We tend to think that altruism is a noble quality. However, there has been a lot of talk lately about the need to develop a healthy egoism. What is more important — our own desires or the needs of another? Psychotherapist Irina Mlodik talks about this.
My Facebook friend (an extremist organization banned in Russia) consists mainly of psychologists. Therefore, it contains many calls to “follow yourself”, “live for yourself”, “be yourself”. To a reader not tempted by psychology, it may even seem that there are no more selfish beings than psychologists. So, it seems, their focus of attention is skewed towards the importance of their own person. But what about other people? Who will think of them?
Try to say something like “And at that moment I decided that I would do everything for my mother that she needs” or “When my loved ones need help, I cannot refuse to take care of them.” There is a great risk of receiving condemnation, ridicule or moralizing in response: they must take care of themselves, take care of themselves.
As if really participation in the lives of loved ones is tantamount to neurotic behavior. The question arises: if the well-being of my environment affects the feeling of my own well-being, then what? “Then this is a codependent position,” young psychologists will say, “it needs to be eliminated.”
Some psychologists really believe that taking care of your loved ones is almost a betrayal of yourself and your interests. For «just people» to take care of others is an urgent need, duty, responsibility, an opportunity to feel good, kind, needed. This behavior is highly supported and approved by society. Therefore, having read what psychologists write, “just people” begin to suspect that they will only “teach bad things”, allow them to be selfish.
I do not support any extreme positions on this issue. Not all concern for one’s neighbor is a manifestation of a codependent position, sometimes it is simply a willingness and desire to help when possible, without masochism or betrayal of oneself. On the other hand, not every character who is excellent at taking care of himself will be a model of mental health.
It is not at all easy to move from a co-dependent position to a more autonomous position, and slogans and appeals alone are not enough
Our loved ones are an important part of our lives. Their state, mood, feelings are not indifferent to us. The quality of our life cannot but depend on what they have. Worrying about the close environment and investing in their life comfort means investing in your personal comfort and peace of mind. It is an inoculation against anxiety, guilt, fear of loss.
I am of the opinion that there is no pure altruism. When we take care of others, we take care of ourselves first. The one who realizes this and is honestly ready to admit it is much nicer to me than the one who says that he himself «does not need anything, as long as everything is fine with you.»
Among the former, it happens that the well-being of loved ones becomes too much of a person’s mental life — this prevents him from feeling separate, even if he is well aware of the desire to stop depending on others. It is precisely for people like him that this “supporting egoism” message from psychologists exists: “turn to your life”, “find yourself”, “stop taking care of others, take care of yourself”.
At the same time, the psychologist, as a rule, does not have the task of making an egoist out of the poor fellow, the professional simply strengthens the right of his client to organize a little more autonomy than he had before. Without this autonomy it is very difficult to feel… separate and alive.
But moving from a co-dependent position to a more autonomous position is not at all easy, and slogans, appeals, and even trainings alone are not enough. As a rule, rather difficult and slow work on personal history and psyche is required. Such a person, even after a course of psychotherapy, does not stop caring for loved ones — he just learns to invest in himself. And he does it consciously, directly, responsibly and desirable with every right.
After working out the codependent position, it becomes easy with such people. They earn my respect. It’s calm next to them also because instead of obsessive care and “service”, they learn to speak directly: “Can I help you?”, “I worry about you. Is there anything I can do for you?» They will not rush to help «out of good intentions» or to show their integrity — completely without noticing you at the same time.
But there is another category of people. They are convinced of their own high spirituality on the grounds that they do not think about themselves at all and only worry about their relatives, the poor, the people, humanity. I can understand perfectly well, but they themselves make me suspicious and bored.
Their position is either “I don’t need anything myself” or “do good and it will come back to you.” More than once I have seen how these wonderful and generous people do not notice exactly how their personal needs are met — alas, not directly, but unconsciously and manipulatively, often at the expense of someone’s investments and efforts.
One such very kind woman, for example, stole a decent amount of tea bags from our office every time she visited — apparently considering them to be “nobody’s”. As you understand, it’s not a pity for tea, but it definitely wasn’t anyone’s. Or another — having let her alcoholic uncle live at home, was offended if her relatives did not lend her a large amount: “Banks take huge interest on loans!”
Energy for life does not come from nowhere. A living person consumes and needs not only material, but also emotional interchange. And if a person does not replenish his resources with food, food, warmth, home and care, he either does it anyway — without realizing it and pushing it out — or he collapses and dies.
People who tend to consider themselves highly spiritual are no exception. It’s just that it’s often hard for them to admit that they also get a lot from other people, including from their self-denial. It seems to them that they are the most altruistic and generous people in the world, but in fact it is difficult with them, because it is completely incomprehensible what the payment for such service will be and at what moment they will decide to collect it.
Many people have the need to be kind and sympathetic, but for some reason it is expropriated by the “highly spiritual”
Often I want to tell them: “High spirituality is not self-destruction, which you offer us to witness. Others can take care of themselves, give them the opportunity. Let them show their humanity, kindness and at least sometimes take care of you.
In the end, many people have the need to be kind and sympathetic, but for some reason it is expropriated by the “highly spiritual”. If for a long time they do not wake up at least some right and the need to take care of themselves, soon enough custody of this person will fall on the shoulders of his loved ones.
And how much guilt they will have for the fact that they, unwittingly, «brought almost to the grave» of someone they could and wanted to take care of, but they were not given a chance. Not everyone can afford the luxury of taking someone else’s care.
There are still others who are sure that their personal needs can and should overshadow social needs: “The most important thing for me is myself. If I need something, everything and everyone must be pushed aside, and what it is for them is their concern.
Often, unfortunately, this category of workers, for some reason, confuses a respectful position regarding their own and others’ autonomy and rudeness. It seems to them that if they are late, change plans, cause other people emotional pain and live without paying attention to how their actions are perceived by the environment, this is a healthy behavior.
If at the same time people are offended, upset or indignant — their problems. This delusion leads to endless strife, severing of significant and insignificant ties, loneliness.
Those who like to defend themselves in this way often complain that everyone around is “unhealthy”, they think only about themselves (and not about them) and do not want to understand and accept them, so progressive and advanced, with their needs and needs. And they forget that true acceptance is dialogical, respectful and mutual.
It is very difficult for all three categories to perceive the presence of a couple. They are so arranged that their psyche seems to be able to hold only one object. And in a pair, people are capable of acceptance, confrontation or dialogue.
For the former (co-dependent), at first glance, there is only a significant Other. His constant — impossible in reality — well-being gives at least some chance to the co-dependent to take care of his life. In fact, the Other is rather quickly replaced by the anxiety and omnipresent control of the codependent and disappears as an autonomous unit.
The second (highly spiritual) also think about the Other. They seem to exclude themselves and push their needs into the unconscious — in fact, they do not satisfy some of their needs in a very direct way.
For others, there is only themselves. It is already too difficult to take into account the needs or experiences of the Other at the same time.
Of course, there are also fourth ones — those brought up in the right connection with others, in respect for others and their own autonomy, in sufficient empathy, in family and tribal rules. For them, there is no opposition in the question «what is more important — taking care of yourself or the other?». It is natural for them to make these choices every day.
However, they are not captured by the intention to «be good» or «control the negligent and incapable.» Initially, they do not have the feeling that they or some other people are bad, that they need some special efforts in order to “improve” or change. They just are. And others live next to them: close, distant, important and not so much. And take into account their desires and needs as naturally and simply as your own.