Self-Esteem


Dglgmut

Recommended Posts

I believe self-esteem is an obscure concept. Self-value--to see oneself as an object of value--is impossible. A value, as Rand said, presupposes the answer to the question: Of value to whom and for what?

Value is subjective, though not dependent on consciousness. Water is a value to a plant, for example, though water holds no intrinsic value to existence itself.

When we try to valuate ourselves we attempt to look at ourselves objectively. Why? Because we cannot look at ourselves subjectively. When looking at any part of reality, we always look through our own eyes, from our own perspective, but when looking at ourselves, we must imagine a new perspective--an objective perspective. This gives us no option to value ourselves subjectively, like we would find value in a new car, for example, instantly. The car does not have any apparent objective value that we can understand, but it is because we do not even attempt to view anything as objectively as we attempt to view ourselves.

When looking out at reality, we take in information as it comes and automatically our normative processes contextualize our experience. This normative process cannot happen unless we look at things in relation to ourselves. We cannot look at ourselves in relation to ourselves. This is why we cannot evaluate ourselves as objects of our experience.

However, we can evaluate our relationship to reality. We must not make ourselves the center of our focus, but rather the center point from which our focus can correctly, subjectively evaluate our environment.

What I'm trying to say is that, "Know thyself," is probably not the great advice it's cracked up to be. Know thy relationship to reality, and in turn you will have the confidence to pursue your values. However, "knowing" something is not what leads to self-efficacy, but rather focusing on something.

Rand equated free will with the ability to choose one's values. I disagree. What we can do is choose to pursue our values or not. In fact, the term "lazy" would not exist if this wasn't the choice we were faced with. Laziness is the choice to not pursue one's values because the objective value of self is not there to support the importance of the value.

So what happens is that rather than focusing on what we want, we focus on our lack of objective value in ourselves, and in turn discredit our desires. However, if we do not attempt to look at ourselves objectively, and simply focus on the desire as an absolute, we cannot help ourselves but to pursue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 121
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Ah, I think I see a mistake. "Know thyself," could signify what we have wanted and will want in the future, as to help us work toward non-instantaneous gratification.

---

However, the main point is valid--that we cannot properly valuate ourselves, and therefore a positive self-image is not what helps us achieve our goals, but rather it is to focus on our goals instead of our self-image.

For our normative process to kick into gear we must always look at things in relation to us, and so for us to have a clear idea of what we want and don't want, we cannot allow our focus to slip into a state of "I wonder what my significance is to the universe" else all our desires will be discredited.

Now I'm reiterating, but I do think it is a major error to think that self-esteem, dignity, or self-respect is what gives us the courage/motivation to work for ourselves. It doesn't exist, but working for ourselves gives us the knowledge that we are capable of achieving our goals, which has nothing to do with self-value, but makes us more prone to embrace our desires rather than push them off because we are afraid of failure, or worse, that they aren't worth achieving because what we want doesn't matter.

That is the choice "to think or not to think." We cannot turn off our descriptive processes, they are automatic. Our normative processes are automatic only as long as we are focused on things as they relate to us. Once we stop, and disregard the fact that we are at the center of our experiences, we stop living consciously and everything becomes arbitrary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Now I'm reiterating, but I do think it is a major error to think that self-esteem, dignity, or self-respect is what gives us the courage/motivation to work for ourselves. It doesn't exist, but working for ourselves gives us the knowledge that we are capable of achieving our goals,

I completely agree. Self-esteem is the result of achieving one's values, not the cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now I'm reiterating, but I do think it is a major error to think that self-esteem, dignity, or self-respect is what gives us the courage/motivation to work for ourselves. It doesn't exist, but working for ourselves gives us the knowledge that we are capable of achieving our goals,

I completely agree. Self-esteem is the result of achieving one's values, not the cause.

I recall the birth of self esteem in my youngest grand-daughter Julia (now age 5.5). Between the ages of 1.5 and 2.0 after she had just learned to talk, whenever she accomplished a task or mission she would shout out in glee " I-DID-it! ". That can-do girl was a happy girls whenever she DID.

She still is a can-do girl and basically a Force of Nature. Watch out world! Julia is coming.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now I'm reiterating, but I do think it is a major error to think that self-esteem, dignity, or self-respect is what gives us the courage/motivation to work for ourselves. It doesn't exist, but working for ourselves gives us the knowledge that we are capable of achieving our goals,

I completely agree. Self-esteem is the result of achieving one's values, not the cause.

