I started carrying around a photo of myself as a kid. I'm sitting against a wall, by a pillar, at our state capital. My eyes are shut. I was kind of a shy kid.
When I start to get frustrated and talk to myself in that short, abrasive, condescending tone, I think of that photo and of myself, as still that kid.
It helps me to be more compassionate towards myself in those moments. I'm still that shy kid trying to make sense of the world.
I just realised, from writing a comment below in the thread, that at 47 (which roughly approximates my age as well) that the internal talk is increasingly provably false.
the voice is a shock jock, click bait. All headline, no research, no lede.
I'm reminded of that scene from A Beautiful Mind where someone asks him if he still has his hallucinations. He looks over and sees the fake people still there, and says "Oh no, they're not gone. Maybe they'll never be." And they still would drag him into things again, but he has learned to ignore them and not get pulled in.
So it is with internal demons sometimes, I find. You learn to recognize them, rather than expunge them.
Sometimes they help recognize what's important. Upon identifying them, I get angry my brain is talking to me that way, and find the will to get shit done.
It's kind of incredible how the sub-concious finds ways to help you out sometimes. It sucks one needs to first learn how much it likes to use dirty tactics though.
True. Rubber ducks for self-debugging are uh mostly overrated. A trained therapist--- sometimes free-of-charge-- works for most
issues where some would rubber duck
That you can prove the inner voice false does not help in the least. It does not listen to reason, and it does not shut up. It needs to be addressed from a completely different angle.
It's easier to be fond and/or tolerant of someone if you can occasionally get a breather from them. You go easy (or easier) on your significant other, family, friends etc because -- at least occasionally -- you can keep some distance.
Try keeping distance from yourself. :/ The self is always there, it never relents; its mistakes and weaknesses ever present, recurrent. It's less easy to accept and/or forgive when you can't forget.
In fact what you are doing with that photo -- which is a practice I completely support and agree with BTW -- is precisely that: distancing yourself from yourself, taking a look "in" from the outside. It's easier to find compassion like that, for both your child and current selves.
Skilled essay, but not an argument. Opens with "As Jung notes" as an appeal to authority, then more name-drops.
Misses clear definitions (what counts as "friendship with self"?) and the mechanism (how X->Y). Anecdotes/quotes != proofs.
IOW, prestige != proof. Two quick checks 1) strip the names - does the reasoning still stand? 2) Flip to counterexamples - does the thesis survive? We all know people who are hard on themselves but deeply loving to others.
Nice essay but treat it as a opinion to test, not a truth to inherit. The thread reads as if the case were already proven.
Introspection and self awareness are prerequisites to love yourself. Or, at least, to become someone you can love.
Loving yourself means you have acknowledged your weaknesses. Whether or not you strengthen them, it enables you to empathize with others as their own weaknesses manifest.
The world becomes much more cozy once you realize others are not much different than you.
I'll be honest, I can't say that awareness of my weaknesses has in any way made it easier to love myself. If anything, the constant gnawing awareness of the many qualities I lack makes it harder.
Knowing yourself to know, and forgive / accept, who and what you are.
Allows you to appreciate the perceptiveness of others when they're correct.
Also, if you do not know yourself (and especially if you cannot forgive yourself) you're going to struggle to deal with your own children.
My kids reflect me back at myself in what were frustrating ways, until I realised it was me and my influence, and it became massively endearing.
Although I may be too forgiving of myself (but in amongst that I do still have 'the voices of discontent' but the longer I live the more their sentiment is proven wrong).
As someone who's had to do extensive work on myself to survive I can relate to a lot of things said here. I have gone through a lot of material on psychology and spend a lot of time thinking myself when I read or go through the material. This was after 3 years of medication and 20 years of suffering and reaching the point of wanting badly to end my life due to multiple factors growing up.
What I would suggest if you wanted to start working on yourself building healthier relationships with yourself and others:
First is find a suitable therapist. Shop for a therapist like you shop for clothes. Do a session or two and see what you feel. What you need depends on what you are going through. Depression panic anxiety marriage health etc. But don't continue therapy where you don't feel good. There wont be a perfect fit but 'good enough' is someone you can talk to and is compassionate and helps you to do well. They will also assign small homework and that is important. The right therapist will be on your team and slowly nudge you in the right direction (though with your knowledge not sneakily). This builds trust.
