Pride or Self Esteem Promotion


David13
 Share

Recommended Posts

“Pride gets no pleasure out of having something, only out of having more of it than the next man... It is the comparison that makes you proud: the pleasure of being above the rest. Once the element of competition is gone, pride is gone.”― C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity

 

The entire point of awards - 1st, 2nd, 3rd - is competition and pride (not esteem). 

 

Giving everyone an award is telling everyone that this is not a competition, this is not about some people trying to be better than others, that the activity is about building relationships and having a good time.

 

Which is just about the worst life lesson you can teach kids.  When reality strikes, and they have to get out into the world and get a job, what good will that do for them?  None.

They are supposed to be going to school to learn how to be productive citizens, who can do a job, not kumbaya singers.

 

The other way the schools have ruined kids is putting forth the idea that learning is "fun".  Learning is not fun.  It is work.  It is blood, sweat, and tears.  It is studying long and late hours even if you are working your way thru' school, which is a good further lesson to learn.  How to use your time wisely and productively. 

The other foolish fallacy is that all the students are "equal".  They are not.

Again when it comes time to get a job, earn a living, pay off those student loans, buy a house to have a place to live and support a wife who may or may not work and kids, do the hire any student?  Any student because they are equal?  No.  They hire the ones who worked and earned the best grades.

 

dc

Edited by David13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They give awards to any kid that shows up.  They don't fail any students.  They give good grades to all the students.  Etc.

 

Respect and self esteem has to be earned.  Otherwise it's false.

dc

I have to admit that I actually didn't want to go to my daughters graduation from kindergarten to first grade. I did go, but I kept thinking about this little clip from The Incredibles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which is just about the worst life lesson you can teach kids.  When reality strikes, and they have to get out into the world and get a job, what good will that do for them?  None.

They are supposed to be going to school to learn how to be productive citizens, who can do a job, not kumbaya singers.

 

The other way the schools have ruined kids is putting forth the idea that learning is "fun".  Learning is not fun.  It is work.  It is blood, sweat, and tears.  It is studying long and late hours even if you are working your way thru' school, which is a good further lesson to learn.  How to use your time wisely and productively. 

The other foolish fallacy is that all the students are "equal".  They are not.

Again when it comes time to get a job, earn a living, pay off those student loans, buy a house to have a place to live and support a wife who may or may not work and kids, do the hire any student?  Any student because they are equal?  No.  They hire the ones who worked and earned the best grades.

 

dc

On the flip side I see problems with ranking and sorting kids. I'm afraid it sends the wrong message. A message championed by Korihor the anti-Christ, who said:

every man fared in this life according to the management of the creature; therefore every man prospered according to his genius, and . . . every man conquered according to his strength. . . . (Alma 30:17)

In the larger scheme of things the problem with self-esteem is simply the focus on self. As long as we teach kids (and adults) to focus on themselves, whether it be in positive ways or negative ways we have missed the mark. The Master shared the true way when he said, "I can of mine own self do nothing:...I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me" (John 5:30).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They give awards to any kid that shows up.  They don't fail any students.  They give good grades to all the students.  Etc.

 

Respect and self esteem has to be earned.  Otherwise it's false.

dc

 

I disagree, my kids go to public school.

Every month there is only one student that gets recognized as the "Super Citizen". That's 9 students a year out of 25. My kids have gotten that award and felt extra special knowing that not everyone gets it, there have also been years when they did not get it and felt left out.

 

Every quarter they come home with grades that reflect their true efforts, I have no problems of pointing out to them their weaknesses and they recognize it and work harder in those areas. When they raise that B or C grade to an A they feel as though they accomplished something special and I praise them for working hard.

 

AYSO soccer is a different story, that is where everyone plays, everyone gets a trophy but im not concerned about that aspect of their lives because in every other aspect they are expected to thrive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Competition is evil, or if not evil, something close to it. As Lewis pointed out, competition does not strive for excellence, or even to be particularly good. Competition cares only that you are better than someone else.

