YOUTH stringlengths 4 1.27k | PHILOSOPHER stringlengths 4 20.6k |
|---|---|
So the child can just ignore his parents’ intentions and live however he pleases? | There is no reason of any sort that one should not live one’s life as one pleases. |
Well, maybe in theory, anyway. But it’s hard to break out. The decision to withdraw from school itself isn’t something to be taken lightly. | I am sure you are right—it would not be easy. Therefore, there is a principle of action that I would like you to commit to memory. When we run into difficulties in our interpersonal relations, or when we can no longer see a way out, what we should consider first and foremost is the principle that says, “Listen to the voice of the larger community.” |
So this connects to what you were saying about all problems being interpersonal relationship problems? | Yes, that’s correct. An Inferiority Complex Is an Excuse |
Gradually, but yes, it’s getting clearer. You don’t seem to be aware of it, but just now you said something really over the top. It’s a dangerous, rather extreme opinion that just negates everything in the world. | Oh, really? What is it? |
You aren’t running away from it, right? | Of course not. Next time, we will probably discuss freedom. |
I suppose it’s what you’ve been referring to as interpersonal relations. From childhood up to the present, I have always been belittled by people around me, especially my parents, as a poor excuse for a little brother. They have never really tried to recognize me for who I am. You say that worth is something one gives to oneself. But that’s just an impracticable theory. For example, at the library where I work, for the most part my job is just sorting the returned books and putting them back on the shelves. It’s routine work that anyone could do once they’ve been taught. If I stopped going to work, my boss would have no trouble finding someone to replace me. I am needed only for the unskilled labor I provide, and it doesn’t actually matter at all if it is “I” who is working there or someone else, or a machine, for that matter. No one is requiring “this me” in particular. In such circumstances, would you have confidence in yourself? Would you be able to have a true sense of worth? | From an Adlerian psychology point of view, the answer is simple. First of all, build a horizontal relationship between yourself and another person. One is enough. Let’s start from there. |
But how is that even possible? | Consider the reality of the act of praise. For example, suppose I praised a statement you made by saying, “Good job!” Wouldn’t hearing those words seem strange somehow? |
Indeed. | When a client shows up requesting a cure from fear of blushing, the counselor must not cure the symptoms. Then recovery is likely to be even more difficult. That is the Adlerian psychology way of thinking about this kind of thing. |
Pursuit of superiority? | This is something you could think of as simply “hoping to improve” or “pursuing an ideal state.” For instance, a toddler learns to steady himself on both legs. He has the universal desire to learn language and to improve. And all the advancements of science throughout human history are due to this “pursuit of superiority,” too. |
What one can change, and what one cannot. | That’s right. Accept what is irreplaceable. Accept “this me” just as it is. And have the courage to change what one can change. That is self-acceptance. |
Well, didn’t he unravel the legendary knot with ease, and go on to become the ruler of Asia? | No, that’s not how it happened. As soon as Alexander the Great saw how tight the knot was, he pulled out his sword and sliced it in half with one stroke. |
So concretely speaking, how does one go about this? One cannot praise, and one cannot rebuke. What other words and choices are there? | Think about a time when you’ve had help in your work—not from a child but from a partner who is your equal—and you will probably see the answer right away. When a friend helps you clean your home, what do you say to him? |
But how . . . ? It would be impossible for all human beings to be especially good, or anything like that, wouldn’t it? No matter what, people have their strengths and weaknesses, and there will always be differences. There’s only a handful of geniuses in the world, and not everyone is cut out to be an honors student. So for all the losers, there’s nothing for it besides being especially bad. | Yes, it’s that Socratic paradox, that no one desires evil. Because to children who engage in problem behavior, even violent acts and theft are accomplishments of “good.” |
I suppose so, but . . . | But do other people actually look at you so much? Are they really watching you around the clock and lying in wait for the perfect moment to attack? It seems rather unlikely. A young friend of mine, when he was a teenager, used to spend a lot of time in front of the mirror arranging his hair. And once, when he was doing that, his grandmother said, “You’re the only one who’s worried how you look.” He says that it got a bit easier for him to deal with life after that. |
Of course. If I could change, if I could start life all over again, I would gladly fall to my knees before you. But it could turn out that you’ll be down on your knees before me. | You remind me of myself during my own student days, when I was a hot-blooded young man searching for the truth, traipsing about, calling on philosophers . . . |
What is it? | In short, that “freedom is being disliked by other people.” |
Well, I don’t mean to contradict you, but not everyone can become Alexander the Great. Isn’t it precisely because there was no one else who could have cut the knot that the anecdote portraying it as a heroic deed is still conveyed to this day? It’s exactly the same with the separation of tasks. Even though one knows one can just cut through something with one’s sword, one might find it rather difficult. Because when one presses forward with the separation of tasks, in the end one will have to cut ties with people. One will drive people into isolation. The separation of tasks you speak of completely ignores human emotion! How could one possibly build good interpersonal relationships with that? | One can build them. The separation of tasks is not the objective for interpersonal relationships. Rather, it is the gateway. |
Huh? This is getting pretty confusing. | Okay, let’s go over things one at a time. The condition of having a feeling of inferiority is a condition of feeling some sort of lack in oneself in the present situation. So then, the question is— |
Is this something that is conveyed by the words “equal but not the same”? | Yes. Equal, that is to say, horizontal. For example, there are men who verbally abuse their wives, who do all the housework, with such remarks as “You’re not bringing in any money, so I don’t want to hear it” or “It’s thanks to me that there’s food on the table.” And I’m sure you’ve heard this one before: “You have everything you need, so what are you complaining about?” It’s perfectly shameful. Such statements of economic superiority or the like have no connection whatsoever to human worth. A company employee and a full-time housewife simply have different workplaces and roles, and are truly “equal but not the same.” |
Why is that? | Well, what does a person have to do to get courage? In Adler’s view, “It is only when a person is able to feel that he has worth that he can possess courage.” |