Second would be start working on your body. Your body is just as important as your mind. And the two are very interlinked. Yoga, Mindfulness, being more present (ditch your phones and social media accounts), exercise, food, etc. all contribute to your mental wellbeing which will help you create a good relationship with yourself. Once you give the body the love it needs, it will give it back to you.
Third would be to do some reading on mental health and books by psychologists. The thing is you will get lot of insights on your own life reading all that. But be careful too, it might bring up intense memories (like trauma) that can be dangerous. So go slow. Peter Levine, Gabor Mate, Bessel van Der Kolk, Gottman, Richard Shwartz, David Burns, beane Browne etc. Such authors are actively doing work on the cognitive side of things. Some have extreme theories so look for things that apply to you.
I will admit that I was skeptical of the whole 'change your thoughts and things will change' and to some extent I still think that it's not the whole story. But you have to do the self work and your mind is a big part of it. I am very far from building healthy relationships in my life but I think I am having a good relationship with myself lately. I may have gone a few notches down in depression and things have improved.
There is a lot more to share tbh on this but these things are something I did in the last two years that seem to have helped.
When I read su**de my brain read suicide, so you still put the word in my mind, what's your point doing that? In fact I spent more time thinking and parsing the word suicide because of the asterisks.
Communication has different registers, that is, in different situations some words words or expressions are less or more appropriate. For example formal or casual talk.
I don't have a proof, but I think 'su**de' is a more appropriate form of 'suicide' here than 'suicide', just because it is.
How? You read it the same way in your brain? Like when you read you think of the words, so they are all there in the same way, with the only added extra parsing on top (ie an extra half second spent on the word you want to avoid). If you want to be careful to avoid this, avoid the subject or use different framing that doesn't require to use the word. Censoring it in text makes zero sense for the reader for your intended purpose.
This feels like a weird combo of "I know talking about this subject will put the thought in people's minds, but I still want to talk about it and say the same thing exactly while at the same time showing that I think it's problematic". But then why do it?
You say it all with so much certainty. Why do you think your approach is better than the other commenter? (Also, certainty is a tipoff, ime, of a lack of knowledge or wisdom.)
They activate different neural pathways? Might not apply to you but it probably applies to others. At least that's what GP believes, and I find it plausible too.
That may be true for people seeing the censored for the first time. But then it just becomes a double speak theater.
Sort of like illegal vs undocumented migrants. First time you hear, it may pass in different ways. But once you realize what’s the topic, people on both sides will read both words the same way. And both in their own ways. It just becomes a kind of virtue signaling after few uses.
It’s more like putting a lipstick on a pig. You know some people will get triggered. But you say it anyway. And then pretend it’s not so bad because you put asterisk in there, so it’s totally not the same thing. Yet you’re talking about the same thing. But it’s totally not the same!!! Yeah, right.
To friendship and love of others I say, you cannot sell what you don't have.
You can do it for a while but, the long lasting stuff, you need that personal foundation.
Easily said but difficult to do for many.
It requires a level of self awareness and an acknowledgement of your strengths and weaknesses and how they impact yourself and others. But like a doctor, the first step to a cure is a correct diagnosis.
Something something Jungian shadow work or something.
That 'doing it for a while' part is one reason I don't really like the "only as well as you love yourself" truism. One can absolutely care deeply for others without caring much for themself, at least to start. But to your point, unless you can develop [/an awareness of the] strengths that you bring to a relationship, fears of being a burden, failing, or taking too much will put a steady drain on it.
I think the biggest thing that the "self-love prerequisite" idea misses and that the article sort of indirectly gets at is that this feeling of social self-efficacy is something most (all?) people learn through successful relationships with others - sometimes in our upbringing, sometimes not. I don't think it's unnatural at all for others' love of us to outpace our own just a little.
Except you can, you can be a middle layer. I'm not just nitpicking on the analogy failing at the first degree, you can love someone much more than you love yourself, and the nature of what you bring to them doesn't need to be how you deal with yourself.
People raising kids in particular are supporting a level of self abuse that flies in the face of the analogy. They also understand that they need to take care of themselves, physically and mentally, to even be there to help their kid when needed. But asking them to treat themselves like they treat their kid just doesn't work in any practical way.
Everyone tells what but not how. From years of healing I have learned that picking up random quotes or texts from internet won’t help at all. You should read or go to a professional. Anger,Sadness, Misery cannot just go away when you say you would. It takes a change in mindset, knowledge, and convincing.
