Introduction to Adlerian psychology

I’m writing this with some help from The Courage To Be Disliked (TCTBD) by Fumitake Koga and Ichiro Kishimi. Here are some highlights from the book. I wont be covering everything so I recommend reading the full book (or at least the highlights) for additional insight. The book can be found on archive.org, but I recommend purchasing if you can to support the authors.

Adlerian psychology is a gateway to becoming whoever you want to be. It demands you look at yourself critically – but not unkindly. Analyze yourself. Are the stories you tell yourself about who you are (and why) really the full truth? Or is the truth so uncomfortable you bury it?

This psychology is very oppositional to the ways we’ve come to understand trauma and emotions in society; This makes it uncomfortable and potentially offensive. If you do find it offensive then I suggest taking breaks between sections and returning when you’re ready.

You have nothing to lose by opening yourself to learning and very much to gain – Seek discomfort and it will make you (and your understanding of people and the world) stronger.

With that said, here are some key points of Adlerian psychology:

“Trauma isn’t real” – The present isn’t defined by the past
People can (subconsciously and consciously) choose emotions
Personality is changeable
“All problems are interpersonal”
The importance of community feeling
Personal power and the present moment

I’ll address each of these first from the perspective of Adlerian psychology, afterwards I’ll give my own personal thoughts. My opinions are not all exactly the same as Adler’s but I agree much more than I disagree. If you find any point of this psychology’s standpoint upsetting then my interpretations might help quell that upset, but I can’t promise that.

Disclaimers:

I’m not an expert of Adlerian psychology
At this point I consider myself a follower of this psychology

I hope you’ll read anyway and let the information I share speak for itself.

Part One – Trauma

“Trauma isn’t Real” – The past doesn’t determine the present or future.

The most common understanding of trauma in society is that it shapes someone for life and determines their personality and capability. Adlerian psychology rejects this and can be best explained directly with a quote from Adler.

“No experience is in itself a cause of our success or failure. We do not suffer from the shock of our experiences—the so-called trauma—but instead we make out of them whatever suits our purposes. We are not determined by our experiences, but the meaning we give them is self-determining.”

This doesn’t mean someone is lying about distress (past or present) – But instead means that people will unconsciously manifest symptoms – including distress – towards a certain goal. They will also use trauma to their current (often short-term) benefit. Just because suffering can be manufactured towards some goal doesn’t mean the suffering isn’t real.

Etiology – Attribution of a result to a cause or reason. Because of X, now Y.

Teleology – Attribution of a result to some purpose, goal, or function.

Etiology, in the context of Adlerian psychology, can also be called determinism which is incompatible with the concept of free will and leads to nihilism and hopelessness. It’s defeatist in nature, everything is pre-determined.

Though the framing of Adlerian psychology and teleology may seem harsh, I believe it’s ultimately more compassionate and empowering. As someone who’s experienced trauma I’ve always been offended by the attitude of “abuse ruins people’s lives forever” – This strips agency from victims and feeds into self-destructive victim mentalities. It encourages prolonged helplessness and suffering.

Abuser’s don’t have the power to ruin anyone’s life forever, if someone survives abuse then their life is in their own control – Stripping that power from them is cruel. It’s much more empowering to assert that anyone, no matter what tragedies they experience, can live fulfilling and self-determined lives.

One example of how trauma can be used towards an unconscious goal.

This example is used in the TCTBD, I’m using this one in particular because it hit very close to home. There will be more examples in further sections relating to trauma.

A person can’t go outside because they experience physical symptoms of distress when they try – Agoraphobia and associated panic responses. Because of this they never leave their home, maybe never even leave their room. They may be miserable living that way and experience shame for it, but there’s an underlying reason (or multiple reasons) for why they can’t go outside, and it’s not because they’ve been forever broken by trauma.

Inability to function in society can elicit attentiveness and support, often from family
If you can function in society you become expected to conform and join the faceless masses
Functioning in society would mean you lose whatever current safety net you have
You may want to avoid rejection or judgement from others
Change is uncomfortable

When you’ve had a painful upbringing or traumatic incident it’s tempting to use that pain as an excuse to not face discomfort – Especially when what our society demands isn’t the pursuit of personal fulfillment, but instead conforming to widespread oppressive standards.

Though my system (OSDD) genuinely didn’t believe we were capable, in hindsight I can see that not wanting to conform to something we didn’t believe in was the main underlying reason why we resisted the idea we would ever be independent or “functional.” We buried the full truth under distress we created. We had the underlying goal of not conforming to a system we didn’t believe in – Alongside the goal of not getting along with others in society, because we had felt abandoned by society in our teenage years for being a MAP. We resented people because we felt abandoned by them.