So when you say “contribute,” you mean to show a spirit of self-sacrifice and to be of service to those around you? | Contribution to others does not connote self-sacrifice. Adler goes so far as to warn that those who sacrifice their own lives for others are people who have conformed to society too much. And please do not forget: We are truly aware of our own worth only when we feel that our existence and behavior are beneficial to the community, that is to say, when one feels “I am of use to someone.” Do you remember this? In other words, contribution to others, rather than being about getting rid of the “I” and being of service to someone, is actually something one does in order to be truly aware of the worth of the “I.” |
If only it weren’t for this, I could do it, too. | Yes. As Adler points out, no one is capable of putting up with having feelings of inferiority for a long period of time. Feelings of inferiority are something that everyone has, but staying in that condition is too heavy to endure forever. |
Life is meaningless? | The world in which we live is constantly beset by all manner of horrendous events, and we exist with the ravages of war and natural disasters all around us. When confronted by the fact of children dying in the turmoil of war, there is no way one can go on about the meaning of life. In other words, there is no meaning in using generalizations to talk about life. But being confronted by such incomprehensible tragedies without taking any action is tantamount to affirming them. Regardless of the circumstances, we must take some form of action. We must stand up to Kant’s “inclination.” |
You mean those people whose lifestyle is all about work? | Yes. People whose lives lack harmony. |
Harmony of life? | In the teachings of Judaism, one finds the following anecdote: “If there are ten people, one will be someone who criticizes you no matter what you do. This person will come to dislike you, and you will not learn to like him either. Then, there will be two others who accept everything about you and whom you accept too, and you will become close friends with them. The remaining seven people will be neither of these types.” Now, do you focus on the one person who dislikes you? Do you pay more attention to the two who love you? Or would you focus on the crowd, the other seven? A person who is lacking in harmony of life will see only the one person he dislikes and will make a judgment of the world from that. |
The goal being revenge? | Yes. And once the interpersonal relationship reaches the revenge stage, it is almost impossible for either party to find a solution. To prevent this from happening, when one is challenged to a power struggle, one must never allow oneself to be taken in. Admitting Fault Is Not Defeat |
That’s ridiculous! Why would I do that? | So that you could avoid an interpersonal relationship with Mr. A. |
It’s complicated. I did have feelings of resentment, but on the other hand there was this sense of relief, too. You know, that I could get them to recognize me if I went to that school. | I see. Let’s talk about one of the major premises of Adlerian psychology regarding this matter. Adlerian psychology denies the need to seek recognition from others. |
That’s strange. Didn’t you say that we are living in a subjective world? As long as the world is a subjective space, I am the only one who can be at its center. I won’t let anyone else be there. | I think that when you speak of “the world,” what you have in mind is something like a map of the world. |
That’s a tough one. | The first thing that I want you to understand here is the fact that anger is a form of communication, and that communication is nevertheless possible without using anger. We can convey our thoughts and intentions and be accepted without any need for anger. If you learn to understand this experientially, the anger emotion will stop appearing all on its own. |
Wait, that’s an argument that can only lead to affirming infidelity. Because if one’s partner were happily having an affair, you’re saying that one should celebrate even that. | No, I am not affirming someone having an affair. Think about it this way: The kind of relationship that feels somehow oppressive and strained when the two people are together cannot be called love, even if there is passion. When one can think, Whenever I am with this person, I can behave very freely, one can really feel love. One can be in a calm and quite natural state, without having feelings of inferiority or being beset with the need to flaunt one’s superiority. That is what real love is like. Restriction, on the other hand, is a manifestation of the mind-set of attempting to control one’s partner, and also an idea founded on a sense of distrust. Being in the same space with someone who distrusts you isn’t a natural situation that one can put up with, is it? As Adler says, “If two people want to live together on good terms, they must treat each other as equal personalities.” |
Well, it’s one thing if you’re just talking about a child’s studies. But when someone’s suffering right there in front of you, you can’t just leave him or her be, can you? Would you still say that lending a helping hand is intervention, and then do nothing? | One must not let it go unnoticed. It is necessary to offer assistance that does not turn into intervention. |
Well, what is your image of life? | Do not treat it as a line. Think of life as a series of dots. If you look through a magnifying glass at a solid line drawn with chalk, you will discover that what you thought was a line is actually a series of small dots. Seemingly linear existence is actually a series of dots; in other words, life is a series of moments. |
What’s the point of that? | For example, do you remember the story about the female student who came to me for counseling on account of her fear of blushing? Why did she develop that fear of blushing? In Adlerian psychology, physical symptoms are not regarded separately from the mind (psyche). The mind and body are viewed as one, as a whole that cannot be divided into parts. Tension in the mind can make one’s arms and legs shake, or cause one’s cheeks to turn red, and fear can make one’s face turn white. And so on. |
Yes, I guess that’s right! Let’s face it: I hate myself! I, the one who’s doing this playing around with old-fashioned philosophical discourse, and who just can’t help doing this sort of thing—yes, I really hate myself. | That’s all right. If you were to ask around for people who say they like themselves, you’d be hard-pressed to find someone who’d puff up his or her chest with pride and say, “Yes, I like myself.” |
Well, what should I do then? | Let’s start with self-acceptance. On our first night, I brought up that statement of Adler’s: “The important thing is not what one is born with but what use one makes of that equipment.” Do you remember this? |
Okay then! | As I have been saying all along, Adlerian psychology has the view that all problems are interpersonal relationship problems. Interpersonal relations are the source of unhappiness. And the opposite can be said, too—interpersonal relations are the source of happiness. |
What does this have to do with me? | How do you justify this? Why did you choose to be unhappy? I have no way of knowing the specific answer or details. Perhaps it will become clearer as we debate this. |
Right. | But those who make themselves look bigger on borrowed power are essentially living according to other people’s value systems—they are living other people’s lives. This is a point that must be emphasized. |
Well, then what is this “other philosophy”? | It is a completely new school of psychology that was established by the Austrian psychiatrist Alfred Adler at the beginning of the twentieth century. It is generally referred to as Adlerian psychology. |
Well, my brother is my brother, and I guess other people are another story. | No, they should become more positive comrades. |
