Think less of yourself

[Infaustus]

My uncle once told me about an old friend of his, who owned a restaurant in a small town way back in the 50's or 60's (I cant remember). The place itself wasn’t extraordinary; it didn’t have amazing food or coffee. But rather what distinguished it from the rest was found subtly in a sign hanging in the window that read "think less of yourself." Folks at the time took this at face value, saw it as an insult and didn’t go there anymore. Despite the obvious complaints and losing business over it, he never took it down. My uncle suggested he probably was just portraying a fact of life; that people tend to take themselves too seriously. In other words, theres always something one thinks makes them somehow unique or special from the rest. This could be good looks, intellect, athletic ability, psychic vampirism, whatever. He said that because of this, these people make it much harder for them to be happy. That in his case, he has already made peace with his own insignificance and is better for it. As it happens, I had been struggling with my own reaching for the stars and at the time was entertaining the fact I’m probably never going to even come close. He provided the last building block I needed to come to a conclusion that I much needed. So it occurred to me that if I put this forward, at the risk of sounding like its about me, maybe other people could benefit from it like I did. So lets see what happens.

[Dark Muse]

It is an interesting thought, but I do not think that one thinking they are unique by defualt leads them to be unhappy, nor do I think that just becasue one does see themselves as different means they are taking themselves too seriously. I for one would not be offended by such a sign even if I do not agree completely with the philosophy behind it.

[Infaustus]

If contentment is required for happiness, then raising the bar doesnt help. But I do understand the stride for greatness, and that without we might not have as much.

[Etienne]

But wouldn't raising the bar help to self-improvement, be it in any domain, including humility? ;)

And I'm sure that in most people's humility there is some pride of this humility, especially if they put signs in their windows. Not that it's meant as an insult to your uncle, there is fundamentally nothing wrong in being proud of one's humility, beside an apparent contradiction (which is more apparent then real, but again no generalization possible).

[Dark Muse]

If contentment is required for happiness, then raising the bar doesnt help. But I do understand the stride for greatness, and that without we might not have as much.

To me being content is not the same as happiness nor required for happiness. To me in a way being content is simply seteling for something less.

For one to choose contentment would be to simply accept thier current posistion instead of trying for anything better.

And who said being unique is just a strive for greatness? I do not think those two things are interchangeable with each other.

[ShoutGrace]

Regarding the opening post, I don't think of myself as insignificant, nor do I think of my abilities or defects as great. I think that if I took the statement to mean, "Don't think about yourself as much," i.e. think of others and their needs more, than I would have been pleased to see the sign.


To me being content is not the same as happiness nor required for happiness. To me in a way being content is simply seteling for something less.

For one to choose contentment would be to simply accept thier current posistion instead of trying for anything better.


I quite agree. I think that this train of thought has something in common with the discrepancies between the typically ancient and the typically modern conceptions of “happiness.” Modern conceptions of happiness seem to involve contentment and self serving pleasure. The ancient conception of happiness has more to do with character, conduct and so forth.

Though this wasn't requested, maybe you will find it interesting - I think that Jesus' conception of human fulfillment squares quite well in form with what you've said here, i.e. "Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness." It is the hungering and thirsting for the right that makes all the difference.

[LitNetIsGreat]

I think there is much in this post and credit Infaustus to your uncle. It reminds me of something I read in a book called Status Anxiety by Alain De Botton. In it he suggests that happiness is relative to things around you, you judge your successes by those immediately surrounding you and closest to you: you best friends, neighbours, work colleagues are you benchmarks to success and ultimately, your happiness.

Ultimately it is all about competition. It is probably true that competition is natural and normal, just as it is in the animal kingdom, which is of course what we are in the end. So these special attributes that we design become part of our ammunition if you like, used in order to compete with those around us. I think it was Wilde who said “there is nothing worse than seeing a friend succeed” all of which may sound horrible, but at the same time it is probably quite true, even if I would like to think that personally this is not so.