If you scroll down the dilog box for this service you will find a link to "vendor preferences".
Click this, and you will find dozens of companies, with many having "legitimate interest" switched on. I find this deceptive (hiding this, essentially, and also using "legitimate interest".
If I really want to read what the site says I laboriously click no to legitimate interest, though usually I just close the page.
I feel like all the truly transformative growth, those periods when you sprint from a nobody to the cutting edge, or start from a blank sheet and build a work of genius the likes that humanity has never seen, the manic energy that drives this, it always comes from hate. A hate for the self (wanting to prove something to yourself) or a hate for others (wanting to prove something to others), (which may really be the same thing; you're trying to invalidate your self-criticism and the perceived criticism of others by proving that you're better at something than most anyone else in the world). Mentally healthy people become mailmen.
> if you finally just accept yourself for who you are (because that's basically what love means)
That's not a good definition of love. Counterexample: most parents love their children, and yet don't just accept them for who they are (at the moment), but try to change them for the better, by raising them. You can love yourself in the same way.
It's a nice reminder that the art of producing meaningless slop with way more style than substance has existed for ages, and it wasn't invented by LLMs.
I don't think it's possible to "love yourself" if you want to word it like that. Understand yourself? Maybe. Accept yourself? Sure. But love as a concept is shared.
"I love eating delicious food" is a totally sensible sentence with involves only the self and an inanimate object, and arguably only the self because it is about your own enjoyment and actions more so than the food itself.
"I love computers", etc etc.
Love is broad, it can be shared, it can be unrequited, it can be with an inanimate object or with an abstract concept. The object can certainly be the self.
I’ve always struggled with this concept too. Respect yourself. Be kind to yourself. But _loving_ youself sounds kind of narcissistic to me (but yes, I get that this is probably a question of semantics and/or my working class catholic upbringing)
> It is commonly, and truly, said that you can only love someone as well as you love yourself.
> I’ve worked with patients [...]
I wish it was clear from the start that they're looking at it through a pathological lens. The advice is worded as some generic fortune cookie wisdom, and I personally think that's a pretty big leap.
In general people should care about themselves and understand their impact on others. But that doesn't need to be "love", and the author seems aware of it, as the nitty gritty parts he describes are more varied than some single umbrella approach.
The "love yourself" meme has been used and abused for so long, I personally found it grating and inadequate for the people we wish to actually help. I'd wish we retire it.
once i learn to accept (grateful receipt of) myself (who i am, what i’ve done, what’s been done to me, what i do today) then it’s easier to accept (grateful receipt of) other people (who they are etc).
compassion is possibly apt too
> Deep awareness of the suffering of another accompanied by the wish to relieve it
> In general people should care about themselves and understand their impact on others. But that doesn't need to be "love"
I agree that anything can become overused cliche. Still, I think the parent comment is like saying, 'people need sustenance but that doesn't need to be water'. There is nothing more essential.
People need love like we need water. We are social organisms, living in groups; we are not like bears who live alone. The lack of love makes us ill and drives us to madness. We've seek, with everything we have, to love and be loved; you can see it in love between parent and child, between family, friends, and romantic partners. These things are universal to humanity - you can find them in every culture, and every culture's stories. Evolution, survival of the fittest, etc. has resulted in that.
And it starts with love of self; how could you love someone else, or be comfortable with them loving you, if you didn't think you were worth love. I've never heard of anyone who seriously studies such things say otherwise; I'd be interested in any references to such people.
> people need sustenance but that doesn't need to be water
The analogy is apt enough IMHO, so let me stretch it.
You wouldn't tell someone holding a melon they absolutely need water or they'll die. You'd tell them to eat the melon, and see if they can get more water from there. If all their hydration ends up coming from different sources than pure water, you wouldn't tell them they're screwed.
The "love yourself" sounds the same to me. There's a thousand ways people can deal with themselves. Self preservation, understanding what they bring to others, what they mean to others why they're needed can and will happen outside of what people call "love".
In particular that "advice" will be pushed toward people who can be in the worst place to reinterpret and adapt it to their needs.
> There's a thousand ways people can deal with themselves. Self preservation, understanding what they bring to others, what they mean to others why they're needed can and will happen outside of what people call "love".
But those things don't provide love, which is (also) essential. People need love even to pursue self-preservation and helping others; it's the people without love that commit s*de.