 

I do not believe that Jesus Christ is or ever was "competitive". I do not believe he ever strove to gain mastery over another person, unless you want to stretch the term "person" to cover Satan and other devils. Even then, Christ was interested in self-mastery, and commanded the devils only insofar as was needed to accomplish his purposes.

 

I have encouraged my sons to wrestle when they enter their teenage years, but with profoundly mixed feelings. I am not at all convinced that the competitive spirit is one that ought to be nurtured. I was happy that my second son scored a near-perfect score on his college entrance exams, but I was proud of him that he appeared not to care at all how he had done relative to friends and other students. He wanted excellence, not to be "better" than someone else.

Edited by Vort
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The competition in school is not against the other students, it's with yourself.  Are you learning.  Are you going to be able to get a job and lead a productive life in some way.

You don't go to public school to learn to be more Christ-like.

You should go to learn how to get a job, trade, skill or profession.  So you can lead a productive life. 

Not so you can waste your time.

dc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I still think this blog distorts too many things; and the current movement against self-esteem is just the other downside of a coin. We ought to consider self-esteem similar to the way we typically consider pride or many other aspects of good health. One may have low self-esteem, which can be an obstacle to healthy living. Or, one may have excessively high self-esteem, which of course is problematic. But it isn’t a large contributing factor to the angst and horror of the U.S. national debt, and it isn’t insidious nor specifically what Satan wants (in the way the blogger’s title suggests). Moreover, to focus on simple wholesome practices like giving little children trophies for participating on a team and talk as if it contributes to the political issues of our day is absurd. I’m glad others on this thread have rightly alluded to the truth that most everything can be taken to extremes, or leavened with good sense. The blogger claimed that self-esteem was bought into as a panacea but I perceive that the author is guilty of the same mistake, selling a panacea--the wholesale elimination of practices meant to enhance self-esteem. I think it’s laughable how the blogger links this issue to the spiritual and at the same time to the market—reminding us that the market is indifferent to feelings and it doesn’t reward for our mere existence. The Savior provides a pretty nice reward, Resurrection, by grace to every one of God’s children simply by the virtue of existing. So, it seems to me that the remedy in the end is not to take all the blogger’s advice, but instead for me to seek the Savior. If my self-esteem is too high, the Savior humbles me; and if it is too low the Savior can correct that, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a teacher, learning is fun!  I was recently on a scholarship committee - the students who got the scholarships were not the ones with the highest GPA's, they were the ones who went to student clubs, who had amazing letters of recommendation, who had overcome great odds...  They need at least a 3.0, but not a 4.0.

 

My husband works in industry - they also do not hire 4.0's because of the attitude that often goes with that.  You have to be an intern or contract worker first, then, if you are friendly, you get hired permanently.  Again, you need a 3.0+, but not a 4.0.

 

How deplorable that people would be punished for excelling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The competition in school is not against the other students, it's with yourself.  Are you learning.  Are you going to be able to get a job and lead a productive life in some way.

 

This is explicitly untrue when you are graded on a curve or in the European system. The competition most certainly is against the other students. You do not necessarily need to do well to get a top grade; you simply need to do better than most others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Satan wants you to have self esteem.

It's a feature on this website, and well states what I have been saying for many years. 

That this idea that the schools have to promote a false self esteem in their students is wrong and very disfunctional.

I cannot say any more about it better than said there.

dc

fake worth, fake love, fake worship.   Sounds like the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to admit that I actually didn't want to go to my daughters graduation from kindergarten to first grade. I did go, but I kept thinking about this little clip from The Incredibles. 

 

I tell my wife that if we go to such an event I will wear my graduation robes. If they insist on hosting academia's ceremonies I will dress for the occasion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Satan wants us to have self esteem" Not so!