The voice of the larger community? | Not at all. Though this might be termed a “you and I” relationship, if it is one that can break down just because you raise an objection, then it is not the sort of relationship you need to get into in the first place. It is fine to just let go of it. Living in fear of one’s relationships falling apart is an unfree way to live, in which one is living for other people. |
A “somewhere” that no one else knows! | That is the nature of energeial life. If I look back on my own life up to now, no matter how I try, I will never arrive at a satisfactory explanation as to why I am here and now. Though, at one time, the study of Greek philosophy was my focus, before long I took up the study of Adlerian psychology in tandem with it, and here I am today, deep in conversation with you, my irreplaceable friend. It is the result of having danced the moments—that is the only way to explain it. When you have danced here and now in earnest and to the full, that is when the meaning of your life will become clear to you. |
Ha-ha. Well, that’s perplexing, isn’t it? How about the other way around, then? Do you really comprehend and accept this community feeling, or whatever it is, that includes the entire universe? | I try to. Because I feel that one cannot truly comprehend Adlerian psychology without comprehending this point. |
That you choose for yourself? | Yes, exactly. You choose your lifestyle. |
So you are saying that one should always take the “people can change” premise? | Of course. And please understand, it is Freudian etiology that denies our free will and treats humans like machines. The young man paused and glanced around the philosopher’s study. Floor- to-ceiling bookshelves filled the walls, and on a small wooden desk lay a fountain pen and what appeared to be a partially written manuscript. “People are not driven by past causes but move toward goals that they themselves set”—that was the philosopher’s claim. The teleology he espoused was an idea that overturned at the root the causality of respectable psychology, and the young man found that impossible to accept. So from which standpoint should he start to argue it? The youth took a deep breath. Socrates and Adler |
Well, of course, I would try everything I could think of to get him to apply himself. I’d hire tutors and make him go to a study center, even if I had to pull him by the ear to get him there. I’d say that’s a parent’s duty. And that’s actually how I was raised myself. I wasn’t allowed to eat dinner until the day’s homework was done. | Then let me ask another question. Did you learn to enjoy studying as a result of being made to do it in such a heavy-handed manner? |
By making an active commitment? What does one do, exactly? | One faces one’s life tasks. In other words, one takes steps forward on one’s own, without avoiding the tasks of the interpersonal relations of work, friendship, and love. If you are “the center of the world,” you will have no thoughts whatsoever regarding commitment to the community; because everyone else is “someone who will do something for me,” and there is no need for you to do things yourself. But you are not the center of the world, and neither am I. One has to stand on one’s own two feet, and take one’s own steps forward with the tasks of interpersonal relations. One needs to think not, What will this person give me? but rather, What can I give to this person? That is commitment to the community. |
Are these tasks the obligations one has as a member of society? In other words, things like labor and payment of taxes? | No, please think of this solely in terms of interpersonal relationships. That is, the distance and depth in one’s interpersonal relationships. Adler sometimes used the expression “three social ties” to emphasize the point. |
All right. Let me tell you about another friend of mine, a man named Y. He’s the kind of person who has always had a bright personality and talks easily to anyone. He’s like a sunflower—everyone loves him, and people smile whenever he’s around. In contrast, I am someone who has never had an easy time socially and who’s kind of warped in various ways. Now, you are claiming that people can change through Adler’s teleology? | Yes. You and I and everyone can change. |
Horizontal relationship? | Let’s start with an easily understood example, that of the parent-child relationship. Whether the circumstances are, for example, those of child-rearing, or of training junior staff in the workplace, generally speaking there are two approaches that are considered: one is the method of raising by rebuke, and the other is the method of raising by praise. |
Well, how about this one? It’s my own story about something I experienced yesterday. | Oh? I’m all ears. People Fabricate Anger |
I am not someone who can mouth off to my seniors, and I would never think of trying. My social common sense would be called into question if I did. | What is “senior”? What is this “mouthing off”? If one is gauging the atmosphere of a situation and being dependent on vertical relationships, one is engaging in irresponsible acts—one is trying to avoid one’s responsibilities. |
Because I have heard all about your reputation. The word is that there is an eccentric philosopher living here whose teachings and arguments are hard to ignore, namely, that people can change, that the world is simple and that everyone can be happy. That is the sort of thing I have heard, but I find that view totally unacceptable, so I wanted to confirm things for myself. If I find anything you say completely off, I will point it out and then correct you . . . But will you find that annoying? | I see. That is an interesting view. |
That is exactly what I wanted to ask about! Even if the cause and effect were reversed, that is to say, in your case, you were able to analyze yourself and say, “It isn’t because he hit me that I have a bad relationship with my father, but that I brought out the memory of being hit because I don’t want my relationship with my father to get better,” even then, how does it actually change things? It doesn’t change the fact that you were hit in childhood, right? | One can think from the viewpoint that it is an interpersonal relationship card. As long as I use etiology to think, It is because he hit me that I have a bad relationship with my father, it would be a matter that was impossible for me to do anything about. But if I can think, I brought out the memory of being hit because I don’t want my relationship with my father to get better, then I will be holding the card to repair relations. Because if I can just change the goal, that fixes everything. |
Well, sure, there are parts of the mind and body that are connected. | The same holds true for reason and emotion, and the conscious mind and the unconscious mind as well. A normally coolheaded person doesn’t expect to have a fit of violent emotion and start shouting at someone. We are not struck by emotions that somehow exist independently from us. Each of us is a unified whole. |
But . . . | When one adopts the point of view of Freudian etiology, one sees life as a kind of great big story based on cause and effect. So then it’s all about where and when I was born, what my childhood was like, the school I attended and the company where I got a job. And that decides who I am now and who I will become. To be sure, likening one’s life to a story is probably an entertaining job. The problem is, one can see the dimness that lies ahead at the end of the story. Moreover, one will try to lead a life that is in line with that story. And then one says, “My life is such-and- such, so I have no choice but to live this way, and it’s not because of me—it’s my past, it’s the environment,” and so on. But bringing up the past here is nothing but a way out, a life-lie. However, life is a series of dots, a series of moments. If you can grasp that, you will not need a story any longer. |