Why is it important to build a model that excludes love, which seems obvious and overwhelmingly present?
Having spent many years very close to people with shit childhoods that deal with depression and other issues, I'd say one of the biggest hurdles was indeed being able to create a positive self image of themselves.
There's some people that think "they are depressive" the same way some people think "they have a penchant for being late to things". All these negative self images just perpetuate behaviors and trains of thought that go nowhere positive.
There's a lot of regular people that hear that and think that's justification to being narcissistic selfish assholes, but that's like all advice, you should first see if it applies to you.
I see depression as specific states that requires different handling. The analogy is limited, but if you break your arm you'll heal it in different ways than if you're just tired.
For people not reaching critical states, creating a positive image of one self doesn't need to come from within. As the article points out, one can start by interacting with others, and getting enough positivity from it to also change self-perception or at least self management.
To borrow another meme, "believe in me that believes in you" effectively works as well.
I've been pretty harsh on myself over the years.
I started carrying around a photo of myself as a kid. I'm sitting against a wall, by a pillar, at our state capital. My eyes are shut. I was kind of a shy kid.
When I start to get frustrated and talk to myself in that short, abrasive, condescending tone, I think of that photo and of myself, as still that kid.
It helps me to be more compassionate towards myself in those moments. I'm still that shy kid trying to make sense of the world.
I'm 47.
I just realised, from writing a comment below in the thread, that at 47 (which roughly approximates my age as well) that the internal talk is increasingly provably false.
the voice is a shock jock, click bait. All headline, no research, no lede.
I'm reminded of that scene from A Beautiful Mind where someone asks him if he still has his hallucinations. He looks over and sees the fake people still there, and says "Oh no, they're not gone. Maybe they'll never be." And they still would drag him into things again, but he has learned to ignore them and not get pulled in.
So it is with internal demons sometimes, I find. You learn to recognize them, rather than expunge them.
Sometimes they help recognize what's important. Upon identifying them, I get angry my brain is talking to me that way, and find the will to get shit done.
It's kind of incredible how the sub-concious finds ways to help you out sometimes. It sucks one needs to first learn how much it likes to use dirty tactics though.
True. Rubber ducks for self-debugging are uh mostly overrated. A trained therapist--- sometimes free-of-charge-- works for most issues where some would rubber duck
(reminder to self)
I must agree.
That you can prove the inner voice false does not help in the least. It does not listen to reason, and it does not shut up. It needs to be addressed from a completely different angle.
A friend of mine called it their "inner critic" or "inner tribunal".
I’ve heard it referred to as the itty bitty shitty committee.
It's easier to be fond and/or tolerant of someone if you can occasionally get a breather from them. You go easy (or easier) on your significant other, family, friends etc because -- at least occasionally -- you can keep some distance.
Try keeping distance from yourself. :/ The self is always there, it never relents; its mistakes and weaknesses ever present, recurrent. It's less easy to accept and/or forgive when you can't forget.
In fact what you are doing with that photo -- which is a practice I completely support and agree with BTW -- is precisely that: distancing yourself from yourself, taking a look "in" from the outside. It's easier to find compassion like that, for both your child and current selves.
I'm also 47.
Thank you for sharing this, really interesting!
I did the same at 39 and was helpful for some major healing. It’s surprisingly common, at least in my circles, over the last few years.
Skilled essay, but not an argument. Opens with "As Jung notes" as an appeal to authority, then more name-drops.
Misses clear definitions (what counts as "friendship with self"?) and the mechanism (how X->Y). Anecdotes/quotes != proofs.
IOW, prestige != proof. Two quick checks 1) strip the names - does the reasoning still stand? 2) Flip to counterexamples - does the thesis survive? We all know people who are hard on themselves but deeply loving to others.
Nice essay but treat it as a opinion to test, not a truth to inherit. The thread reads as if the case were already proven.
it at least seems like it has a modicum of human thought, whereas this GPT drivel does not.
Introspection and self awareness are prerequisites to love yourself. Or, at least, to become someone you can love.
Loving yourself means you have acknowledged your weaknesses. Whether or not you strengthen them, it enables you to empathize with others as their own weaknesses manifest.
The world becomes much more cozy once you realize others are not much different than you.
I'll be honest, I can't say that awareness of my weaknesses has in any way made it easier to love myself. If anything, the constant gnawing awareness of the many qualities I lack makes it harder.
You’re at least further along than people who aren’t aware of their weaknesses.