I recall the birth of self esteem in my youngest grand-daughter Julia (now age 5.5). Between the ages of 1.5 and 2.0 after she had just learned to talk, whenever she accomplished a task or mission she would shout out in glee " I-DID-it! ". That can-do girl was a happy girls whenever she DID.

She still is a can-do girl and basically a Force of Nature. Watch out world! Julia is coming.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Very cute, Bob, and very true. A force of nature. It's a paramount need for a child

to make sense of her world and to know she has a place in it, and she is equal to any challenges.

Mostly, we all experienced it - but sometimes lost it for a while, or forever, when doubt crept in:- can it be so easy? Who am I to ...? Bigger people know best... I'm only one person. I make errors and fail sometimes-

- and so on.

What is natural to a youngster may falter in later years, and that's what I think is the single most important element of a rationally selfish morality - to sustain consciously, what was once so natural.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When we try to valuate ourselves we attempt to look at ourselves objectively. Why? Because we cannot look at ourselves subjectively. ...

What I'm trying to say is that, "Know thyself," is probably not the great advice it's cracked up to be. Know thy relationship to reality, and ...

The problem is "we." My suggestion is that you speak for yourself and wait for concordance from others who seem to understand your words as descriptions of their own self-perceptions.

I do have one question: Why do you consider this a metaphysical problem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The core of my argument is that we cannot be objects of our own experience. We cannot value ourselves, we can only estimate how capable we are.

"Know thyself," means something else to me now, though. It means to know what you are in order to choose and plan according to what is best for you. In that sense it's excellent advice.

I don't know I think I was a bit confused when making this thread. I think I was trying to demonstrate how focusing on what you want is more useful than focusing on what you are capable of or not/worthy of or not. Since then I've kind of established that there is a big difference between what you want and what will make you happy, and so knowing yourself is useful for achieving future happiness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now I'm reiterating, but I do think it is a major error to think that self-esteem, dignity, or self-respect is what gives us the courage/motivation to work for ourselves. It doesn't exist, but working for ourselves gives us the knowledge that we are capable of achieving our goals,

I completely agree. Self-esteem is the result of achieving one's values, not the cause.

I'm not so sure this is not too outcome-based: it seems more a description of the virtue Pride, than of self-esteem, which is "the reputation you have with yourself" according to N.Branden. A virtue is "the action by which one gains and keeps values".

Self-esteem is more sub-conscious, pertaining to how firmly one holds one's virtues, like integrity, but along with other components like self-assertiveness and self-acceptance.

There is an absorbing nexus between the two, but I feel sure self-esteem is more the cause, than an effect.

To say "Self-value - to see oneself as an object of value - is impossible", would be evidently wrong, and negates self-esteem, I think, Calvin. We do all the time, (and as an "object of NON-value" too) and it fits with Branden's "Witness within."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NB suggests that the causation between the actions we choose and the level of our self-esteem is reciprocal. A higher self-value and sense of confidence in coping with life's challenges motivates different choices to lower self-value and self confidence. An inner sense of "I am worth my greatest effort" will produce different outcomes to "I am worthless." An inner sense of "I can do it" will produce different outcomes to "I can't do it." Reciprocally, acting on my own behalf in situations where it would be easier not to takes motivated energy and is experienced by us as being treated by ourselves as having value. Also, acting in our lives to successfully produce positive outcomes for ourselves increases our sense that we can successfully produce positive outcomes for ourselves.

Here are NB's own words (view full article here):

About all those virtues the question might be asked, “To practice them, does one not need already to possess self-esteem? How can they be the foundation of self-esteem?”

In answering, I must introduce what I call the principle of reciprocal causation. By this I mean that behaviors that generate good self-esteem are also expressions of good self-esteem. Living consciously is both a cause and an effect of self-efficacy and self-respect. And so is self-acceptance, self-responsibility, and all the other practices I describe.

Thus, the more I live consciously, the more I trust my mind and respect my worth. The more I trust my mind and respect my worth, the more natural it feels to live consciously. The more I live with integrity, the more I enjoy good self-esteem. The more I enjoy good self-esteem, the more natural it feels to live with integrity.