"Satan desires to make all men miserable like unto himself". He wants us to wallow in self pity and believe that all is lost and there is no reason to carry on. What happens in school is an effort to life us up in pride...you are right about that. Satan can use vanity and pride to bring us down...he would much rather destroy us early, to save him the trouble of dealing with us later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As the post's author, I would like your take on the King Benjamin incident. What was the point of tearing down a righteous people to get them to the point that they felt lower than dirt? Seems like he would have been ripped on by educators, motivators, psychologists and clergy. 

When King Benjamin says we are nothing, or less than the dust of the earth he does not mean we are worthless. Rather, he is referring to our current state. M. Catherine Thomas is very perceptive in her comments on this point. She says:

 

Nothingness does not mean valuelessness. The Lord assures us that we are each of infinite worth to him. Rather, nothingness refers to man's fallen and reduced state in this mortal sphere (Mosiah 4:5). Nothingness describes not man's lack of value but rather his reduced, powers during his mortal probation and especially his all-encompassing need for the Lord. ("The Doer of Our Deeds and the Speaker of Our Words", Speech given at BYU Dec. 7, 1993)

 

Man's dual nature, his fallen state, and need for the Savior are points few educators and psychologists recognize. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to say something that is going to get me into a lot of trouble, but I think it NEEDS to be said.

This article is complete JUNK. I'd use stronger language, but I'm riding close enough to offending people as it is.

 

The author made this statement: "From an academic standpoint, what conscientious parents and educators are finding out, far too late, is that at some point, the praise junkie will one day be pitted against a merciless market. The market is indifferent to feelings and only rewards added value for efficient production’s sake and not for mere existence." (emphasis added)

 

Don't you all realize that it is the market that is the problem? It is the "relentless, merciless market" that is ungodly! God, our FATHER is NOT indifferent to feelings, and His rewards are completely unrelated to added value or efficient production. Do you want a perfect picture of what God's way looks like?

 

There have been numerous comments, and the article itself, that conflate self-esteem with pride. Anyone who makes that mistake has never read a single scientific study (or even a dictionary) on the subject of self esteem.

 

noun

1.

a realistic respect for or favorable impression of oneself; self-respect.

Let me quote a prophet: "God Himself said we are the reason He created the universe! His work and glory—the purpose for this magnificent universe—is to save and exalt mankind. In other words, the vast expanse of eternity, the glories and mysteries of infinite space and time are all built for the benefit of ordinary mortals like you and me. Our Heavenly Father created the universe that we might reach our potential as His sons and daughters."

 

Let me be clear. GOD does not reward you based on your competitive comparison to other people. God rewards you for participation in His Plan of Salvation ONLY. There is absolutely NOTHING any of us can do to earn our place in the Celestial Kingdom, short of showing up. Eternal Life is a participation trophy.

 

I am sorry if this offends anyone. That's not my intention (honestly). But I can not sit back and allow false doctrine to be perpetuated.

 

Satan wants you to have a false pride in your own "earned" confidence, the same as what nearly destroyed this woman's life. Satan wants you to compete against others rather than work with them. Satan wants you to think that a relentless and merciless market that cares nothing for feelings and only rewards added value is Godly while recognizing our own intrinsic worth as caring and compassionate beings is satanic.

 

Again, I'm sorry. This got me rather upset. I'm going to step away now and take 10 deep breaths yadda yadda. Hopefully I can come back and discuss this in a slightly more rational (and less emotional) mode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sorry if this offends anyone. That's not my intention (honestly). But I can not sit back and allow false doctrine to be perpetuated.

 

Satan wants you to have a false pride in your own "earned" confidence, the same as what nearly destroyed this woman's life. Satan wants you to compete against others rather than work with them. Satan wants you to think that a relentless and merciless market that cares nothing for feelings and only rewards added value is Godly while recognizing our own intrinsic worth as caring and compassionate beings is satanic.

 

Again, I'm sorry. This got me rather upset. I'm going to step away now and take 10 deep breaths yadda yadda. Hopefully I can come back and discuss this in a slightly more rational (and less emotional) mode.