Interestingly enough, once I started forgiving myself for my flaws, a significant portion of them went away.
Is this a Kierkegaardian "the only way out is through" sort of situation then?
Friending yourself means that you don't have to rely on others to enjoy jokes at your own expense!
(Edited for clarity)
Knowing yourself to know, and forgive / accept, who and what you are.
Allows you to appreciate the perceptiveness of others when they're correct.
Also, if you do not know yourself (and especially if you cannot forgive yourself) you're going to struggle to deal with your own children.
My kids reflect me back at myself in what were frustrating ways, until I realised it was me and my influence, and it became massively endearing.
Although I may be too forgiving of myself (but in amongst that I do still have 'the voices of discontent' but the longer I live the more their sentiment is proven wrong).
Kids are a great mirror
--sometimes their unforgiveness (beyond mere unforgivingness/mercilessness :) is a spur to get better..
Are some voices of discontent not simply expressing a desire to make things better for others? Those shouldn't be dismissed so readily
Warning: self harm, su**de.
As someone who's had to do extensive work on myself to survive I can relate to a lot of things said here. I have gone through a lot of material on psychology and spend a lot of time thinking myself when I read or go through the material. This was after 3 years of medication and 20 years of suffering and reaching the point of wanting badly to end my life due to multiple factors growing up.
What I would suggest if you wanted to start working on yourself building healthier relationships with yourself and others:
First is find a suitable therapist. Shop for a therapist like you shop for clothes. Do a session or two and see what you feel. What you need depends on what you are going through. Depression panic anxiety marriage health etc. But don't continue therapy where you don't feel good. There wont be a perfect fit but 'good enough' is someone you can talk to and is compassionate and helps you to do well. They will also assign small homework and that is important. The right therapist will be on your team and slowly nudge you in the right direction (though with your knowledge not sneakily). This builds trust.
Second would be start working on your body. Your body is just as important as your mind. And the two are very interlinked. Yoga, Mindfulness, being more present (ditch your phones and social media accounts), exercise, food, etc. all contribute to your mental wellbeing which will help you create a good relationship with yourself. Once you give the body the love it needs, it will give it back to you.
Third would be to do some reading on mental health and books by psychologists. The thing is you will get lot of insights on your own life reading all that. But be careful too, it might bring up intense memories (like trauma) that can be dangerous. So go slow. Peter Levine, Gabor Mate, Bessel van Der Kolk, Gottman, Richard Shwartz, David Burns, beane Browne etc. Such authors are actively doing work on the cognitive side of things. Some have extreme theories so look for things that apply to you.
I will admit that I was skeptical of the whole 'change your thoughts and things will change' and to some extent I still think that it's not the whole story. But you have to do the self work and your mind is a big part of it. I am very far from building healthy relationships in my life but I think I am having a good relationship with myself lately. I may have gone a few notches down in depression and things have improved.
There is a lot more to share tbh on this but these things are something I did in the last two years that seem to have helped.
When I read su**de my brain read suicide, so you still put the word in my mind, what's your point doing that? In fact I spent more time thinking and parsing the word suicide because of the asterisks.
Communication has different registers, that is, in different situations some words words or expressions are less or more appropriate. For example formal or casual talk.
I don't have a proof, but I think 'su**de' is a more appropriate form of 'suicide' here than 'suicide', just because it is.
Or perhaps put in a little effort and think of a euphemism or something more creative within the set of existing comprehensible english words
Damn, I read "self harm, sucks dude". Censoring may only trigger the triggerable!
Maybe a habit to avoid censorship?
Wasn't sure if it gets flagged or something. Also sometimes seeing the actual word can have a worse effect than the censored word.
How? You read it the same way in your brain? Like when you read you think of the words, so they are all there in the same way, with the only added extra parsing on top (ie an extra half second spent on the word you want to avoid). If you want to be careful to avoid this, avoid the subject or use different framing that doesn't require to use the word. Censoring it in text makes zero sense for the reader for your intended purpose.
This feels like a weird combo of "I know talking about this subject will put the thought in people's minds, but I still want to talk about it and say the same thing exactly while at the same time showing that I think it's problematic". But then why do it?
> makes zero sense
You say it all with so much certainty. Why do you think your approach is better than the other commenter? (Also, certainty is a tipoff, ime, of a lack of knowledge or wisdom.)
> How?