Consider also NB's concept of psychological visibility (from Psychology of Romantic Love):

Our psychology is expressed through behaviour, through the things we say and do, and through the ways we say and do them. It is in this sense that our self is an object of perception to others. When others react to us, to their view of us and of our behaviour, their perception is in turn expressed through their behaviour, by the way they look at us, by the way they speak to us, by the way they respond, and so forth. If their view of us is consonant with our deepest vision of who we are (which may be different from whom we profess to be), and if their view is transmitted by their behaviour, we feel perceived, we feel psychologically visible. We experience a sense of the objectivity of our self and of our psychological state of being. It is in this sense that others can be a psychological mirror.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I was thinking of consciousness, rather than people. I mean, we do exist, so we can experience ourselves. But you could say our consciousness cannot be the object of our experience.

I guess the reason this is useless information is that we are more than consciousness.

Again, my idea when I made this thread was that it is better to focus on what you want, without considering what you are, than to focus on yourself. But what you want is not always what will make you happy. Or going after what you want will not always make you happy, depending when you do it, as there is more than one thing we want/need.

The answer to "What is right/What should I do?" is not always consciously known, and so we must estimate based on our knowledge of self what will be right (for us).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NB suggests that the causation between the actions we choose and the level of our self-esteem is reciprocal. A higher self-value and sense of confidence in coping with life's challenges motivates different choices to lower self-value and self confidence. An inner sense of "I am worth my greatest effort" will produce different outcomes to "I am worthless." An inner sense of "I can do it" will produce different outcomes to "I can't do it." Reciprocally, acting on my own behalf in situations where it would be easier not to takes motivated energy and is experienced by us as being treated by ourselves as having value. Also, acting in our lives to successfully produce positive outcomes for ourselves increases our sense that we can successfully produce positive outcomes for ourselves.

Here are NB's own words (view full article here):

About all those virtues the question might be asked, “To practice them, does one not need already to possess self-esteem? How can they be the foundation of self-esteem?”

In answering, I must introduce what I call the principle of reciprocal causation. By this I mean that behaviors that generate good self-esteem are also expressions of good self-esteem. Living consciously is both a cause and an effect of self-efficacy and self-respect. And so is self-acceptance, self-responsibility, and all the other practices I describe.

Thus, the more I live consciously, the more I trust my mind and respect my worth. The more I trust my mind and respect my worth, the more natural it feels to live consciously. The more I live with integrity, the more I enjoy good self-esteem. The more I enjoy good self-esteem, the more natural it feels to live with integrity.

Consider also NB's concept of psychological visibility (from Psychology of Romantic Love):

Our psychology is expressed through behaviour, through the things we say and do, and through the ways we say and do them. It is in this sense that our self is an object of perception to others. When others react to us, to their view of us and of our behaviour, their perception is in turn expressed through their behaviour, by the way they look at us, by the way they speak to us, by the way they respond, and so forth. If their view of us is consonant with our deepest vision of who we are (which may be different from whom we profess to be), and if their view is transmitted by their behaviour, we feel perceived, we feel psychologically visible. We experience a sense of the objectivity of our self and of our psychological state of being. It is in this sense that others can be a psychological mirror.

Paul, very pertinent - thanks.

So I was half right, half wrong, that it is equally cause and effect: "the principle of reciprocal causation".

(I'm imagining getting the tilt, just SO, on one of those old pinball machines, and you get the ball bouncing back and forth, non stop - chinga chinga ching - racking up the points.)

Self-esteem is a two-way street, then, the prime motivator being living

consciously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I was half right, half wrong, that it is equally cause and effect: "the principle of reciprocal causation".

(I'm imagining getting the tilt, just SO, on one of those old pinball machines, and you get the ball bouncing back and forth, non stop - chinga chinga ching - racking up the points.)

Self-esteem is a two-way street, then, the prime motivator being living

consciously.

Think of it as playing chess against yourself where you are able to orient your perspective and methods differently for each side. One side is all proactive strategy in response to the field of play. The other side is all reactive programming. As such, there is no learning between the two sides. There is no reciprocal causation.

If we inject the ability for each orientation to map and learn from the other, a way to create a shared perspective with shared information, we have reciprocal causation and a greatly accelerated learning process. Even more than this, we have a whole new mode of learning where insights attained by one part of the self feed the development of another part of the self. This is a dialectical learning and growth operating between different parts of the self where the self is experienced as more than any particular part.