Throughout time some philosophers have always recommended walking in the dessert or such massive open spaces because it makes us feel small in comparison to the world around us. It gives us a sense of perspective about the “true” life we are leading, and reminds us not to get sucked into the politics of everyday life. The sign displaying the words “Think less of yourself” has the same effect”.

The problem with believing that one is unique, or possesses qualities that are above others is that it falls into the competitive category, which in the end is harmful. Perhaps it is taking the wisdom of the sign a little too far to suggest it borrows some of the Buddhist philosophy of rejection of material things. By holding on to the idea of a specialised quality we are forming an attachment, which if you follow Buddhist philosophy as I do a little bit, leads only to suffering.

No, I like your uncle’s café and if it had been around today I would have gladly popped round for a coffee and a bite to eat.

[Dark Muse]

The problem with believing that one is unique, or possesses qualities that are above others is that it falls into the competitive category, which in the end is harmful. Perhaps it is taking the wisdom of the sign a little too far to suggest it borrows some of the Buddhist philosophy of rejection of material things. By holding on to the idea of a specialised quality we are forming an attachment, which if you follow Buddhist philosophy as I do a little bit, leads only to suffering.

If no one thought themselves unique, or tried to be different, or thought they possessed qualities that others did not have, than there would be no great works of art or literature, or a lot of other things like the computer you used to type that message.

[LitNetIsGreat]

But art and the material world are two completely separate things. I do not place the great works of literature or genius in the fields of music and art as the same thing as technology, however useful that may be.

Great artists and thinkers by their very nature tend to operate outside of the competitive world, or outside of mainstream thought, often receiving criticism for it at the time. Most artistic endeavours are created because of individual desire of expression and not to pander to the masses necessarily.

I am not saying that being unique or different is a bad thing, but that thinking you are unique and different, i.e. better than others could be. I suppose it is all about attitude and how you view and treat others around you. If you are Shakespeare and think you are better than others, then fine, but if you think you are better than Shakespeare, you are going to be disappointed and ultimately unhappy for it. If you know what I mean.

[Etienne]

But to think of yourself highly, of striving to do better -to create the perfect work of art - is not about humility at all, on the contrary, the desire to create the sublime is probably the act that requires the least humility.

[Dark Muse]

I am not saying that being unique or different is a bad thing, but that thinking you are unique and different, i.e. better than others could be. I suppose it is all about attitude and how you view and treat others around you. If you are Shakespeare and think you are better than others, then fine, but if you think you are better than Shakespeare, you are going to be disappointed and ultimately unhappy for it. If you know what I mean.


Honestly I do not see the connection between one thinking they are unique to equaling one thinking they are better than others.

I do not see being different as = to being superior.

I just don't get that argument.

[Infaustus]

I am sorry, I failed to word it correctly. I was refering to those who would believe they are better or greater because they are unique and special.

[Judas130]

My uncle once told me about an old friend of his, who owned a restaurant in a small town way back in the 50's or 60's (I cant remember). The place itself wasn’t extraordinary; it didn’t have amazing food or coffee. But rather what distinguished it from the rest was found subtly in a sign hanging in the window that read "think less of yourself." Folks at the time took this at face value, saw it as an insult and didn’t go there anymore. Despite the obvious complaints and losing business over it, he never took it down. My uncle suggested he probably was just portraying a fact of life; that people tend to take themselves too seriously. In other words, theres always something one thinks makes them somehow unique or special from the rest. This could be good looks, intellect, athletic ability, psychic vampirism, whatever. He said that because of this, these people make it much harder for them to be happy. That in his case, he has already made peace with his own insignificance and is better for it. As it happens, I had been struggling with my own reaching for the stars and at the time was entertaining the fact I’m probably never going to even come close. He provided the last building block I needed to come to a conclusion that I much needed. So it occurred to me that if I put this forward, at the risk of sounding like its about me, maybe other people could benefit from it like I did. So lets see what happens.