They activate different neural pathways? Might not apply to you but it probably applies to others. At least that's what GP believes, and I find it plausible too.
That may be true for people seeing the censored for the first time. But then it just becomes a double speak theater.
Sort of like illegal vs undocumented migrants. First time you hear, it may pass in different ways. But once you realize what’s the topic, people on both sides will read both words the same way. And both in their own ways. It just becomes a kind of virtue signaling after few uses.
It’s more like putting a lipstick on a pig. You know some people will get triggered. But you say it anyway. And then pretend it’s not so bad because you put asterisk in there, so it’s totally not the same thing. Yet you’re talking about the same thing. But it’s totally not the same!!! Yeah, right.
To friendship and love of others I say, you cannot sell what you don't have.
You can do it for a while but, the long lasting stuff, you need that personal foundation.
Easily said but difficult to do for many.
It requires a level of self awareness and an acknowledgement of your strengths and weaknesses and how they impact yourself and others. But like a doctor, the first step to a cure is a correct diagnosis.
Something something Jungian shadow work or something.
That 'doing it for a while' part is one reason I don't really like the "only as well as you love yourself" truism. One can absolutely care deeply for others without caring much for themself, at least to start. But to your point, unless you can develop [/an awareness of the] strengths that you bring to a relationship, fears of being a burden, failing, or taking too much will put a steady drain on it.
I think the biggest thing that the "self-love prerequisite" idea misses and that the article sort of indirectly gets at is that this feeling of social self-efficacy is something most (all?) people learn through successful relationships with others - sometimes in our upbringing, sometimes not. I don't think it's unnatural at all for others' love of us to outpace our own just a little.
> you cannot sell what you don't have.
Except you can, you can be a middle layer. I'm not just nitpicking on the analogy failing at the first degree, you can love someone much more than you love yourself, and the nature of what you bring to them doesn't need to be how you deal with yourself.
People raising kids in particular are supporting a level of self abuse that flies in the face of the analogy. They also understand that they need to take care of themselves, physically and mentally, to even be there to help their kid when needed. But asking them to treat themselves like they treat their kid just doesn't work in any practical way.
> To friendship and love of others I say, you cannot sell what you don't have.
I love this formulation and will add it to my collection of aphorisms. I myself like a similar phrasing: one cannot pour from an empty cup.
Everyone tells what but not how. From years of healing I have learned that picking up random quotes or texts from internet won’t help at all. You should read or go to a professional. Anger,Sadness, Misery cannot just go away when you say you would. It takes a change in mindset, knowledge, and convincing.
Did you notice the cookie service this site (and many others) use?
This service can have cookies switched off, though "legitimate interest" is left on.
"Legitimate interest" sounds innocent, yet it is not.
https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/uk-gdpr-guidance-and-re...
If you scroll down the dilog box for this service you will find a link to "vendor preferences".
Click this, and you will find dozens of companies, with many having "legitimate interest" switched on. I find this deceptive (hiding this, essentially, and also using "legitimate interest".
If I really want to read what the site says I laboriously click no to legitimate interest, though usually I just close the page.
The problem is this: if you finally just accept yourself for who you are (because that's basically what love means), do you then stop growing?
I don’t think so.
You can accept yourself and be content/happy and still want to learn new skills, try new hobbies, and grow.
I feel like all the truly transformative growth, those periods when you sprint from a nobody to the cutting edge, or start from a blank sheet and build a work of genius the likes that humanity has never seen, the manic energy that drives this, it always comes from hate. A hate for the self (wanting to prove something to yourself) or a hate for others (wanting to prove something to others), (which may really be the same thing; you're trying to invalidate your self-criticism and the perceived criticism of others by proving that you're better at something than most anyone else in the world). Mentally healthy people become mailmen.
1000% correct. the second you look in the mirror and you're happy with what you see, baby, you just lost the battle.
What you describe as "hate" can work much more efficient when coming from a somewhat loving competitiveness, I think.
I don’t think so.
You still grow but in the direction and with the motivation you decided.
> if you finally just accept yourself for who you are (because that's basically what love means)
That's not a good definition of love. Counterexample: most parents love their children, and yet don't just accept them for who they are (at the moment), but try to change them for the better, by raising them. You can love yourself in the same way.
Very good read. Took me almost 40 years to understand this. Better late than never !
It's a nice reminder that the art of producing meaningless slop with way more style than substance has existed for ages, and it wasn't invented by LLMs.
