But as we have seen in the development of corporate America, this is often not the case.
Decidedly breaking from the culture of greed as a motivator, Zappos has created a cult of service. Inspiring rather than motivating has been Tony’s goal.
But how does service inspire individuals, making them happier? The answer is the meaning and sense of purpose that comes with service to a cause outside of ourselves.
At Zappos, achieving happiness comes from delivering happiness. The culture of service Tony has been able to achieve inspires employees by giving them a sense of purpose outside themselves. This is supported throughout the workplace structure at Zappos.
A prime example of how Zappos is redefining success is the lack of time-restrictions on customer service phone calls and a large amount of staff allotted to this position. This allows employees to focus on serving the customer, rather than call-time efficiency. Tony actually reported that their record call-time was seven and a half hours with a customer!
The foundation of Zappos’ company culture centers on its core values. These are the guiding principals that support a positive environment where individuals gain a sense of comradery rather than a sense of competition.
Unlike most organizations, their core values are actually relevant, meaningful, and drawn upon to determine who is hired and fired. This means that individuals who are highly qualified will not be hired or retained if they are not in line with the core values.
Instead of assuming individuals are motivated by an endless pursuit of wealth, Zappos focuses its resources on building a workplace that fosters positive relations and provides a structure that allows employees to serve.
Check out the Zappos Family Culture Book, for first-hand accounts of the powerful workplace culture at Zappos.
Conclusion
True success means staying true to a deeper sense of purpose, despite deviating from a superficial social norm.
It means finding joy in suffering. It means having the courage to peruse one’s own journey when confronted by the fear of uncertainty.
In a world characterized by rapidly growing uncertainty, we can try to seek solace in the empty promise of conventional success, or we can choose our own path.
Although it is our own path, we need to be aware of how this path connects us to a cause or community beyond ourselves.
Living in aliment with our core values allows us to genuinely connect with others rather than trying to gain a false sense of acceptance through status.
Hopefully, this article has helped clarify the true meaning of success.
If you are interested in learning more about this topic, you can check out my articles on Identity, Purpose, and Belonging.
by Steve Rose | Apr 20, 2019 | Identity, Purpose, and Belonging
On the go? Listen to the audio version of the article here:
The phrase, “it’s lonely at the top” suggests success causes loneliness. But what does the research say on whether successful people are actually at risk of loneliness?
According to Thomas Joiner in Lonely at the Top, success can cause loneliness when people neglect the quality and quantity of their close social relations in favor of focusing on instrumental goals associated with success.
Although being successful does not guarantee loneliness, it can be a risk factor for loneliness, especially among successful older men.
Let’s take a closer look at what causes this form of loneliness.
Career Success Among Men
For millennia, men have enjoyed a disproportionate amount of wealth and power. Although the gender gap is now narrowing, women still earn roughly 74 cents for every dollar men earn.
Part of this gap may be due to discrimination, but another explanation is that women might be more likely to choose life-satisfaction over higher earnings.
Although men have held political and economic superiority, their success has lead to suffering from higher levels of loneliness. In Lonely at the Top, Thomas Joiner looks at the high cost of men’s success, showing that men’s loneliness is caused by their privilege. He states:
Much attention is focused, rightly, on men’s disproportionate share of wealth and power; too little attention is spent on men’s disproportionate share of misery, one index of which is high suicide rates.
How Success Causes Loneliness Among Men
Thomas Joiner argues that the loneliness and resulting misery are caused by ignoring relationships in favor of instrumental activities such as efficient problem-solving and a “go-getter” attitude to goal attainment.
Instrumental goals include focusing on getting ahead financially and out-competing others in the workplace. They include focusing on transactions over social relations.
This mentality is highlighted in the movie Glengarry GlenRoss:
ABC. “A”, always. “B”, be. “C”, closing. ALWAYS BE CLOSING. Always be closing…[.] you can’t play the man’s game, you can’t close them, and then tell your wife your troubles.