Yesterday afternoon, I was reading a book in a coffee shop when a waiter passed by and spilled coffee on my jacket. I’d just bought it and it’s my nicest piece of clothing. I couldn’t help it, I just blew my top. I yelled at him at the top of my lungs. I’m not normally the type of person who speaks loudly in public places. But yesterday, the shop was ringing with the sound of my shouting because I flew into a rage and forgot what I was doing. So how about that? Is there any room for a goal to be involved here? No matter how you look at it, isn’t this behavior that originates from a cause? | So you were stimulated by the emotion of anger and ended up shouting. Though you are normally mild-mannered, you couldn’t resist being angry. It was an unavoidable occurrence, and you couldn’t do anything about it. Is that what you are saying? |
The courage to be happy, huh? | Do you need further explanation? |
That sounds exactly like my boss. | But is being acknowledged by your boss “work” that you should think of as top priority? It isn’t your job to be liked by people at the place you work. Your boss doesn’t like you. And his reasons for not liking you are clearly unreasonable. But in that case, there’s no need for you to get cozy with him. |
All right. I’d like to hear all about it. | Community feeling is also referred to as “social interest,” that is to say, “interest in society.” So now I have a question for you: Do you know what society’s smallest unit is, from the point of view of sociology? |
Yes, please. The discussion of community feeling had become more confusing than ever. One must not praise. And one must not rebuke, either. All words that are used to judge other people are words that come out of vertical relationships, and we need to build horizontal relationships. And it is only when one is able to feel that one is of use to someone that one can have a true awareness of one’s worth. There was a major flaw in this logic somewhere. The young man felt it instinctively. As he sipped the hot coffee, thoughts of his grandfather crossed his mind. Exist in the Present | Well, have you worked things out? |
One wants to change, but changing is scary? | When we try to change our lifestyles, we put our great courage to the test. There is the anxiety generated by changing, and the disappointment attendant to not changing. I am sure you have selected the latter. |
What do you mean? | You are not living to satisfy other people’s expectations, and neither am I. It is not necessary to satisfy other people’s expectations. |
I will. In any case, it was quite a blow to be told that I never really look at others, and I only have concern for myself. You’re really a dreadful fellow! | Ha-ha. You say it in such a happy way. |
That’s a lie! It’s nothing more than academic sophistry. | Of course, we cannot do without interpersonal relationships. A human being’s existence, in its very essence, assumes the existence of other human beings. Living completely separate from others is, in principle, impossible. As you are indicating, the premise “If one could live all alone in the universe” is unsound. |
What are life tasks? | Let’s think of the word “life” as tracing back to childhood. During childhood, we are protected by our parents and can live without needing to work. But eventually, the time comes when one has to be self-reliant. One cannot be dependent on one’s parents forever, and one has to be self-reliant mentally, of course, and self-reliant in a social sense as well, and one has to engage in some form of work— which is not limited to the narrow definition of working at a company. Furthermore, in the process of growing up, one begins to have all kinds of friend relationships. Of course, one may form a love relationship with someone that may even lead to marriage. If it does, one will start a marital relationship, and if one has children, a parent-child relationship will begin. Adler made three categories of the interpersonal relationships that arise out of these processes. He referred to them as “tasks of work,” “tasks of friendship,” and “tasks of love,” and all together as “life tasks.” |
That’s not true! No way! That’s too depressing! | No. This is the difference between etiology (the study of causation) and teleology (the study of the purpose of a given phenomenon, rather than its cause). Everything you have been telling me is based in etiology. As long as we stay in etiology, we will not take a single step forward. Trauma Does Not Exist |
I am? | None of us live in an objective world, but instead in a subjective world that we ourselves have given meaning to. The world you see is different from the one I see, and it’s impossible to share your world with anyone else. |
The feeling of inferiority is a kind of launch pad? | That’s right. One tries to get rid of one’s feeling of inferiority and keep moving forward. One’s never satisfied with one’s present situation—even if it’s just a single step, one wants to make progress. One wants to be happier. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the state of this kind of feeling of inferiority. There are, however, people who lose the courage to take a single step forward, who cannot accept the fact that the situation can be changed by making realistic efforts. People who, before even doing anything, simply give up and say things like “I’m not good enough anyway” or “Even if I tried, I wouldn’t stand a chance.” |
How can that be? You and I are living in the same country, in the same time, and we are seeing the same things—aren’t we? | You look rather young to me, but have you ever drunk well water that has just been drawn? |
No, don’t you see that’s completely illogical? I do want to change; that is my sincere wish. So how could I be making the decision not to? | Although there are some small inconveniences and limitations, you probably think that the lifestyle you have now is the most practical one, and that it’s easier to leave things as they are. If you stay just like this, experience enables you to respond properly to events as they occur, while guessing the results of one’s actions. You could say it’s like driving your old, familiar car. It might rattle a bit, but one can take that into account and maneuver easily. On the other hand, if one chooses a new lifestyle, no one can predict what might happen to the new self, or have any idea how to deal with events as they arise. It will be hard to see ahead to the future, and life will be filled with anxiety. A more painful and unhappy life might lie ahead. Simply put, people have various complaints about things, but it’s easier and more secure to be just the way one is. |
It doesn’t matter if the contribution is not a visible one? | You are not the one who decides if your contributions are of use. That is the task of other people, and is not an issue in which you can intervene. In principle, there is not even any way you can know whether you have really made a contribution. That is to say, when we are engaging in this contribution to others, the contribution does not have to be a visible one—all we need is the subjective sense that “I am of use to someone,” or in other words, a feeling of contribution. |
It certainly is a fascinating argument. But focusing on people who suffer from stammering seems like a rather special example. Could you give me any others? | Well, another would be the workaholic. This, too, is an example of a person who is clearly lacking in harmony of life. |