thats quite a lovely story. Yet i would have to argue that, physically, we are all different, not one will ever be like you in the history of this Earth. your genetic make up is completely unique (unless in the case of twins...but im not sure on that one).

religiously however, we were all created in the image of God, and God does not love one man more than the other.

i think your story is good to teach us not to get full of ourselves with illusions of grandeur or power as that can lead to bad character. Yet i still believe we should do all we are capable of and try at least to follow our dreams or hopes and not see our lives as insignificant...as some might connote that choice of word with 'hopeless', or 'good for nothing'.

However still, i would agree that theres something just...nice...about living a peaceful good life. Yet i still think theres something saying 'if you put the effort in you'll still fail'. I think if theres a chance of being who we fancy ourselves to be, then we can do it.


I am sorry, I failed to word it correctly. I was refering to those who would believe they are better or greater because they are unique and special.

'An Aryan race' springs to mind. I understand now.

[blp]

Someone mentioned Alain de Botton. Today I read his book The Consolations of Philosophy, which is irritating in a lot of ways, but it talks in some detail about three philosophers who seem very relevant to this thread, Epicurius, Seneca and Montaigne. Seneca in particular suggests, as de Botton has it, that the greatest problem for human beings is setting their expectations too high, both of themselves and of the world around them.

However, de Botton also goes on to talk about Nietzsche and how contemptuous he was of the idea of repudiating one's desires philosophically - saying that love, success etc. were superficial because one had failed to achieve fulflilment in these areas - giving in to bitterness in other words. Instead, Nietzsche counseled, we should continue to allow ourselves to want the great things we naturally do - even our own greatness - but with the understanding that achieving greatness would involve great difficulty.

Later, Lacan said, 'The only thing of which one can be guilty is of giving ground relative to one's desire.'

!

[Infaustus]

Let me try to clarify were this is ideal for you all. Take my "reaching for the stars" for instance; at one time I thought I was destined to do something great, for one reason or another. I did make myself quite unhappy with what I perceived as failure to do so, to the point were I finally sat back and started to think, "maybe I'm not so hot." Then soon after, we left on our trip and that is when my good uncle told me the story and thus helped me get closure on the matter. Surely this is not just limited to me, and thus what I meant from others benefiting from it. Though in my experience, being humble isn't a bad thing.

Furthermore its not that I don’t try to perform well anymore, I simply choose not to beat myself up over whether or not I achieve greatness.

[blp]

I think what you're describing is pretty normal, Infaustus. It's a disease common to youth, though not, perhaps, something all youth are infected with, to think you're going to go out and rock the world like it's never been rocked before. It's equally common at some point to realise you have no innate, god-given genius or midas touch that ensures everything you touch turns to gold. The question here is what to do once this reality hits.

In de Botton's version of things, which is all I have to go on for the moment, Seneca's solution and to a perhaps lesser extent Epicurius' and Montaigne's, is to recognise your human fallibility. Nietzsche's response, which is the one that's working best for me as an argument, is to say, that this isn't an end point. Desire doesn't shut down just because you've realised it's difficult, perhaps even impossible to fulfill. And, somehow, the world still seems to need to be rocked - and we know it's possible to do it because we've got all the examples of its happening from the past. The risk Nietzsche is pointing to is a sort of abject, foolish capitulation to one's fallibility that makes one even more fallible than one even needs to be. Instead of one's great projects, one suddenly has instead one's 'little pleasures' - a glass of wine or four after dinner, a smoke, a scratch of the dog's head and, in all that supposed peace with the world (as long as your relatively wealthy and privileged enough to even attain it), suppressed desire like a stifled fire and a sort of viciousness towards younger, more idealistic types, turning your philosophy of simple humility from the liberation it was supposed to be to an oppressive wish to see others fail. I've seen enough people fall prey to this kind of thing to believe this is a real risk.