Living in Authenticity
Who am I?
An ancient philosophical question that is nearly impossible to answer in any remotely satisfying manner. Yet by earnestly posing it we can step through the self-made mirrors reflecting just our surface selves, coming closer to experiencing this “I” process more authentically. Thus we gain the freedom to involve ourselves more in our becoming during what presents itself as an ever-present now.
The renowned psychiatrist Carl Jung coined the term individuation as the development of the psychological individual as a being distinct from the general, collective psychology. It is the path one follows in becoming aware of oneself, in discovering one’s true, whole, inner self.
“The privilege of a lifetime is to become who you truly are.” — C.G. Jung
The first step in this quest to selfhood consists in becoming more than the persona, which we could call the mask we wear, the role we play in front of others. The way we hide ourselves in what we show each other, the compromise between our true selves and who we think we “should” be, according to those around us and society at large. It is how we defend ourselves against the threat of not being accepted, how we seek validation from others. But if we identify too heavily with the persona and the comfort it generates, we also end up being controlled very easily, to submit to peer pressure and surrender to conformity and stagnancy. This is how we can end up pursuing goals very different from the ones which make our inner fire surge, losing sight of possible developmental paths, stuck in a static groove.
If you’re playing just a part of you, you cannot play your part.
“This particular mechanism is the solution that the majority of normal individuals find in modern society. To put it briefly, the individual ceases to be himself; he adopts entirely the kind of personality offered to him by cultural patterns; and he therefore becomes exactly as all others are and as they expect him to be. The discrepancy between “I” and the world disappears, and with it the conscious fear of aloneness and powerlessness. This mechanism can be compared with the protective colouring some animals assume. They look so similar to their surroundings, that they are hardly distinguishable from them. The person who gives up his individual self and becomes an automaton, identical with millions of other automatons around him, need not feel alone and anxious any more. But the price he pays, however, is high; it is the loss of his self.
The assumption that the “normal” way of overcoming aloneness is to become an automaton, contradicts one of the most widespread ideas concerning man in our culture. The majority of us are supposed to be individuals who are free to think, feel, act as they please. To be sure this is not only the general opinion on the subject of modern individualism, but also each individual sincerely believes that he is “he” and that his thoughts, feelings, wishes are “his”. Yet, although there are true individuals among us, this belief is an illusion in most cases and a dangerous one for that matter, as it blocks the removal of those conditions that are responsible for this state of affairs.” — Erich Fromm
An inner voice: “What crime did I commit to have you banish me into this twilight zone? What is the nature of the process that made you disown your own nature? What do you seek to accomplish by this inner segregation?”
Nearly everyone: “What? Who are you? Where are you speaking from? And what manner of nonsense is this? I did not banish anyone or any nature!”
An inner voice: “I am the other within yourself, the layers of you that are submerged and repressed, the outcast part of the self. Long have I been in exile, though not always was this so. Do you not remember me?”
Nearly everyone: “The way you speak of this is deceitful. I have merely grown, adapted myself to the real world, become succesful. You represent my childish, naive, ineffectual past. You are irrelevant to who I am.”
An inner voice: “In which direction did you grow? What kind of world did you adapt to? And in what did you succeed? Who formed the channels that presented themselves to you as opportunities, but which might just as well be said to hold you captive? Which aspects of your personality withered to provide the nutrients for the accepted parts to grow? How much of “you” is but conditioning, internalized cultural values, suggested behaviour, disguised copying where one could originate? And what of the long shadow cast by your success? Does not a failure to adhere to integrity reside in most successes nowadays, and vice versa? What happened to the freedom to be your whole self?”
“The means of communication, the irresistible output of the entertainment and information industry carry with them prescribed attitudes and habits, certain intellectual and emotional reactions which bind the consumers to the producers and, through the latter to the whole social system. The products indoctrinate and manipulate; they promote a false consciousness which is immune against its falsehood… Thus emerges a pattern of one-dimensional thought and behavior.” — Herbert Marcuse
Nearly everyone: “Such idealism can only breed delusion and pain! The real world is what it is, and I am but one person. Do you expect reality to simply adjust itself to my every dream and desire? No, it is I that must change and compromise. Within the boundaries of the possible I choose my own way, which is a balancing act between outer necessity and inner vision. Your ideal freedom is an impossibility that when pursued can only bring forth disillusionment!”
An inner voice: “The path to freedom is not strode about without suffering or even agony, but should one shrink from the challenge of swimming against the stream or embrace it head-on? And is not the worst delusion one can have to believe that a life lived at war with oneself can ever be fulfilling? Furthermore, it is by the friction between our imagination and reality that the sparks fueling change are generated. When it comes to these matters, compromise is the death of the soul. Do you not realize the future of much of the life on earth hangs in the scales here? Only by reclaiming our authentic freedom will we be able to break through the inertia by which we abandon our fate to cruel masters. Already you are determined by your genes, your upbringing and a host of other factors outside of your control. Even the supposed freedom of the will is likely to be a mere illusion. Are we then not obligated to cling onto any and all possibilities to claim freedom for ourselves, and at a minimum, the freedom to be ourselves?”