What way is that? | It’s to act as if one is indeed superior and to indulge in a fabricated feeling of superiority. |
I don’t get what you’re saying. How on earth could I have chosen it? | That is not true. If your lifestyle is not something that you were naturally born with, but something you chose yourself, then it must be possible to choose it over again. |
There’s no shortage of people who desire evil, is there? Of course, there are plenty of thieves and murderers, and don’t forget all the politicians and officials with their shady deals. It’s probably harder to find a truly good, upright person who does not desire evil. | Without question, there is no shortage of behavior that is evil. But no one, not even the most hardened criminal, becomes involved in crime purely out of a desire to engage in evil acts. Every criminal has an internal justification for getting involved in crime. A dispute over money leads someone to engage in murder, for instance. To the perpetrator, it is something for which there is a justification and which can be restated as an accomplishment of “good.” Of course, this is not good in a moral sense, but good in the sense of being “of benefit to oneself.” |
And what do you do with that as the starting point? | You make the switch from attachment to self (self-interest) to concern for others (social interest). |
Okay . . . | For the sake of convenience, up to this point I have discussed self- acceptance, confidence in others, and contribution to others, in that order. However, these three are linked as an indispensable whole, in a sort of circular structure. It is because one accepts oneself just as one is—one self-accepts—that one can have “confidence in others” without the fear of being taken advantage of. And it is because one can place unconditional confidence in others, and feel that people are one’s comrades, that one can engage in “contribution to others.” Further, it is because one contributes to others that one can have the deep awareness that “I am of use to someone” and accept oneself just as one is. One can self-accept. The notes you took down the other day, do you have them with you? |
Funny, you caught on right away. That’s right, I still have some issues with it. I’ll say it straight out—I have no idea what you are going on about with your references to the universe and all that, and it ends up reeking of religion from beginning to end. There’s this kind of cultish quality to it all that I just can’t shake. | When Adler first proposed the concept of community feeling, there was a great deal of opposition in a similar vein. People said that psychology is supposed to be a science, and here was Adler discussing the issue of worth. That sort of thing isn’t science, they said. |
What do you mean, exactly? | People are constantly selecting their lifestyles. Right now, while we are having this tête-à-tête, we are selecting ours. You describe yourself as an unhappy person. You say that you want to change right this minute. You even claim that you want to be reborn as a different person. After all that, then why are you still unable to change? It is because you are making the persistent decision not to change your lifestyle. |
My enemy? | You start to think that people are always looking down on you and treating you with scorn, that they’re all enemies who must never be underestimated, who lie in wait for any opening and attack at the drop of a hat. In short, that the world is a terrifying place. |
But . . . | This is something I spoke of last time. The fact that there are people who do not think well of you is proof that you are living in freedom. You might have a sense of something about this that seems self-centered. But I think you have understood this from today’s discussion: A way of living in which one is constantly troubled by how one is seen by others is a self-centered lifestyle in which one’s sole concern is with the “I.” |
It seems to me that until I started university, I was never able to ignore my parents’ intentions. I was anxious, which was unpleasant, but the fact of the matter is that my wishes always seemed to end up overlapping with my parents’. My place of work I chose myself, however. | Now that you mention it, I haven’t heard about that yet. What kind of work do you do? |
An antonym of confidence? Uh . . . | It is doubt. Suppose you have placed “doubt” at the foundation of your interpersonal relations. That you live your life doubting other people— doubting your friends and even your family and those you love. What sort of relationship could possibly arise from that? The other person will detect the doubt in your eyes in an instant. He or she will have an instinctive understanding that “this person does not have confidence in me.” Do you think one would be able to build some kind of positive relationship from that point? It is precisely because we lay a foundation of unconditional confidence that it is possible for us to build a deep relationship. |
So when you’re hung up on winning and losing, you lose the ability to make the right choices? | Yes. It clouds your judgment, and all you can see is imminent victory or defeat. Then you turn down the wrong path. It’s only when we take away the lenses of competition and winning and losing that we can begin to correct and change ourselves. Overcoming the Tasks That Face You in Life |
Effective communication tools other than anger . . . | We have language. We can communicate through language. Believe in the power of language and the language of logic. |
It’s perfectly fine to have winners and losers! | Give some thought to it, then, if it were you, specifically, who had a consciousness of being in competition with the people around you. In your relations with them, you would have no choice but to be conscious of victory or defeat. Mr. A got into this famous university, Mr. B found work at that big company, and Mr. C has hooked up with such a nice-looking woman—and you’ll compare yourself to them and think, This is all I’ve got. |
So you’re saying that one praises in order to manipulate? | That’s right. Whether we praise or rebuke others, the only difference is one of the carrot or the stick, and the background goal is manipulation. The reason Adlerian psychology is highly critical of reward-and-punishment education is that its intention is to manipulate children. |
A series of moments? | Yes. It is a series of moments called “now.” We can live only in the here and now. Our lives exist only in moments. Adults who do not know this attempt to impose “linear” lives onto young people. Their thinking is that staying on the conventional tracks—good university, big company, stable household—is a happy life. But life is not made up of lines or anything like that. |
Bragging about one’s own misfortune? | The person who assumes a boasting manner when talking about his upbringing and the like, the various misfortunes that have rained down upon him. If someone should try to comfort this person, or suggest some change be made, he’ll refuse the helping hand by saying, “You don’t understand how I feel.” |
Pushing oneself up from below? | A stone is powerless. Once it has begun to roll downhill, it will continue to roll until released from the natural laws of gravity and inertia. But we are not stones. We are beings who are capable of resisting inclination. We can stop our tumbling selves and climb uphill. The desire for recognition is probably a natural desire. So are you going to keep rolling downhill in order to receive recognition from others? Are you going to wear yourself down like a rolling stone, until everything is smoothed away? When all that is left is a little round ball, would that be “the real I”? It cannot be. |