Addendum: this is also an important consideration for the subject of free will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we inject the ability for each orientation to map and learn from the other, a way to create a shared perspective with shared information, we have reciprocal causation and a greatly accelerated learning process. Even more than this, we have a whole new mode of learning where insights attained by one part of the self feed the development of another part of the self. This is a dialectical learning and growth operating between different parts of the self where the self is experienced as more than any particular part.

Addendum: this is also an important consideration for the subject of free will.

"The more I practise, the 'luckier' I get" - feeding one's effectiveness or self-efficacy, through

self-affirmation and repitition, similar to the golfer, who quoted that, establishing his 'muscle memory'.

(Aristotle as well: We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence then, is not an act but a habit.)

Free will definitely connects; good thought.

The learning process by reciprocal causation you outline, is also a process of discovery, not only of self-efficacy

and self-knowledge - but of an awareness of an expanding range of options open to one, too, I think.

The confidence to choose, reciprocates with near limitless choices - and grows further confidence.

Hence, self-direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The more I practise, the 'luckier' I get" - feeding one's effectiveness or self-efficacy, through

self-affirmation and repitition, similar to the golfer, who quoted that, establishing his 'muscle memory'.

I like this thought. It illustrates how our motive to live from a place of an energized, free-flowing, and playful spirit can work with our capacity for structure and habit to increase the quality and efficiency of our actions and increase the freedom available to us.

It is easy for us to experience these two sides of the self as competing and in conflict. This can can cause a battle between parts of the self, pushing us to own one and disown the other. many of us are divided between the structured and controlled self and the energized and flowing self. Even our political landscape can be seen as defined by this. We have conservatives who live from a place of structure and control first and liberals who live from a place of free-flowing energy first.

In my life, I've tended to choose my free-flowing side over my structured side when they produce conflicting motives but, again, what is needed is a more meta-perspective that is more than and includes both. This is illustrated by the golfer who is "feeding one's effectiveness or self-efficacy, through self-affirmation and repetition." It is the spiritual, flowing self working with the body and brain's structures and automation capacity to create a whole self that is greater than the sum of the separated parts.

If we divide the self into parts though a pattern of owning and disowning, between a spiritual flowing self and a controlled structured self, whenever the two are in conflict and we choose one over the other, we automatically do damage to our self-esteem by disowning part of ourselves. We necessarily treat an important part of ourselves without respect and we take important processes out of our conscious control, leaving us less capable to cope with life's challenges.

(Aristotle as well: We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence then, is not an act but a habit.)

I would distinguish between self actualized excellence and trained excellence. Trained excellence comes from allowing others' feelings, actions and teachings to flow through us, until we develop 'right' habits and programming. Self actualized excellence starts with what we feel, how we see the world, how we make sense of things and the choices we repeatedly make that shape our habits and our programs. Trained excellence can create the super-ego self, the world of "shoulds," so many of us have to fight throughout adulthood to find ourselves again.

Being able to live in trained excellence is an important tool for our development. But this is a place for learning, not a place to call home. We need to make awareness, self assertiveness, and self actualization home. Our habits need to be a natural, organic expression of our authentic selves for us to be healthy and whole.

Free will definitely connects; good thought.

The learning process by reciprocal causation you outline, is also a process of discovery, not only of self-efficacy and self-knowledge - but of an awareness of an expanding range of options open to one, too, I think.

Absolutely. The process of organic and authentic growth applies to our development of expanded awareness, self-esteem, insight, understanding, knowledge, and skills. The assertiveness that flows through us, from our core, flows back to our core through experience and awareness. This is the essence of the causal reciprocation that can shape who we are and how we live.

The confidence to choose, reciprocates with near limitless choices - and grows further confidence.

Hence, self-direction.

Our unconscious works more like a quantum computer, generating all kinds of possibilities, suspending us in a state of superposition where we can see multiple possible paths, from which we can consciously choose our actions. This is the essence of our free will: the capacity to generate, and suspend from the causal chain, action possibilities from which we can choose and initiate action toward consciously. This gives us self-direction. However, our standard concepts of causality cannot accommodate this breakdown of determinism.

Btw- just got a new iPhone, after four years with my old one, and just discovered Siri. Wow! I just wrote this whole response using voice recognition. Absolutely incredible!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


The confidence to choose, reciprocates with near limitless choices - and grows further confidence.
Hence, self-direction.