 

 

You do realize that the article is not a church article, but an article an article about the world in which we live?

 

And even the church realizes that people need the tools to survive in this world.  Also that the church hold up as examples those people that have over come hard things.  And guess what?  Its very hard to learn how to over come hard things...  Unless you face hard things.

 

Thus my thoughts (and my take from the article) is that we do competition not because it is somehow innately "good"  but because it is innately "hard".  By facing 'hard things' in a controlled environment (homes, schools etc) we get the training to handle 'hard things' in an uncontrolled environment (aka the world).

 

However if our controlled environment removes things that are hard then when we go out into the world (which we all must) then we will fundamentally lack certain skills that would help us survive.  People who lack fundamental coping skills are considered to some degree dysfunctional people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, first, thanks for a thoughtful reply. That means I wasn't too dramatic in my last post. Either that, or you're just a better person than I am.
 

You do realize that the article is not a church article, but an article an article about the world in which we live?

"Wherefore, verily I say unto you that all things unto me are spiritual, and not at any time have I given unto you a law which was temporal;"
I do realize it's an editorial and not an official church piece or even necessarily an article about the church or church doctrine. But I (try to) view everything through a Gospel-focused lens. Truth is truth, whether we're talking about the Gospel or whether we're talking about sociology studies and public education.
 

And even the church realizes that people need the tools to survive in this world.  Also that the church hold up as examples those people that have over come hard things.  And guess what?  Its very hard to learn how to over come hard things...  Unless you face hard things.
 
Thus my thoughts (and my take from the article) is that we do competition not because it is somehow innately "good"  but because it is innately "hard".  By facing 'hard things' in a controlled environment (homes, schools etc) we get the training to handle 'hard things' in an uncontrolled environment (aka the world).
 
However if our controlled environment removes things that are hard then when we go out into the world (which we all must) then we will fundamentally lack certain skills that would help us survive.  People who lack fundamental coping skills are considered to some degree dysfunctional people.

So, the way that you have it written there, I would agree with (almost) completely. Yes, we can and do and will face a lot of hard things. Yes it's absolutely important that we understand how to face hard things. Yes it's imperative that we teach our children how to face hard things. If we enroll our kids in competitive activities (sports or what have you) while explicitly teaching them "facing hard things" as the context, then those competitive activities can greatly benefit our kids.

 

The problem is that that is not what is happening (at least not on a societal scale). Instead, competition is training our kids to value winning over sportsmanship and to avoid at all costs facing the hardest thing of all - failure. There's a reason that the word "loser" has so many derogatory connotations to it.

 

So I'll throw all of that out the window and just consider one thing: What is the Gospel perspective? Our reward in Eternity is based on one thing: How we play. Our success/failure at any of the innumerable challenges of life is utterly meaningless, all that matters is how we face those challenges. And what that means, at its most simple, is it all comes down to whether or not we participate in the Gospel. If we participate, we obtain Eternal life. If we don't participate, we obtain nothing.

 

So if that's how God's plan works, then how does that apply to school and sports and career and family? Well, to me, it means that whether I get an A or an F on the math test doesn't really matter, as long as I am participating, engaging, learning, and progressing. It means that whether I win or lose the football game doesn't matter, as long as I am participating, engaging, and learning, and progressing. It means that whether or not I add value to the gross national product doesn't matter, as long as I am participating, engaging, learning, and progressing. It means whether or not I'm the ideal father doesn't matter, as long as I am participating, engaging, learning, and progressing.

In short: success is in the effort, as long as it's our best effort.

 

The "market" and our society and everything that we are raised by our culture to believe will tell you that what I just said is wrong. That people with that kind of attitude will be dysfunctional. Well, the market is ungodly. So do we adapt to serve an ungodly economy? Or do we adapt the economy to serve God's plan?