We didn’t want to support a system we didn’t believe in and had never felt supported by; and we definitely didn’t want to kill our soul to do it. This led to us unknowingly manufacturing more anxiety – making our agoraphobia and overall incompetence worse – to support our goal of further social isolation. We created more suffering and hardship for ourselves.

Personal thoughts: Lasting trauma is the choice to be determined by past suffering.

I have some issues with the framing of “trauma isn’t real” even though I agree with everything I’ve stated above. I believe there is truth in both sides, that lasting trauma is manufactured and chosen, and also that trauma is real and should be recognized as such. I think the real problem is the way our society frames trauma as inescapable and survivors of trauma as helpless to life-long suffering.

I appreciate how the statement of “trauma isn’t real” cuts directly to the opposing truth and forces people to confront a reality in which they aren’t defined by their traumas; but I also think this framing will be ineffective to most people by nature of how invalidating it can feel initially.

One – The concept of reality.

There’s the saying that “reality is subjective” – I prefer to think of it as subjective reality vs objective reality, or personal reality vs collective reality.

Subjective/Personal reality: The experiences and lived worldview of an individual. Something can be real to an individual without being true to objective reality. An example of this would be hallucinations and delusions – A person experiencing either of those will experience them as real.

Every person has their own slice of reality, and that reality will never be entirely objectively true – Because nobody knows everything. We also all have a tendency to spin things internally to protect our own egos. No perspective is ever entirely objective.

Objective/Collective reality: This is what everyone thinks of when they think of “reality” – It’s the plane where we all exist together alongside all information. All experiences and perspectives are equal. Everything is equally devoid of meaning – because meaning comes from perspective, the realm of personal reality.

So the statement “trauma isn’t real” ignores half of the picture. Someone experiencing trauma will experience it as real. However, that experience of reality is changeable.

Two – Pain demands acknowledgement for true connection.

This is based only on my experiences and observations. I believe one of the main reasons people cling to trauma is because deep down they want their suffering to be recognized. As social animals we want to know our experiences matter to our own kind. We want to feel like we belong. When pain is kept hidden those painful secrets will act as a barrier to forming true connections. Someone wont feel truly known, someone not truly known can’t deeply connect to others.

I think for many people the first step to letting go of being defined by trauma is to have that trauma recognized and to receive compassion and understanding. People can also struggle to work through things on their own, we’re social animals and we’re meant to support each other. A support network is very helpful for emotional wellbeing and the ability to form meaningful connections.

Once someone has gotten the support they need they might find themselves letting go of being defined by trauma; The relationships in our lives go a long way in affecting our mental health and habits, especially when those relationships influence us in positive ways.

Three – Victimhood should be healed, not enabled or treated as a virtue.

This is where I strongly agree with the approach of Adlerian psychology on trauma.

While there are some people who struggle to ever open up about the trauma they experience, some people become so shaped by it they induce and perpetuate suffering and mistreatment.

A martyr complex, also known as a victim complex, is when someone seeks out and maintains their own suffering to some end goal and can present in multiple ways – Probably most notably, it can look like sacrificing one’s own happiness out of a sense of duty tied to love or familial commitment.

When someone tells a victim to leave an abuser there are many people who consider it to be inconsiderate – I wholeheartedly disagree.

I think it’s much more inconsiderate to coddle victims of abuse as they sacrifice their happiness and wellbeing, and by extension their very lives – Yes, there are many reasons people stay with abusers and leaving can be difficult. It can mean making escape plans and having to build up independent financial stability for the first time, finding a new home, finding new community. But victims of abuse are not helpless and powerless fragile creatures. We need to help empower them when they feel their weakest.

Sometimes what people need to hear isn’t “I’m so sorry, you don’t deserve this and they’re terrible” and instead it’s something like “That sounds like a horrible way to live, I think you should work on finding a way out. If you ever need any help with that I’m here for you and will do what I can.”

Similarly, a victim mentality can lead to frequently using one’s trauma and emotional dysregulation to receive comfort and sympathy from others. It can be used as a shield to deny criticism, presume innocence, and justify aggression. Victimhood does not inherently mean “free from wrongdoing.”

The view of trauma leading people to being broken forever ends up coddling victims, fostering helplessness, and encouraging a victim mentality. This enables abuse as well as self-destructive behavior. In both the cases of a victim mentality and a martyr complex, and in all other cases, we should avoid encouraging codependency in our relationships (including our friendships.)