Joiner states that higher levels of instrumentality give a sense of purpose and contribute to lower levels of depression in men compared to women, but women’s greater focus on relationships is a protective factor later in life.
After retirement, men are more likely to suffer the effects of their relational neglect. The competitive career orientation may drive successful men in their careers, but this success comes at a high cost.
There is also a physical cost of men’s success, potentially leading to physical health complications.
As discovered in a study on loneliness:
“Loneliness is as strong a risk factor for illness and death as smoking, obesity, and high blood pressure,”
In addition to the physical costs, there are mental health costs. Upon retirement, men not only lose a sense of purpose, but they also lose many of their casual acquaintances at the workplace. This double loss increases the risk of suicide due to feeling isolated and lacking purpose. You can read more about this topic in my articles on suicide and mental health.
Joiner’s message is clear: men are privileged, instrumentally oriented, therefore neglect facilitating strong deep social ties, resulting in likely suffering from chronic loneliness later in life, perhaps without even recognizing how bad it is until it’s too late.
Solutions to the problem require men to focus on maintaining and deepening meaningful social ties, particularly later in life, or during retirement when they are most at risk.
Joiner recommends hobbies, regular gatherings with friends, and even using Facebook, which Joiner regards as a useful platform to stay connected with others, despite its potential for overuse. I talk more about how to use social media in a healthy way in my article on social media addiction.
Loneliness Among Male Veterans
In terms of my own research, the social transition faced by veterans returning to civilian life puts them at risk of experiencing loneliness.
One Canadian veteran recounts his experience transitioning into law school after the military. He states:
“[At law school] you’re in a large group, but ultimately you’re alone…. In the military you can bet someone is always looking out for you… you’re always accountable to one another – which is a great thing – but when you take that away it can be isolating.”
In terms of regaining a sense of belonging, veterans I spoke with found that non-traditional veterans groups were valuable. Treble Victor is one of the groups several individuals found helped them reconnect in civilian life. One individual stated:
“The experience [of transition] had been marked by quasi-isolation and challenges to connect with people. When I got to Treble Victor, I just walked in the room and the group felt very familiar and extremely welcoming, it was very much a social setting that was similar to what I had experienced while I was serving, so the comradery, the openness to connect, and the sense of trust, it’s like meeting family you never met.”
Although this issue is common among all veterans, it was especially difficult for those entering the highly individualistic white-collar professions. The Treble Victor veterans entrepreneurial group is a creative solution to this problem and can perhaps serve as a model for combating loneliness among civilian business-persons as well.
If you’re interested in reading more of my research on veterans, you can check out my articles on veterans in transition.
Preventing the Loneliness that Comes With Success
Although success may be a risk factor for loneliness, there are ways to prevent this issue before it starts. This involves focusing on the quality and quantity of one’s close social relations.
The ability to connect with others facilitates a positive sense of social identity which is necessary for individuals to feel a sense of belonging and significance.
As Hugh Mackay writes in The Good Life:
“…our identity is social at least as much as personal.”
Men’s identities have been traditionally tied to instrumental career attainment, neglecting the maintenance of quality interpersonal ties. This is why, as Joiner says, men are “lonely at the top.”
Retirement or career transitions can also trigger this state – especially in the case of veterans, whose life in the military facilitated deep ties to those they served with, but leaves them often struggling to reconnect in an individualistic civilian world.
Conclusion
Loneliness is a risk factor for success, especially among older men. Preventing loneliness requires one to focus on the quality and quantity of one’s close social relations.
Men who lose meaningful social ties due to an overemphasis on instrumentalism may find themselves lonely at the top.
In addition, those who leave the military lose the social identity formed through deep ties to those they served with.
This is important because loneliness is a significant risk factor for suicide, as well as mortality through physical illness.
Men need to recognize this is a significant issue and take action to work on their interpersonal relations. Lastly, as a society, we need to acknowledge this issue and facilitate men’s social connectedness.
If you’re interested in reading more about how social connection contributes to better overall health, you can check out my article, What Is Social Health?