 

The whole reason that self-esteem is a thing is because somebody discovered that accomplishment was a consequence of confidence and not the other way around. I will raise my children to face hard things knowing that they are children of God and that God has the power to save them. That's going to mean self-esteem, and it may mean participation trophies. It may mean that they wind up being dysfunctional misfits in our current economic system. I certainly hope so.

 

:edit:
P.S.

There are a LOT of hard things you can have your kids face in a controlled environment that do not involve competition.

 

(Tangent)

I took a university class where the professor listed about 10 very controversial topics on the board. The assignment was to pick a topic and then prepare an oral presentation where we had to argue that topic from the point of view opposite of what we personally believed. This is a beautiful exercise and I encourage everyone to engage in it as often as possible because it's really quite enlightening.

 

Anyway, he gave the class an example to discuss and that was the topic of participation trophies. When I raised my hand and he asked me to explain why participation trophies were a good thing, I thought about Nash economics and game theory - cooperation is always better than competition. And that became my answer. Participation trophies teach kids that participation and cooperation are better and more important than competition. Of course, in reality, kids learn whatever they're told to learn, so if you tell them that participation trophies will only make them dysfunctional praise-junkies, then that's what they will learn. I'm getting distracted.

 

So after that class, having defended a position on participation trophies that I originally did not agree with, I took some time and considered it thoroughly. I came to the same conclusion that John Nash did. Cooperation is always better for the group and for all of the individuals within the group. The problem is that, as cultural individualists, we never ever think outside the individualist perspective, which means we always choose competition. In short, our society is broken by selfishness.

Edited by puf_the_majic_dragon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, first, thanks for a thoughtful reply. That means I wasn't too dramatic in my last post. Either that, or you're just a better person than I am.

 

"Wherefore, verily I say unto you that all things unto me are spiritual, and not at any time have I given unto you a law which was temporal;"

I do realize it's an editorial and not an official church piece or even necessarily an article about the church or church doctrine. But I (try to) view everything through a Gospel-focused lens. Truth is truth, whether we're talking about the Gospel or whether we're talking about sociology studies and public education.

 

So, the way that you have it written there, I would agree with (almost) completely. Yes, we can and do and will face a lot of hard things. Yes it's absolutely important that we understand how to face hard things. Yes it's imperative that we teach our children how to face hard things. If we enroll our kids in competitive activities (sports or what have you) while explicitly teaching them "facing hard things" as the context, then those competitive activities can greatly benefit our kids.

 

The problem is that that is not what is happening (at least not on a societal scale). Instead, competition is training our kids to value winning over sportsmanship and to avoid at all costs facing the hardest thing of all - failure. There's a reason that the word "loser" has so many derogatory connotations to it.

 

So I'll throw all of that out the window and just consider one thing: What is the Gospel perspective? Our reward in Eternity is based on one thing: How we play. Our success/failure at any of the innumerable challenges of life is utterly meaningless, all that matters is how we face those challenges. And what that means, at its most simple, is it all comes down to whether or not we participate in the Gospel. If we participate, we obtain Eternal life. If we don't participate, we obtain nothing.

 

So if that's how God's plan works, then how does that apply to school and sports and career and family? Well, to me, it means that whether I get an A or an F on the math test doesn't really matter, as long as I am participating, engaging, learning, and progressing. It means that whether I win or lose the football game doesn't matter, as long as I am participating, engaging, and learning, and progressing. It means that whether or not I add value to the gross national product doesn't matter, as long as I am participating, engaging, learning, and progressing. It means whether or not I'm the ideal father doesn't matter, as long as I am participating, engaging, learning, and progressing.

In short: success is in the effort, as long as it's our best effort.

 

The "market" and our society and everything that we are raised by our culture to believe will tell you that what I just said is wrong. That people with that kind of attitude will be dysfunctional. Well, the market is ungodly. So do we adapt to serve an ungodly economy? Or do we adapt the economy to serve God's plan?