I don't think it's possible to "love yourself" if you want to word it like that. Understand yourself? Maybe. Accept yourself? Sure. But love as a concept is shared.
Love is a reasonably broad english word.
"I love eating delicious food" is a totally sensible sentence with involves only the self and an inanimate object, and arguably only the self because it is about your own enjoyment and actions more so than the food itself.
"I love computers", etc etc.
Love is broad, it can be shared, it can be unrequited, it can be with an inanimate object or with an abstract concept. The object can certainly be the self.
I’ve always struggled with this concept too. Respect yourself. Be kind to yourself. But _loving_ youself sounds kind of narcissistic to me (but yes, I get that this is probably a question of semantics and/or my working class catholic upbringing)
On the core of the piece
> It is commonly, and truly, said that you can only love someone as well as you love yourself.
> I’ve worked with patients [...]
I wish it was clear from the start that they're looking at it through a pathological lens. The advice is worded as some generic fortune cookie wisdom, and I personally think that's a pretty big leap.
In general people should care about themselves and understand their impact on others. But that doesn't need to be "love", and the author seems aware of it, as the nitty gritty parts he describes are more varied than some single umbrella approach.
The "love yourself" meme has been used and abused for so long, I personally found it grating and inadequate for the people we wish to actually help. I'd wish we retire it.
i prefer self-acceptance.
once i learn to accept (grateful receipt of) myself (who i am, what i’ve done, what’s been done to me, what i do today) then it’s easier to accept (grateful receipt of) other people (who they are etc).
compassion is possibly apt too
> Deep awareness of the suffering of another accompanied by the wish to relieve it
> In general people should care about themselves and understand their impact on others. But that doesn't need to be "love"
I agree that anything can become overused cliche. Still, I think the parent comment is like saying, 'people need sustenance but that doesn't need to be water'. There is nothing more essential.
People need love like we need water. We are social organisms, living in groups; we are not like bears who live alone. The lack of love makes us ill and drives us to madness. We've seek, with everything we have, to love and be loved; you can see it in love between parent and child, between family, friends, and romantic partners. These things are universal to humanity - you can find them in every culture, and every culture's stories. Evolution, survival of the fittest, etc. has resulted in that.
And it starts with love of self; how could you love someone else, or be comfortable with them loving you, if you didn't think you were worth love. I've never heard of anyone who seriously studies such things say otherwise; I'd be interested in any references to such people.
> people need sustenance but that doesn't need to be water
The analogy is apt enough IMHO, so let me stretch it.
You wouldn't tell someone holding a melon they absolutely need water or they'll die. You'd tell them to eat the melon, and see if they can get more water from there. If all their hydration ends up coming from different sources than pure water, you wouldn't tell them they're screwed.
The "love yourself" sounds the same to me. There's a thousand ways people can deal with themselves. Self preservation, understanding what they bring to others, what they mean to others why they're needed can and will happen outside of what people call "love".
In particular that "advice" will be pushed toward people who can be in the worst place to reinterpret and adapt it to their needs.
> There's a thousand ways people can deal with themselves. Self preservation, understanding what they bring to others, what they mean to others why they're needed can and will happen outside of what people call "love".
But those things don't provide love, which is (also) essential. People need love even to pursue self-preservation and helping others; it's the people without love that commit s*de.
Why is it important to build a model that excludes love, which seems obvious and overwhelmingly present?
I think the focus on love blurs the message, while ironically putting the bar a lot higher depending on what the person perceives as love.
To put it a bit bluntly, there's a laziness in wording it that way that IMHO comes with a real cost.
Having spent many years very close to people with shit childhoods that deal with depression and other issues, I'd say one of the biggest hurdles was indeed being able to create a positive self image of themselves.
There's some people that think "they are depressive" the same way some people think "they have a penchant for being late to things". All these negative self images just perpetuate behaviors and trains of thought that go nowhere positive.
There's a lot of regular people that hear that and think that's justification to being narcissistic selfish assholes, but that's like all advice, you should first see if it applies to you.
> depression
I see depression as specific states that requires different handling. The analogy is limited, but if you break your arm you'll heal it in different ways than if you're just tired.
For people not reaching critical states, creating a positive image of one self doesn't need to come from within. As the article points out, one can start by interacting with others, and getting enough positivity from it to also change self-perception or at least self management.
To borrow another meme, "believe in me that believes in you" effectively works as well.