An excuse not to change? | Yes. I have a young friend who dreams of becoming a novelist, but he never seems to be able to complete his work. According to him, his job keeps him too busy, and he can never find enough time to write novels, and that’s why he can’t complete work and enter it for writing awards. But is that the real reason? No! It’s actually that he wants to leave the possibility of “I can do it if I try” open, by not committing to anything. He doesn’t want to expose his work to criticism, and he certainly doesn’t want to face the reality that he might produce an inferior piece of writing and face rejection. He wants to live inside that realm of possibilities, where he can say that he could do it if he only had the time, or that he could write if he just had the proper environment, and that he really does have the talent for it. In another five or ten years, he will probably start using other excuses like “I’m not young anymore” or “I’ve got a family to think about now.” |
That’s true. | Adler is saying that the pursuit of superiority and the feeling of inferiority are not diseases but stimulants to normal, healthy striving and growth. If it is not used in the wrong way, the feeling of inferiority, too, can promote striving and growth. |
. . . | Am I wrong? |
I just cannot agree with that. | When receiving praise becomes one’s goal, one is choosing a way of living that is in line with another person’s system of values. Looking at your life until now, aren’t you tired of trying to live up to your parents’ expectations? |
Indeed. | Then, when those expectations are not satisfied, they become deeply disillusioned and feel as if they have been horribly insulted. And they become resentful, and think, That person didn’t do anything for me. That person let me down. That person isn’t my comrade anymore. He’s my enemy. People who hold the belief that they are the center of the world always end up losing their comrades before long. |
Ah. That is a hotly debated issue. | Why? |
I hope you will not mind if, at some point, I visit you here again. Yes, as an irreplaceable friend. And I won’t be saying anything more about taking apart your arguments. | Ha-ha! At last, you have shown me a young person’s smile. Well, it’s quite late already. Let’s pass our own nights, and greet the new morning. The young man slowly tied his shoelaces and left the philosopher’s house. On opening the door, he found a snowy scene spread out before him. The full moon, its floating form obscured, illuminated the shimmering whiteness at his feet. What clear air. What dazzling light. I am going to tread on this fresh snow, and take my first step. The young man drew a deep breath, rubbed the slight stubble on his face, and murmured emphatically, “The world is simple, and life is too.” Afterword In life, there are encounters in which a book one happens to pick up one day ends up completely altering one’s landscape the following morning. It was the winter of 1999, and I was a youth in my twenties, when I had the great fortune of encountering such a book at a bookshop in Ikebukuro. This was Ichiro Kishimi’s Adorā Shinrigaku Nyūmon (Introduction to Adlerian Psychology). Here was a form of thought, profound in every way, yet conveyed in simple language, that seemed to overturn our accepted wisdoms at their very roots. A Copernican revolution that denied trauma and converted etiology into teleology. Having always felt something unconvincing in the discourses of the Freudians and Jungians, I was affected very deeply. Who was this Alfred Adler? How had I never known of his existence before? I purchased every single book by or about Adler that I could get my hands on and became completely engrossed and read them over and over again. But I was struck then by a certain fact. What I was interested in was not solely Adlerian psychology but rather something that had emerged through the filter of the philosopher, Ichiro Kishimi: It was Kishimi-Adler studies that I was seeking. Grounded in the thought of Socrates and Plato and other ancient Greek philosophers, the Adlerian psychology that Kishimi conveys to us reveals Adler as a thinker, a philosopher, whose work went far beyond the confines of clinical psychology. For instance, the statement “It is only in social contexts that a person becomes an individual” is positively Hegelian; in his laying emphasis on subjective interpretation over objective truth, he echoes Nietzsche’s worldview; and ideas recalling the phenomenology of Husserl and Heidegger are in abundance. Adlerian psychology, which draws inspiration from these philosophical insights to proclaim “All problems are interpersonal relationship problems,” “People can change and be happy from this moment onward,” and “The problem is not one of ability, but of courage” was to utterly change the worldview of this rather confused youth. Nevertheless, there was almost no one around me who had heard of Adlerian psychology. Eventually, it occurred to me that I would like to make a book some day with Kishimi that would be a definitive edition of Adlerian psychology (Kishimi- Adler studies), and I contacted one editor after another and waited impatiently for the opportunity to arise. It was in March 2010 that I was at last able to meet with Kishimi, who lives in Kyoto. More than ten years had passed since my first reading of Introduction to Adlerian Psychology. When Kishimi said to me then, “Socrates’s thought was conveyed by Plato. I would like to be a Plato for Adler,” without a second thought, I answered, “Then, I will be a Plato for you, Mr. Kishimi.” And that is how this book was conceived. One aspect of Adler’s simple and universal ideas is that there are times when he may seem to be stating the obvious, while at others he is likely to be regarded as espousing utterly unrealizable, idealistic theories. Accordingly, in this book, in hopes of focusing on any doubts that might be harbored by the reader, I have adopted the format of a dialogue between a philosopher and a young man. As is implied in this narrative, it is not a simple thing to make the ideas of Adler one’s own and put them into practice. There are points that make one want to rebel, statements that are difficult to accept, and proposals that one may struggle to grasp. But the ideas of Adler have the power to completely change a person’s life, just like they did for me over a decade ago. Then it is only a question of having the courage to take a step forward. In closing, I would like to express my deep gratitude to Ichiro Kishimi, who never treated me as a disciple, even though I was much younger than he, but met me forthrightly as a friend; to the editor Yoshifumi Kakiuchi, for his steadfast and unstinting support at every step of the way; and last but not least, to all the readers of this book. Thank you very much. Fumitake Koga More than half a century has passed since the death of Adler, and the times still cannot catch up with the freshness of his ideas. Though compared to Freud or Jung, the name Adler is little known in Japan today. Adler’s teachings are said to be a “communal quarry” that anyone can excavate something from. And though his name often goes unmentioned, the influence of his teachings has spread far and wide. I had been studying philosophy ever since my late teens, and it was around the time my child was born, when I was in my early thirties, that I first encountered Adlerian psychology. Eudaimonic theory, which investigates the question “What is happiness?,” is one of the central themes of Western philosophy. I