Codependency doesn’t refer to relying on others sometimes, it’s when someone believes they’re incapable of taking care of themself and managing their own emotions, and thus needs someone else to play that role. If someone is constantly venting to you – or seeking therapy in their friends – then continuing to enable that behavior will keep them weak. That has also been me and my system in the past, we’ve enabled and been enabled. Sometimes caring means telling people to look into attachment theory (or maybe Adlerian psychology!) to figure out how to help themselves. Everyone deserves to have internally sourced security because external support is not always available.

While victim’s have the right to own their own experiences, choosing to be determined by past suffering will only ever lead to the continuation of that suffering.

Trauma can be thought of like shackles, it limits your movement and ability to change into whoever you want to become. One can recognize their past traumas and consider them important in their personal journey, but one shouldn’t wear the shackles forever.

Part two – Emotions

Emotions understood from the perspective of teleology

I’m sure the phrase “emotions can be chosen” will go against how nearly everyone who reads this has been lead to understand emotions. It will make a lot more sense by the end of the section.

Like with trauma, I’ll focus first just on the standpoint of Adlerian psychology and teleology and providing examples, at the end I’ll give my own interpretation.

I also want to preface that like with trauma, just because there is choice involved doesn’t mean the experience isn’t real. Emotions can be chosen but that doesn’t mean they aren’t truly felt or don’t still matter. All feelings exist to tell us about ourselves and how we fit into the world around us.

I also don’t believe Adlerian psychology makes the claim that all emotions are chosen, only that they can be chosen (and often are) to be used as tools.

Example: Using anger to subjugate and punish

A parent is yelling at their child, the justification for this is that their child has done something to upset them. This warrants anger, and anger “results” in uncontrollable yelling. The parent receives a call and immediately their demeanor changes – they take on a pleasant tone. As soon as the call is over, they go back to yelling as if the call never happened.

If asked, the parent might say “I was so angry I couldn’t help myself” but considering that they were able to switch gears when presenting that same behavior would reflect negatively upon them, this justification fails. Anger was chosen to justify verbal abuse, and that aggression was chosen to 1. feel powerful and exert control and 2. to punish their child for going against their wishes.

Example(s): Using hurt to justify a choice otherwise viewed as wrong

1 – Someone is unhappy in a relationship. They’ve already made commitments to their partner to stay together for the rest of their lives but they’re no longer satisfied with how things are. The idea of leaving feels wrong, it would mean breaking that commitment and hurting their partner’s feelings. Because this person has the internalized belief that leaving would be wrong they end up subconsciously searching for reasons to justify leaving. If they had justification then they could exit the relationship without hurting their own self-image or “looking bad.”

Eventually their partner makes an error and immediately the unsatisfied individual will pull away. “You hurt me too much, I can never forgive you” or “What you did was wrong and this makes you a bad partner” – If they genuinely wanted to sustain the relationship then the immediate response wouldn’t be to exit the relationship entirely, it would be to try to work through and correct the problem.

(I’m not saying someone should remain in a relationship that doesn’t satisfy them – I’m just explaining that in this scenario the choice was justified using emotions)

2 – A more extreme example of using hurt to justify actions (in this case acts that are actually wrong) would be every person who has ever committed nonconsensual violence. Every abuser and killer has internal justifications – Using the extreme example of serial killers, the justification might look like “I can’t connect to other’s because I’m broken, society doesn’t want people like me. If people knew about my inability to connect and my taboo sexual desires they would reject me.”

When someone feels they have no ability to connect, that all people would reject them for things that are important to their internal experience, and that they’re inherently broken… This allows for internal justification for acts of extreme cruelty.

Violent fantasy on its own doesn’t lead to violence, but social disconnect and perceived rejection paired with those violent fantasies might. Someone might feel they have nothing to lose because of this perceived lack of belonging and then chasing the fantasy becomes more feasible and appealing.

Example(s): Using suffering to receive sympathy

1 – Factitious disorder imposed on another, previously known as Munchausen syndrome by proxy, is a well known example of this. This is most commonly when a parent will pretend their child has medical issues to gain sympathy from others. There is also a standalone disorder – Factitious disorder imposed on self; In which a person will pretend, manifest, or induce symptoms of illness or injury (physical or mental) to receive sympathy and care.

While the criteria for Factitious disorder is that this is done deliberately, when you consider how people twist their internal narrative to their own favor, and how people will suppress and repress unpleasant information – I believe it’s possible to genuinely believe oneself is suffering an illness and manifest symptoms, especially psychological symptoms or hallucinations of pain.

