Book review - The courage to be disliked

As someone with people pleasing tendencies I was hoping to get some tips on how to be ok with people not liking me from this book - what I actually got was so much more.

Adler vs Freud/Jung

I have to admit I started out a bit dubious about this psychology/philosophy (based on the work of Adler who was a peer of Freud) as it goes straight into stating that trauma isn't real and whatever problems we might face following traumatic events are indeed choices, not a reaction to the trauma as such. Personally I think this is rubbish! Trauma is real and we have to deal with our trauma in order to move on and to stop it repeating itself throughout our lives. I think, in this space, this philosophy feels hugely privileged and also does not take into account mental health issues and diseases. That said, there was a lot of good to come once you got past that bit so I'm choosing to mostly ignore that part.

What I did like however was the element of freedom posed by this theory, whilst Jung and Freud essentially preached determinism (we are a pure product of our experiences), Adler believed in freewill and that we make our own choices in life (even unproductive ones like withdrawing from the world) in order to fulfil whatever goal we set for ourselves. This is interesting and brings a sense of hope I feel.

Compare and despair

The book sets out that all our problems are interpersonal ones i.e. that we wouldn't have them if we were the only person left on earth (I'd argue though that we'd probably have bigger problems in that case like survival and loneliness but anyway...). For example, you wouldn't care what you looked like, ruminating over something you said or that you were shy if there was no one else around. Kind of makes sense I guess. Apparently Adler also coined the terms inferiority complex whereby a person believes so strongly that an atribute of their's has been the direct cause of problems in their lives. Adler believed that feelings of inferiority aren't necessarily a bad thing, they help us strive for superiority. The difference from how we normally use those terms today though are that he never used them in comparison to others - only to ourselves. The comparison of ourselves to others and competition is where we get into trouble which is a great philosophy - easier said than done though...

Alongside this concept of only comparing oneself to oneself is the understanding that all humans are equal (yes, getting a bit Animal Farm here but it's all good), irrespective of age, education, social standing, ethnicity etc and we have to think of all people as our comrades - only then can we feel safe in the world. Adler set out that there are two main objectives to human life:

1. To be self reliant

2. To live in harmony with the world

Mind your own business

Across both of these points he sets out that we have three main life tasks as humans across work, friendship and love and that all interpersonal problems arise when you encroach on someone else's tasks, or they on your's. The owner of the task is whoever is directly affected by the outcome, for example, like the saying goes, 'what other people think of you is none of your business'. Liking, or not liking you is the other person's task, accepting that whatever they think of you is fine is your's. Personally I like this representation of tasks, just think how many time someone has gotten involved in your tasks at work and the feelings this drives up - grrrr!

The book then takes some very interesting stances on relationships, ANY relationship (married couple, friends, parent/child, student/teacher, employee/employer etc), in stating that we should also strive to only have horizontal relationships. What does this mean?! A relationship of true equals where you don't see yourself or the other person as superior/inferior and always feel able to object and challenge irrespective of your position to the other person. I love this as a concept! I've always struggled with authority and hold levels in very high regard especially at work meaning I don't always feel able to challenge and object. This leads me to taking on too much or not really critically thinking through what I've been asked to do, just blindly accepting. Definitely something I'm going to start working on!

Good girl!

Interestingly the book then goes on to add that one must never praise or berate as this only belongs in vertical relationships. It gives the example of if you ask a friend to help you clean your house, you would never praise their work as this would be patronising, you'd say 'thank you'. The book poses that praise makes people believe that they have no ability and that we must also never seek praise or recognition from others. If you seek recognition you are living by other people's values and not your own, hence you are living their life and not your own 🤯

Following on from this they state that living one's life in order to not be disliked is an unfree way of living and so one must become free of that desire for recognition and to be liked in order to live one's own, free life.

Living in harmony

This all goes to that first human objective of self reliance, the second objective is then to live in harmony. The key to this whole theory is that people are innately good and don't wish harm on others. Therefore you should take care of yourself and your tasks but also contribute to society, or the wider eco system that we live in. Contributing doesn't mean at the expense of yourself, your happiness or your wellbeing! You come first as you can only contribute if you take good care of yourself. A contribution can be anything including just being but most contribute through their work, if they are able to, or through being part of the 'chain' by buying food for example, this then contributes to the entire supply chain down to the producers.

This all then boils down to a 'community feeling' where we feel 'it's ok to be here' and understand our place in the ecosystem. The key points that drive this are:

1. Self acceptance - This is me, warts and all!

2. Confidence in others - People are equals and comrades. We are in this together!

3. Contribution to others - Through work or other means e.g. just by being

This is really beautiful and where I think the title of the book is actually really deceiving. Yes, this is about 'you doing you' unapologetically but it's so much more. It's a gorgeous, harmonious view of the world and a way of living to really aspire to. It does state that apparently it take the amount of years of half your age to actually fully understand and implement this way of living e.g. if you're 40 it will take you 20 years, but it feels worth the time investment for true freedom.

The book ends with the grand statement that all humans can be happy. They pose that happiness equates to a contribution to others plus freedom. When one is able to fully accept oneself and one's flaws and live in freedom from recognition from others whilst holding the feeling of being of use then one will be happy. They add that the contribution can be invisible i.e. that we are of value just by being e.g. someone would miss us if we were gone.

Wrapping up

It's a bit of a hard read and the format of conversation between student and teacher is rather heavy going at times. The title is definitely deceiving but I'm sure helpful for sales as 'Gain true happiness through contribution to others' is not really going to fly off the shelves in the same way.

I do feel that the elements around trauma are flawed, the parts around goals and choices are not inclusive of mental health conditions or socio economic inequality and comes from a great deal of privilege. I do though really believe in the overall message of being self sufficient and contributing to others. This is backed by so much research into happiness and holds up. I'm not sure if it's implementable or particularly congruent with todays capitalist society but if enough of us try maybe it could just save the world 😊