The topic of self-esteem is very dear to my heart. I've struggled with it all my life as I'm sure many people do. That's why, even though I've stayed up the entire night, I'm very pleased with myself for tackling this issue. And so, after spending much time dissecting this and other statements in this thread, I've decided to end my mad brainstorming session with the use of Occam's razor in reducing my findings to one, fairly simple assertion:

Self-esteem is impacted directly by our decisions

I will expound on this later. In the meantime I'm waiting to see how you all will interpret this assertion.

EDIT: Ok, so after two hours I couldn't bare it any longer. I have to throw two more assertions out there that derive from my initial assertion

1)Self-esteem is positively impacted when a decision reinforces one's integrity

2)Self-esteem is negatively impacted when a decision compromises one's integrity

So, the three main terms in these statements are self-esteem, decision, and integrity. Decision is a fairly easy one and I'm going to ignore self-esteem for now. Now, integrity is defined as adherence to one's moral and ethical principles. Calvin quoted AR as saying,"Free will is equivalent to the ability to choose one's values." How right she is! Now let's talk about choice. A choice, such as the fundamental choice to uphold integrity as one's personal value is comprised of ALL the choices that are involved in continually adhering to this standard. If we make any one choice that goes against this standard, we cannot be said to have made that choice at all, can we? So, you see how AR's statement that "Free-will is equivalent to the ability to choose one's values" is somewhat of a riddle? It's because free-will is more about strictly adhering to one's values and morals than it is about having the freedom to do whatever the hell you want. Now how can I prove that integrity or the lack thereof has an effect on self-esteem? Well, take personal hygiene for instance. Let's say you've acknowledged the fact that you should be better about it. You know you should have a standard for personal hygiene but you avoid the decision altogether and as a result suffer from the effects of poor hygiene. That's the first scenario. Scenario two is the person who has taken the time to consciously set a standard for themselves they feel is acceptable. However, this person fails to consistently adhere to this standard. Now,scenario three: the person has a set standard and consistently follows it. Which of these people has the most integrity? Which of these people has the highest self-esteem? Now, substitute personal hygiene with personal finance. Then ask yourself the same questions. It's apparent isn't it? Self-esteem is directly related to the level of integrity one exercises in adhering to standards of excellence. It's definitely not enough to avoid setting standards for ourselves as with the first scenario and, for the second scenario, well, as I suggested earlier in this paragraph, if we aspire to some goal or set some moral standard for ourselves and then at anytime down the road make a choice that goes against that goal or that standard, we have,in effect, made no choice at all, and as a result, fail in proving our worth/obtaining any measure of value, be it self-efficacy, self-sufficiency, integrity, etc. that enhances our self-esteem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My goal was to develop an assertion that explained how self-esteem is dependent on integrity. Instead, I ended up writing a long-winded paragraph. My initial statement was that "self-esteem is impacted directly by our decisions". Then I followed with the assertion that "Self-esteem is positively impacted when a decision reinforces one's integrity." I may need to amend this completely. Maybe I just need to expand my definition of integrity. Integrity: consistently making the right choices in achieving a desired outcome or in meeting some standard of excellence. With this definition it can be said that integrity is a confidence builder, since it results in the realization of one's abilities. Or maybe I should have just said what I wanted to say from the start and that is that "Each choice that brings us closer to a desired goal, results in an increased level of confidence/self-assurance, since with each choice we improve our self-efficacy." Hell, I just hope ya'll got something out of this. I need to stop. I've been up all night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aristo,

These are good thoughts - and you didn't waste your night, I believe.

It seemed to me too, that integrity was central - involving as it does courage, consistency, self-discipline, honesty and much more.

"Integrity is congruence between what you know, what you profess, and what you do."[NB]

Out of Branden's "Six Pillars", 'living consciously' and 'integrity', always seemed to me the primaries -

with self-acceptance, self-responsibility, self assertiveness, and (perhaps another primary) - purposefulness -

being semi-derivatives from them.

As he put it, "[These] virtues that self-esteem asks of us ...are also the virtues that life asks of us."

Evidently then, there is no faking it: either one's self-esteem will "find one out" - or, reality will.

Mostly, both.

(Just found this NB quote, I enjoy: "Deep and courageous self-assertiveness - letting others hear the music inside of you.")

A great man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"To think or not to think?" I don't believe this is the choice we are faced with, as Rand asserted. We cannot just turn off our reasoning processes, they are automatic. Some would say the choice is between focusing or not, but focusing on what?