had spent many years pondering this question before I attended the lecture where I first learned of Adlerian psychology. On hearing the lecturer declare from his podium, “Those who have listened to my talk today will be able to change and be happy from this moment onward,” I felt repulsed. But at the same time, it dawned on me that I had never thought deeply about how I myself can find happiness, and with the notion that “finding happiness” itself was perhaps easier than I’d imagined, I took an interest in Adlerian psychology. In this way, I came to study Adlerian psychology side by side with philosophy. I soon realized, however, that I could not study them separately, as two distinct fields. For instance, the idea of teleology, far from being something that appeared suddenly in Adler’s time, is present in the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle. It became clear to me that Adlerian psychology was a way of thinking that lay in the same vein as Greek philosophy. Moreover, I noticed that the dialogues that Socrates engaged in with youths, which Plato recording in writing for posterity, could be said to correspond very closely to the counseling practiced today. Though many people think of philosophy as something difficult to understand, Plato’s dialogues do not contain any specialized language. It is strange that philosophy should be something that is discussed using words understood only by specialists. Because in its original meaning, philosophy refers not to “wisdom” itself but to “love of wisdom,” and it is the very process of learning what one does not know and arriving at wisdom that is important. Whether or not one attains wisdom in the end is not an issue. A person reading Plato’s dialogues today may be surprised to find that the dialogue concerning courage, for instance, ends without arriving at any conclusion. The youths engaged in dialogues with Socrates never agree with what he says at the outset. They refute his statements thoroughly. This book is continuing in the tradition of philosophy since Socrates, and that is why it follows the format of a dialogue between a philosopher and a youth. Upon learning of Adlerian psychology, which is another philosophy, I became dissatisfied with the way of living of the researcher who only reads and interprets the writings of his predecessors. I wanted to engage in dialogues in the way that Socrates did, and eventually I began to practice counseling at psychiatry clinics and other venues. In doing so, I met many youths. All of these youths wanted to live sincerely, but many of them were people who had been told by worldly, jaded elders to “be more realistic” and were on the verge of giving up on their dreams, people who had been through arduous experiences of being entangled in interpersonal relationships that were complicated precisely because they were pure. Wanting to live sincerely is an important thing, but it is not enough on its own. Adler tells us that all problems are interpersonal relationship problems. But if one does not know how to build good interpersonal relationships, one may end up trying to satisfy other people’s expectations. And unable to communicate out of fear of hurting other people even when one has something to assert, one may end up abandoning what one really wants to do. While people may certainly be popular among those they know, and not many people will dislike them perhaps, they will end up being incapable of living their own lives. To a young person like the youth in this book, who has many problems and has already had a harsh awakening to reality, the views put forward by this philosopher, that this world is a simple place and that anyone can be happy from this day onward, may come as a surprise. “My psychology is for all people,” says Adler, and dispensing with specialized language much as Plato did, he shows us specific steps for improving our interpersonal relationships. If Adler’s way of thinking is hard to accept, it is because it is a compilation of antitheses to normal social thinking, and because to understand it one must put it into practice in everyday life. Though his words are not difficult, there may be a sense of difficulty like that of imagining the blazing heat of summer in the dead of winter, but I hope that readers will be able to grasp keys here to solving their interpersonal relationship problems. The day Fumitake Koga, my collaborator and writer for this book, first visited my study, he said, “I will be a Plato for you, Mr. Kishimi.” Today the reason we can learn about the philosophy of Socrates, who left no known writings, is that Plato took down his dialogues in written form. But Plato did not simply record what Socrates said. It is thanks to Plato’s correct understanding of his words that Socrates’s teachings are still conveyed today. It is thanks to the exceptional powers of understanding of Koga, who persisted in carrying out repeated dialogues with me over a period of several years, that this book has seen the light of day. Both Koga and I often made visits to our teachers in our university days, and the youth in this book could be either one of us, but more than anyone, he is you, who picked up this book. It is my sincere hope that while your doubts may linger, I will be able to support your resolution in all manner of life situations through this dialogue with a philosopher. Ichiro Kishimi The Courage to Be Disliked by Ichiro Kishimi and Fumitake Koga This reading group guide for The Courage to Be Disliked includes an introduction, discussion questions, and ideas for enhancing your book club. The suggested questions are intended to help your reading group find new and interesting angles and topics for your discussion. We hope that these ideas will enrich your conversation and increase your enjoyment of the book. Introduction The Courage to Be Disliked follows a conversation between a young man and a philosopher as they discuss the tenets of Alfred Adler’s theories. Alder, a lesser-known twentieth-century psychologist whose work stands up to Freud and Jung, believes in a liberating approach to happiness in which each human being has the power and potential to live a happy and fulfilled life without worry about the past or future. Their dialogue spans five nights, and the reader is invited to journey alongside the youth as he grapples with, fights against, and is ultimately moved by the profundity of Alder’s wisdom. Topics & Questions for Discussion The First Night: Deny Trauma 1. Like the youth, do you feel determined from the outset to reject the philosopher’s theories? Why might that be? 2. “Everyone wishes they could change,” the youth says. Do you agree? If you could change one thing about yourself, what would it be and why? 3. What “equipment” do you possess? Assess how successfully, on a scale from 1– 10, you are using your equipment to bring happiness to your life in this moment? The Second Night: All Problems Are Interpersonal Relationship Problems 4. Do you find it comforting to hear that it is “basically impossible to not get hurt in your relations with other people”? Why or why not? 5. Describe a time when your own feeling of inferiority acted as a kind of launchpad to change or move forward in your life. 6. Do you agree that love is the most difficult life-task? Why do you think so? The Third Night: Discard Other People’s 7. Answer the philosopher’s question: why does one want to be praised by others? (page 116) 8. The philosopher offers the following definition of freedom: “Freedom is being disliked by other people.” How would you define freedom? 