 

The whole reason that self-esteem is a thing is because somebody discovered that accomplishment was a consequence of confidence and not the other way around. I will raise my children to face hard things knowing that they are children of God and that God has the power to save them. That's going to mean self-esteem, and it may mean participation trophies. It may mean that they wind up being dysfunctional misfits in our current economic system. I certainly hope so.

 

:edit:

P.S.

There are a LOT of hard things you can have your kids face in a controlled environment that do not involve competition.

 

(Tangent)

I took a university class where the professor listed about 10 very controversial topics on the board. The assignment was to pick a topic and then prepare an oral presentation where we had to argue that topic from the point of view opposite of what we personally believed. This is a beautiful exercise and I encourage everyone to engage in it as often as possible because it's really quite enlightening.

 

Anyway, he gave the class an example to discuss and that was the topic of participation trophies. When I raised my hand and he asked me to explain why participation trophies were a good thing, I thought about Nash economics and game theory - cooperation is always better than competition. And that became my answer. Participation trophies teach kids that participation and cooperation are better and more important than competition. Of course, in reality, kids learn whatever they're told to learn, so if you tell them that participation trophies will only make them dysfunctional praise-junkies, then that's what they will learn. I'm getting distracted.

 

So after that class, having defended a position on participation trophies that I originally did not agree with, I took some time and considered it thoroughly. I came to the same conclusion that John Nash did. Cooperation is always better for the group and for all of the individuals within the group. The problem is that, as cultural individualists, we never ever think outside the individualist perspective, which means we always choose competition. In short, our society is broken by selfishness.

 

 

That is all well and go for you.. but rip apart and totally dismiss an argument because because they do not agree with your (And let face it outside these circles, rare) understanding how God set things up is to misses the whole point.

 

People want to be successful.  In studying successful people they found that they had 'self esteem.'  Instead of figuring out if 'self esteem' was the cause or just another byproduct of success, they assume it was the cause.   As so you get this worldly drive to "build self-esteem" so they can be successful.

 

So how does the world "build self-esteem"?  By taking away all challenges.  By making sure "everyone" wins and gets the prize. (aka no failure so no hard things) I would hope this plan sounds familiar.  Once we see this I would hope we try to counter it, and so when someone out in the world also sees it as a problem we should be willing to support them (to a point).

 

Now does this mean the other way was free of flaws?  No of course not.  But if the worse we can say is it might stroke pride and a sense of competition... well we already have to fight those battles anyways.

 

But if you got a plan that can teach people to do hard things without competition and pride that the world would be willing to put into practice I am all for it

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is all well and go for you.. but rip apart and totally dismiss an argument because because they do not agree with your (And let face it outside these circles, rare) understanding how God set things up is to misses the whole point.

 

People want to be successful.  In studying successful people they found that they had 'self esteem.'  Instead of figuring out if 'self esteem' was the cause or just another byproduct of success, they assume it was the cause.   As so you get this worldly drive to "build self-esteem" so they can be successful.

 

So how does the world "build self-esteem"?  By taking away all challenges.  By making sure "everyone" wins and gets the prize. (aka no failure so no hard things) I would hope this plan sounds familiar.  Once we see this I would hope we try to counter it, and so when someone out in the world also sees it as a problem we should be willing to support them (to a point).

 

Now does this mean the other way was free of flaws?  No of course not.  But if the worse we can say is it might stroke pride and a sense of competition... well we already have to fight those battles anyways.

 

But if you got a plan that can teach people to do hard things without competition and pride that the world would be willing to put into practice I am all for it

 

Yep, I know, my point of view is pretty rare. Even within these circles. Makes for some interesting Sunday School lessons, lemme tell ya. But like most people, I'm pretty well convinced that my point of view is the right one, so I'm dead set on getting others to see it my way ;)

 

As for a plan... well, the problem's way more complicated than that. I mean we've been weaving individualist philosophy into our culture and our politics and our economics and our religion for 200 years - the only plan that can really combat that is the Plan of Salvation, and there's even disagreement about that among people who share their belief in that plan. So on a large scale? No, I'm sorry, there's not much I can do.