The choice we are faced with is between our short term well being and our long term, or our present self and our future self. Self-esteem is a factor in which choice we make. If we believe we can positively affect our future by making good choices, then it is likely that we will accept the short term challenges that go along with such choices. However, if we do not feel capable of improving our future circumstances we default to considering only our short term well being, like an animal.

It is always a risk that we take when trying to achieve future happiness at the cost of short term sacrifices. If we believe in ourselves, the sacrifice is insignificant because it means a better future. If we are unsure of ourselves, then the sacrifice is difficult to bear.

Mental evasion is focusing on the short term, with full knowledge that it is bad for your future self. The only way it is possible to make a decision like this is if one feels uncertain of what the right choice would be (low self-esteem).

So the question is not even to focus or not to focus, because we are always focused on something. The question is to focus on our short term well being, like an animal, or to focus on our future--to plan, which is essentially what separates us from animals.

Again, I prefer the term self-efficacy over self-esteem, because there is no objectification of ourselves in the moment. It is entirely about how capable we feel, not about how we "see" ourselves (how we mentally project ourselves based on information we have accumulated from outside of the present). Even when we look in the mirror, it is our memory that leads us to the inference that it is us looking back. There is nothing purely "us" about it, as there is when we consider what is at the center of our experience (that is how we know ourselves--not as a thing to be experienced, but as the source of meaning in everything that we do experience).

Oh, and Aristo, your assertions about self-esteem are basically what Rand wrote in The Fountainhead. She said that self-respect directly correlates to one's level of independence. So it all comes from evidence that you are capable of achieving your goals... and that's where Rand's definition of art comes in. Art can be used to improve one's self-efficacy by improving one's concept of of man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To think well or not to think well?

To focus or not to focus implies a choice of something to focus on--a locus for the focus. Then there is the question of the level of focus--it's intensity.

Self-esteem demands an existential source of self-esteem--a source one creates for and by oneself. I made a conscious and rational decision to stop smoking over 43 years ago on my 25th birthday. The longer I live in consequent good health, the greater that decision pays off in my self-esteem. This is a continual accumulation of self-esteem value. There are other things one can do to benefit self-esteem that don't accumulate by themselves that way, but it doesn't matter for if you have a self-esteem accumulation personality, they pile up.

While it's hardly this simple, I think I'm on to something.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"To think or not to think?" I don't believe this is the choice we are faced with, as Rand asserted. We cannot just turn off our reasoning processes, they are automatic. Some would say the choice is between focusing or not, but focusing on what?

The choice we are faced with is between our short term well being and our long term, or our present self and our future self. Self-esteem is a factor in which choice we make. If we believe we can positively affect our future by making good choices, then it is likely that we will accept the short term challenges that go along with such choices. However, if we do not feel capable of improving our future circumstances we default to considering only our short term well being, like an animal.

It is always a risk that we take when trying to achieve future happiness at the cost of short term sacrifices. If we believe in ourselves, the sacrifice is insignificant because it means a better future. If we are unsure of ourselves, then the sacrifice is difficult to bear.

Mental evasion is focusing on the short term, with full knowledge that it is bad for your future self. The only way it is possible to make a decision like this is if one feels uncertain of what the right choice would be (low self-esteem).

So the question is not even to focus or not to focus, because we are always focused on something. The question is to focus on our short term well being, like an animal, or to focus on our future--to plan, which is essentially what separates us from animals.

Again, I prefer the term self-efficacy over self-esteem, because there is no objectification of ourselves in the moment. It is entirely about how capable we feel, not about how we "see" ourselves (how we mentally project ourselves based on information we have accumulated from outside of the present).

Calvin,

You are certainly right to focus on focus - like Aristo and Brant are also doing. But I wonder again if making choices, and their outcomes, is not overly deliberately cognitive, when it comes to self-esteem.

For instance, Aristo wrote : "Self-esteem is impacted directly by our decisions."

Isn't this rather *pride* in one's effectiveness? Which alone is most beneficial, sure.

Whereas, self-efficacy (although related) is additionally not only having control over one's environment, or

over one's mind and actions - giving up smoking, say - but possessing the ability to focus, and knowing it.(I think.)

(Paul's posts #10, 14, are a great explanation of the complete process.)

A bit simpler: in my view, self-efficacy as directly connected to self-esteem - is the result of developing and

owning the power to focus our minds at will.

Gaining positive results of focusing matter greatly, of course - but focus is no guarantee of a successful outcome.