9. Do you have the courage to be disliked? Or do you know anyone in your life who seems to? If so, do their relationships or yours seem “things of lightness” as the philosopher suggests? The Fourth Night: Where the Center of the World Is 10. From where in your life do you derive a sense of community feeling? 11. Is your life worth living because you are of use to someone? Consider how we manifest this worth—think of the jobs we take, the places we chose to live, or the experiences we accept or decline. 12. The philosopher offers the youth the same advice Adler offered once: “someone has to start.” That is, to create a meaningful life, a sense of community, it must begin with you regardless of what others around you are doing. How practical do you find this advice? What are concrete ways you might begin to “start”? The Fourth Night: Where the Center of the World Is 13. Were you surprised, comforted, and/or fascinated to read that “there is no such thing as a 100 percent person”? How can you actively acknowledge this fact to yourself, as the philosopher suggests? 14. Labor is one way we come to feel useful and worthwhile, and therefore happy. What aspects of your work give you a sense of fulfillment? Do some aspects of your labor detract from your happiness? 15. Share how you plan to cast a spotlight on the here and now. What sort of action plan can you make to focus on living in the present moment? Enhance Your Book Club 1. The Courage to be Disliked is a book that instructs readers how to have the courage to live a happy, authentic life. All of the advice of the philosopher hinges on retraining your mind to accept yourself as you are, and in turn to accept others as they are. In order to help declutter your mind, spend some time in meditation with your book club. Turn the lights down and sit in a circle. Together, practice relaxation techniques, including breathing in deeply through your nose and out through your mouth. Visualize your entire body filling with air and then emptying out completely. In the background, play some relaxing music or ocean sounds. Feel yourself relax and prepare to discuss the concepts you find most challenging in the book. 2. The structure of The Courage to be Disliked is inspired by Socratic dialogue, a literary genre derived from Plato’s dialogues in which Socrates is a main character who, through conversation, seeks to answer questions on the meaning of life. Participate in your own version of this ancient quest for discovering truth. Have your book club perform a Socratic circle. Come up with a list of a few questions you’d like to discuss and prepare responses individually. Once your group meets, form an inner circle and an outer circle. The inner circle will do the discussing, while the outer circle will watch, listen, and take notes. Over lunch, discuss how the circle felt different from your regular book club meeting. Did the tone of the conversation change? Rules for a Socratic circle can be found here: http://www.corndancer.com/tunes/tunes_print/soccirc.pdf 3. Go on a nature walk with your book club. Notice everything around you using your five senses—what do you hear? Smell? See? Taste? How do you feel in this moment? Are you happy? Collect as much “data” on your walk as possible, feeling the ground underneath you, the air around you, the sky overhead. In essence, “shine a spotlight on the here and now . . . earnestly and conscientiously.” Once the walk is complete, reconvene with your book club and exchange notes about the experience. What was it like to live in the moment? Was it a new experience for you, or something you try often? Were you successful at shutting out the past and/or future? Why or why not? About the Authors ICHIRO KISHIMI was born in Kyoto, where he currently resides. He writes and lectures on Adlerian psychology and provides counseling for youths in psychiatric clinics as a certified counselor and consultant for the Japanese Society of Adlerian Psychology. He is the translator, into Japanese, of selected writings by Alfred Adler— The Science of Living and Problems of Neurosis—and he is the author of Introduction to Adlerian Psychology, in addition to numerous other books. FUMITAKE KOGA is an award-winning professional writer and author. He has released numerous bestselling works of business-related and general nonfiction. He encountered Adlerian psychology in his late twenties and was deeply affected by its conventional wisdom—defying ideas. Thereafter, Koga made numerous visits to Ichiro Kishimi in Kyoto, gleaned from him the essence of Adlerian psychology, and took down the notes for the classical “dialogue format” method of Greek philosophy that is used in this book. MEET THE AUTHORS, WATCH VIDEOS AND MORE AT SimonandSchuster.com Authors.SimonandSchuster.com/Ichiro-Kishimi Authors.SimonandSchuster.com/Fumitake-Koga Facebook.com/AtriaBooks @AtriaBooks @AtriaBooks We hope you enjoyed reading this Simon & Schuster ebook. Get a FREE ebook when you join our mailing list. Plus, get updates on new releases, deals, recommended reads, and more from Simon & Schuster. Click below to sign up and see terms and conditions. CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP Already a subscriber? Provide your email again so we can register this ebook and send you more of what you like to read. You will continue to receive exclusive offers in your inbox. An Imprint of Simon & Schuster, Inc. 1230 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 www.SimonandSchuster.com Copyright © 2013 by Ichiro Kishimi and Fumitake Koga English translation copyright © 2017 by Ichiro Kishimi and Fumitake Koga First published in Japan as Kirawareru Yuki by Diamond Inc., Tokyo in 2013 All rights reserved, including the right to reproduce this book or portions thereof in any form whatsoever. For information, address Atria Books Subsidiary Rights Department, 1230 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10020. First Atria Books hardcover edition May 2018 and colophon are trademarks of Simon & Schuster, Inc. For information about special discounts for bulk purchases, please contact Simon & Schuster Special Sales at 1- 866-506-1949 or business@simonandschuster.com. The Simon & Schuster Speakers Bureau can bring authors to your live event. For more information or to book an event, contact the Simon & Schuster Speakers Bureau at 1-866-248-3049 or visit our website at www.simonspeakers.com. Interior design by Jason Snyder Jacket design by Albert Tang Jacket art © Elinacious/Depositphotos Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Kishimi, Ichiro, 1956- author. | Koga, Fumitake, 1973- author. Title: The courage to be disliked : the Japanese phenomenon that shows you how to change your life and achieve real happiness / Ichiro Kishimi, Fumitake Koga. Other titles: Kirawareru Yuki. English Description: New York : Atria Books, 2018. Identifiers: LCCN 2018002432 (print) | LCCN 2018009555 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Adler, Alfred, 1870-1937. | Self-actualization (Psychology) | Adlerian psychology. | Conduct of life. | Thought and thinking. | BISAC: SELF-HELP / Personal Growth / Happiness. | SELF-HELP / Motivational & Inspirational. | PHILOSOPHY / Free Will & Determinism. Classification: LCC BF637.S4 (ebook) | LCC BF637.S4 K553513 2018 (print) | DDC 158—dc23 Classification: LCC BF637.S4 (ebook) | LCC BF637.S4 K553513 2018 (print) | DDC 158—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018002432 ISBN 978-1-5011-9727-7 ISBN 978-1-5011-9729-1 (ebook) This English edition published by arrangement with Diamond, Inc. c/o Tuttle-Mori Agency, Inc., Tokyo through Chandler Crawford Agency, Massachusetts, USA. |
Are you free, now? | Yes. I am free. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.