 

But what I can do, is share and discuss and teach and hopefully influence the few people within my tiny corner of the world to see a better way and to strive for it. 

 

Anyway, I hope you understand that I don't have anything against competition per se. The problem is in our attitude towards competition and in the instruction (or lack thereof) that we give to our children when we put them in competitive environments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was scrolling down my  newsfeed and saw this. I think it sums up the point I'm trying to make quite nicely. With this adendum: competition is literally defined as comparing ourselves to others.

 

11350805_1002772219742983_45031145632351

 

I think that our general authorities have made it quite clear that self-esteem is a good thing. If the author of the article wishes to argue against certain ways that we define self-esteem, or certain ways that we develop it, then he should probably consider a rewrite.

 

https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/james-e-faust_self-esteem-great-human-need/

https://www.lds.org/media-library/video/the-value-of-self-esteem?lang=eng

https://www.lds.org/liahona/1983/09/helping-your-children-like-themselves?lang=eng

https://www.lds.org/new-era/2014/01/truth-lies-and-your-self-worth?lang=eng

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi guys, 

 

As the post's author, I would like your take on the King Benjamin incident. What was the point of tearing down a righteous people to get them to the point that they felt lower than dirt? Seems like he would have been ripped on by educators, motivators, psychologists and clergy. 

I think you'll really appreciate this BYU devotional. A quotation that I think answers your question: "Nothingness describes not man’s lack of value, but rather his powerlessness during his mortal probation and, especially, his all-encompassing need for the Lord." (emphasis added)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I put this in response to the article, but I also want to put it here.

 

The first and biggest problem with this article is misunderstanding of the true definition of Self-Esteem. And, as to the TED Talk, he never defines it either. He discusses our need to rid of it, but never actually defines what it is. From how he described each point, it’s evident he isn’t any more aware of the true definition as is the author of this article. Then, in the video he uses an example of a healthy way his own self-esteem was promoted in being told regularly that he was loved, thereby contradicting his own argument.

If the definition of building one’s self-esteem is to be repeatedly told how wonderful and perfect we are, then I would agree with both this article and video. If our self-esteem was dependent upon our being bigger and better at everything than the next person, then I would believe with this article and the video. These behaviors are detrimental to a self-esteem and in fact do create narcissistic and entitled individuals continually dependent on the praise of other people. However, thankfully so, these are not the definition of self-esteem.

Nathaniel Branden, author of The Six Pillars of Self-Esteem explains, “Sometimes self-esteem is confused with boasting or bragging or arrogance; but such traits reflect not too much self-esteem, but too little; they reflect a lack of self-esteem. Persons of high self-esteem are not driven to make themselves superior to others; they do not seek to prove their value by measuring themselves against a comparative standard. Their joy is in being who they are, not in being better than someone else.”
Yes, it’s nice to have what we already know validated by another, but a person with a healthy level of self-esteem doesn’t allow someone else who challenges what we know about ourselves to drive our self-esteem.

Nathan goes on to define self-esteem with two components: “One is a sense of basic confidence in the face of life’s challenges: self-efficacy. The other is a sense of being worthy of happiness: self-respect….Self-efficacy means confidence in the functioning of my mind, in my ability to think, understand, learn, choose, and make decisions; confidence in my ability to understand the facts of reality that fall within the sphere of my interests and needs; self-trust; self-reliance”. That is not narcissism, it’s a personal assurance that you are okay in the world, can function within it and provide to its functionality.
The man in the video discusses how he handled his daughters concern for being a capable soccor player. He was correct in how he handled it. He actually served her self-esteem while believing he wasn’t holding to it. Nathaniel explains, ““When our illusion of self-esteem rests on the fragile support of never being challenged, when our insecurity finds evidence of rejection where no rejection exists, then it is only a matter of time until our inner bomb explodes. The form of the explosion is self-destructive behavior—and the fact that one may have an extraordinary intelligence is no protection. Brilliant people with low self-esteem act against their interests every day”