Knowing you can make errors, and quickly and easily re-focus your mind to correct them, is the substantial element in building self-esteem. We build trust and confidence with ourselves.

Talking of mistakes, one of NB's 'Pillars', Self-Acceptance, is hugely important:

" Self-acceptance is quite simply realism. That which is, is. That which you think, you think. That which you feel, you feel. That which you did, you did."

See the effect? - obviously this doesn't hand a blank cheque to an immoral person, or excuse arbitrary behavior.

His statement takes for granted a level of virtue in a person, and expects of oneself more to come. Merited self-esteem.

So errors of judgment, wrong decisions, won't impact on self-esteem - unless we keep repeating the same ones :smile: - because "living consciously", i.e. focusing - rationally, introspectively, empathically, (thanks, Paul) and whatever else - means we know we are not at the mercy of innocent mistakes and blind chance.

This is an valuable avenue of thought, I'm learning some good stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Self-efficacy is not how capable one is but how capable/competent one believes one is. It is interchangeable with almost all usages of "self-esteem".

To esteem something requires you to objectify it, if it is not already an object for you to experience. Self-efficacy means you see existence differently, in that with high self-efficacy things will seem more attainable. This is the whole reason "self-esteem" is so important, because without it we would not see a point in trying to do anything, because we would always expect failure.

In Brant's example of quitting smoking, the longer he doesn't smoke the more effective his choice was to try to quit. If he was smoking again a year after quitting he would have evidence that he did not have the control over his life he had hoped he did. Or, even if he never picked smoking back up, if his health got bad for other reasons he would have evidence that even when he makes tough choices and succeeds at his goals, he still cannot help himself.

The results of our actions affect our self-efficacy depending on how close they are to our intended effect.

The circularity is that our self-efficacy then affects how ambitious we are with those intended effects... Do we try to accomplish big, important goals or do we save our energy because we would fail anyway?

So the question is: How do you stay ambitious while lacking evidence of capability?

This comes down to the two outlets of focus: your present experience or your desired experience. How long do you focus on what you want without getting it before you revert to more basic cognition? (Rand's mental suicide escape from dictatorship)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was no question I was going to stop smoking and stay stopped. That's because of all the rational prep work I had done. I had all my ducks lined up in a row and a significant date and when I launched my attack the smoking didn't have a chance. It was a slaughter. It's not like I simply used will-power and threw a switch. Example: I smoked in the army and Vietnam. I figured I had a good chance of being killed and I almost was. Stopping smoking in that context was a piffle. This was a powerful rationalization but 18 months home and I couldn't use it any more. It had completely collapsed and I knew it. I also knew a lot about health issues because of my extensive army medical training. I was scared of emphysema. Etc. (I had several more good reasons.) I looked reality right in the face and dealt with it. That's where the the se benefits came from, not just from stopping.

--Brant

sounds like bragging, but better that way than the longer post I made that I lost when my laptop's battery ran out of juice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Self-efficacy is not how capable one is but how capable/competent one believes one is. It is interchangeable with almost all usages of "self-esteem".

To esteem something requires you to objectify it, if it is not already an object for you to experience. Self-efficacy means you see existence differently, in that with high self-efficacy things will seem more attainable. This is the whole reason "self-esteem" is so important, because without it we would not see a point in trying to do anything, because we would always expect failure.

It's why I don't think self-efficacy comprises everything of self-esteem. While I agree with some comments, I still think this is all too extrinsic, or too goal-directed. Put it this way, I could succeed - receive the promotion, get the raise, and accolades from the boss for doing good work, corner office and all - and not feel worthy of it. Then, I could lose a big contract to design a skyscraper in Atlanta, and not have my self-esteem impacted in the least.

Without doubt, feeling efficacious to face any eventuality in life, is a big part, but not all.

The other big part is: Do I feel I deserve it? Not think it - feel it. In my own eyes, not anyone else's.

I am the one person I can't fool. Every thought and emotion, word and act (or non-act) of mine, has an

effect on me.

I see self-esteem as the aggregate of these actions - a fluctuating estimate, a sort of internalized inductive process, judging all of that according to my standard -- weighing it all, and coming up with a sub-conscious conclusion. Yes, no - I am worthy, I am not.

Essentially, have I betrayed or remained loyal to myself?

I think there is a limit to how much one can "objectify" oneself, otherwise self-esteem would be easier to achieve and sustain.

As it stands it is rarer in people, I reckon, than it would seem at first glance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now