9 November 2024
The next steps, in understanding self-regard, concern understanding the term, self-regard, and unpacking Seligman’s statement that “Serving something larger than self fosters purpose and perspective.”
What happens if we invert the terms of Seligman’s statement thus: Serving purpose and perspective enlarges self? That reframing puts the emphasis back where it belongs: within each individual. That reframing also drops the phrase, something larger than self. Maybe I’ve heard too many sermons, in which self is grossly minimized in favour of serving G-d or Jesus. If the goal of a healthy human is to live a well-spirited life, that well-managed spirit is her own. She has only one spirit though I am equally eager to state that that one spirit is hugely enriched through meaningful human connection—and equally impoverished in the absence of such connection.
But, the meaningfulness of each of those connections must ultimately be ranked by each individual soul—that’s freedom of thought moving toward freedom of association. That ranking is predicated on that soul’s values. That soul’s values are determined by her genetic and external attributes and how those attributes interact with the environments to which she is exposed. As before, we brush up against Heraclitus’ river. Each exposure, each interaction, and each new day brings change to that soul and to her environments. There is no point—in life—at which a soul is congealed or finally set in its ultimate configuration. So long as that person draws breath, her soul is in flux within a given (but almost infinitely variable) pattern of genetic and external traits. By my standards, as someone who works with human lives, one at a time, there are few things on Earth more important than this.
And here’s my point: There are few endeavours, more noble, or more difficult, than Aristotle’s call to maximize your individual potential. To approach significant or substantial actualization is our highest calling i.e., if taken in earnest, to serve others well, first requires serving self well. If you serve self faithfully, and with eudaimonic discipline, you cannot help but improve the lives of those with whom you come in contact. The reason I believe this to be true is that the more highly actualized a soul, the less controlling is that person. Free souls don’t seek to control others, they actually try, often with admirable subtly, to help others reach their own destinations. Inadvertently, this also speaks to the importance of good self-regard.
We will not re-engage with the definition of self as that was done in the first 30 pages, in earlier blogs. We will look at the roots of regard. My dictionary contains a lengthy definition, which has been edited down to what follows:
regard v. —tr. 1. To look at attentively; observe closely. 2. To look upon or consider in a particular way…5. To consider or take into account. 6. Obsolete. To take care of… [Middle English regarden, from Old French regarder, reguarder, to look at, regard : re- back, back at + guarder, garder, to GUARD.] (Morris, 1975, p. 1,095)
As such, to have or to practice self-regard is to observe self closely, to take self into account, and clearly, in its origins, to guard, to take care of self. As regard was being researched, Socrate’s prescriptive warning came to mind: Know thyself. How, other than through scrupulously objective self-regard are we to know ourselves? There are no other means. And that is maybe why our society has shunned such practices as vain, conceited, and G-d forbid, selfish!, concerned with self.
This book began with a quote that now becomes entirely apposite:
The hope of a secure and livable world lies in the disciplined and dedicated nonconformists, set not on the preservation of any status quo, but set on building, with God’s help, an order of justice peace and brotherhood. The world has always moved forward on the feet of its nonconformists. It was the nonconformists who stood forthrightly against slavery. It was a nonconformist like Socrates who, having drank the hemlock paved the way for academic freedom. It was the nonconformists who fought for popular education and the freedom of scientific research. It was the nonconformists that fought for religious liberty. In any cause that concerns the progress of mankind put your faith in the nonconformist.
—Martin Luther King, Jr., civil-rights leader (15 Jan 1929-1968) Draft of Chapter II, “Transformed Nonconformist”
And like Socrates, we killed Martin Luther King, Jr. Which goes to the heart of the danger we are now discussing. The reason for both deaths, per T.S. Eliot, is that mankind cannot bear too much reality. Truth, or too much reality, makes humans uncomfortable with self and that is a fundamental discomfort that cannot be borne long. It pushes us in one of two directions: reject and resent the person(s) making you aware of this or change self through some scrupulous objective self-regard.
While G-d was discussed above, it is the only part of Dr. King’s prescription that I cannot follow. But…in the place of G-d, I put eudaimonia (well-spiritedness), faith in Earth, and reverence for well-actualized life and the extraordinary positive artefacts of human life. To conclude this argument, we’ll return to Seligman’s terms with the following restatement: Enlarging self i.e, actualizing self, intensifies purpose and enlarges perspective.
Thank you for thinking and acting. More next week. Be well.
Summary
Sources Referenced:
Morris, W. (Ed.) (1975). The Heritage illustrated dictionary of the English language. American Heritage Publishing Co, Inc.
Madeson, M. (2017). Seligman’s PERMA+ Model Explained: A Theory of Wellbeing. https://positivepsychology.com/perma-model/
King, M. L. Jr. (1962-1963) Draft of Chapter II, “Transformed Nonconformist.” Stanford University. https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/draft-chapter-ii-transformednonconformist#:~:text=%E2%80%9CBe%20ye%20transformed%20by%20the,he%20makes%20us%20new%20creatures.
Comments