One of the best examples of how to build self-esteem I’ve heard is to allow them to determine their worth on their own from the words not spoken. If I tell little Johnny, “You are so wonderful f” after he cleans up the book shelf by placing the books in order!” That doesn’t build self-esteem. The only thing Johnny gets from it is that he somehow wonderful. To what extend is he wonderful? Why is he wonderful? But, if you say to Johnny, “Thank you, Johnny, for cleaning up the bookshelf and placing the books in order. Because of this, we will be able to find what we need more easily.” Then, Johnny is able to deduce on his own that he did a good thing, he helped out, he fits into this world, he is safe in this world, and he made a beneficial contribution to his fellow classmates. That tells him so much more than a hallow wonderful.

Nathaniel explains the difference between the destruction of a poor self-esteem and the benefits to a healthy one, ““Poor self-esteem correlates with irrationality, blindness to reality, rigidity, fear of the new and unfamiliar, inappropriate conformity or inappropriate rebelliousness, defensiveness, over-compliant or over-controlling behavior, and fear of or hostility toward others.”

“High self-esteem seeks the challenge and stimulation of worthwhile and demanding goals. Reaching such goals nurtures good self-esteem. Low self-esteem seeks the safety of the familiar and undemanding. Confining oneself to the familiar and undemanding serves to weaken self-esteem…. Research shows that high-self-esteem subjects will persist at a task significantly longer than low-self-esteem subjects…. The higher our self-esteem, the more disposed we are…. The healthier our self-esteem, the more inclined we are to treat others with respect, benevolence, goodwill, and fairness—since we do not tend to perceive them as a threat, and since self-respect is the foundation of respect for others. With healthy self-esteem, we are not quick to interpret relationships in malevolent, adversarial terms. We do not approach encounters with automatic expectations of rejection, humiliation, treachery, or betrayal…. Research shows that a well-developed sense of personal value and autonomy correlates significantly with kindness, generosity, social cooperation, and a spirit of mutual aid”

To say that we don’t need to be emotionally independent, emotionally intelligent and strong as an individual but can only rely on other people to do it for use, because they’re going to be there anyway, is like saying we don’t need two arms or two legs – we can simply use the one. But, who is to say the right arm is up to doing the work of both the right and the left arm? Who is to say it should have the responsibility for the functions of both arms? And, who is to say the right and left arm have the same functionality? They don’t. They are mirrored. They have their own strength. Yes, the right arm could be strengthened with the extra use in the absence of the left arm. But, the right arm could never entirely replace the function required of and in the same perfection that could be carried out by the left arm. They are interdependent. So is our function in this life. We are interdependent. We require a level of independence and dependence. My emotional and mental well-being is just as important as my physical, mental, and spiritual health. You wouldn’t suggest to me any of those are any less necessary than required of me to live a functional, healthy, and productive life so why suggest I don’t need a healthy, well-balanced self-esteem to guide myself through life. The five prepared of the Ten Virgins couldn’t share their oil with the other unprepared five because otherwise they wouldn’t have enough for themselves. We need to put our own oxygen masks on before we help others. Taking time to take care of ourselves allows us to have the strength necessary to help other people efficiently. Knowing where our boundaries of healthy sacrifice allow us to sustain our service to humanity long term. How happy Heavenly Father must feel when he knows we have those positive attributes and still become like a child, are obedient and faithful because now we know we are independent enough while know we are still dependent on Him, we still turn to Him. We are interdependent with Him. We do all we can and have He’ll meet us in the middle. We act instead of being acted upon. If there is anything Satan doesn’t want us to have is a healthy self-esteem; a healthy sense of self, a health sense of self-respect, competence, confidence, inner and outward strength, and the like. So, what does he do? He confuses the definition of such so some who are well-meaning can suggest we need to do away with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share