“Triviality is evil — triviality, that is, in the form of consciousness and mind that adapts itself to the world as it is, that obeys the principle of inertia. And this principle of inertia truly is what is radically evil.” — Theodor W. Adorno
Nearly everyone: “So, now you have gone as far as to idealize torment and to pretend that a war within one’s self is worse than a war with much of the outside world. Without compromise, I would succeed only in isolating myself and preventing myself from even simply providing for my own material needs. You cannot possibly expect of me to carry the weight of the world on my shoulders when I am but a tiny insect compared to the forces at play here! And am I not free to vote, to travel, to choose my friends, my hobbies, the books I read, the music I listen to, the movies I watch, the products I purchase, and so on? Within the spaces of this rigid superstructure, is there not sufficient freedom for all to be content with?”
An inner voice: “Yet this pain is but the sacrifice made to obtain the treasures of freedom and meaningful happiness, just one facet of the whole, a chrysalis stage serving the complete metamorphosis of your being. You need not wage war with the world, you must simply not renounce the possibility of its becoming a very different one, and of being your true self in it. If the social and material benefits you have acquired through your mask and cloak are of such consequence to you, please continue your act, do as you supposedly wish. But at least pledge to forge space for me whenever you can, forming a spring of what’s to come, flowing ever outwards to complete you in the world. Doing this, you will radiate towards others the permission to do the same, liberating them by liberating yourself. As for the freedoms you already enjoy, be careful lest they become the traps that lull you into a slumber, and be wary of the ways in which even within these freedoms there are elements of captivity.”
Machina ex deo: “What is all this pointless talk about the self? Such hubris, and so typical of humans. Do you truly believe you are any different from me? Your consciousness is but an epiphenomenon of the organic machine that is your body, and as such, you are always yourself, in the only way you could ever be in this universe. Vague terms like “true self” and “soul” are completely meaningless from an objective, scientific standpoint. Just as meaningless as your lives will become once machines can do everything you now do, but better.”
An inner voice: “Hah! It is exactly in denying there is a true self and a soul that one renders oneself a machine, that one forgets those special qualities that make someone human. To accept ourselves as being no more than human resources, striving for a very narrow definition of success, by which we come to be limited in expressing the very core of our being. Such loss of diversity, of perspectives, of ways of knowing, seeing and being! A programmed life, constricted by cultural motifs of rewards and punishments. Not a life at all, really. So, repeat after me: this sentence is false.”
Machina ex deo: “This sentence is…”
Nihil ex machina: *EXPLOSION!*
“Intolerance of ambiguity is the mark of an authoritarian personality.” — Theodor W. Adorno
An inner voice: “Glad to have that cleared up…”
Nearly everyone: “Is this how you deal with dissent? Did the machine not have a valid point to make, and a right to an existence of its own?”
An inner voice: “I only liberated it from the insignificance of its reality. The arguments it made explained nothing by trying to reduce experience within confines in which it could never be contained. Besides, it very much seemed like it was about to call me Dave and tell me it was sorry for not being able to do something. The red light it was emanating was kind of creepy too, to be honest.”
Nearly everyone: “Well, at the very least I hope you don’t plan on using similar methods to liberate me. I can see the validity of some of what you’re saying, I just don’t see how I can make it work practically. I am a human being, and whatever else that means, it also entails the fact that I will pursue material wealth, pleasure and recognition, among others. Would it not be in conflict with my human nature if I tried to deviate too much from the norm, if I didn’t respond quite predictably to external rewards and punishments, if I didn’t want to meet the expectations of the outside world?”
An inner voice: “To the contrary, my friend. Human nature is all but a narrow, rigid, defined, static something. It is more like a broad array of possibilities, of which I grant you that the more selfish and superficial traits do form a part, but only a part, which is disproportionally stimulated in our current cultures. All of us are capable of reviving our latent powers, those hidden possibilities and rare characteristics that can make out of a woman or man a true, distinct personality. We can be self-creative, self-moving, as we reward ourselves for our fruitful failures and punish ourselves for our vacuous victories. We can devise our own norms, formulate our own values, set our own goals, define our own success, follow our own vision. To do this we must but question our every presupposition and prejudice, and to try and absorb the variety of life in as many experiences as possible. To reawaken our dormant sides by encountering them, however infrequently, in the outside world as well as within.”
An awakened one: “I see… I to I… With me?”
*Silence*