2 – A less extreme example would be someone who frequently uses their trauma to receive sympathy and relies heavily on support from other’s to achieve a sense of meaning, belonging, and security.

Example: Using emotional pain to influence the behavior of others

A person might rely on others for all of their emotional stability, sense of self worth, and security – This leads to the formation of codependent relationships. Because these relationships are built on the individual’s desire for emotional stability, and their self worth is determined by relational success, it naturally becomes unbalanced. When the care-giver presents information that compromises the feelings of the other individual it will quickly lead to conflict, and this conflict will reflect the nature of the insecure attachment involved.

It may not be intentional but it will lead to emotional manipulation that prioritizes the importance of the person expecting care. This can become emotional abuse where the abuser believes they are the victim, and the abused may also believe that. It can involve gaslighting and guilt tripping behaviors.

Example: Resentment to avoid discomfort

A male child is raised by an abusive misandrist mother. The child may end up resenting women because of this, they might avoid women later on in life to avoid the possibility of being reminded of their past suffering. Using a similar experience, a female child may be abused by a man and this may lead them to resent men, or they could develop fear being around men. They may also avoid having men entirely in their personal relationships.

In both cases, an individual may resent an entire sex and/or gender and come to rely on this resentment as a way to cope with the pain of their past. Giving up on that resentment would mean changing their worldview and facing discomfort, and also acknowledging how they might have regarded others unfairly because of this resentment.

If we let our fears or past suffering control us we remain limited. Exposure therapy can ultimately increase a persons confidence in navigating future social situations. It’s long-term of more benefit to seek discomfort than to avoid it.

Example: Hopelessness to avoid discomfort

Someone is unhappy with the way society is. Instead of doing anything about it – Such as educating people – They say “nobody would listen/change” as a reason to avoid having difficult conversations with people who make them uncomfortable. They claim to be passionate about whatever issue but do nothing towards solving that problem, instead writing off everyone else as either incapable of change or an inherent enemy.

This example used to be my system as well. If you’re willing to be silent then you’re prioritizing your own comfort more than you actually care about the state of society. Use passion as a way to encourage you to step out of your comfort zone – Become the change you want to see.

The courage to be happy, face discomfort, and be disliked.

Previously I covered the “negative” emotions, but what about happiness? If people can choose emotions, why are so few people truly happy? When people say you can choose happiness, the immediate reaction of most unhappy people will probably be: “If I could choose to be happy I wouldn’t be suffering right now” The possibility of choosing to be happy isn’t an invalidation of current unhappiness, it’s instead a reminder that someone determines their own perspective.

The view in Adlerian psychology is that happiness requires the courage to change – The courage to be disliked and to face the discomfort required for change. Change is uncomfortable because it requires breaking habits you’ve likely retained since childhood.

An example in TCTBD is the metaphor of driving an old familiar car with problems rather than upgrading to a new car with features you aren’t familiar with. Familiarity is comfortable, change is uncomfortable. Change requires analyzing yourself naked in a bright light. It means acknowledging everything you’ve been hiding from yourself to protect your ego. It means facing ways you might have been wrong. It also means breaking habits you’ve come to rely on and replacing them with new strategies.

If you don’t think you can be happy then ask yourself why. Is it a matter of circumstance? If it is, what about other’s in similar (or worse) circumstances that find ways to be happy? Is it a matter of disliking who you are or the way you live? Your place in the world?

The topic of happiness will come back up in following sections.

Personal thoughts: 1 – The happiness of virtue and choosing discomfort

Asceticism is the practice of abstaining from worldly pleasures, often used for the purpose of pursuing spiritual enlightenment. Many religions have adopted asceticism throughout history.

The Cynics practiced asceticism as a part of Cynicism. They rejected conventional desires of wealth, possessions, power, conformity and social status. They did “shameful” human acts in public to demonstrate that there was nothing shameful in being human. They claimed that the only necessity for happiness was virtue, which they saw as living in agreement with nature.

The reason I bring up the Cynics is because they demonstrate the choice of happiness. If someone can be happy with almost nothing while seeking an uncomfortable lifestyle, then happiness can be chosen by everyone. It’s not based on predetermined factors, it’s a matter of worldview.

Personal thoughts: 2 – Emotions are a way to honor our experiences

With all of that said, I don’t believe that the implications of this information is “People should always be happy.” I think unhappiness is important for a number of reasons:

Unhappiness acts as a signal to whether our current lifestyle truly satisfies us
It’s a way to honor our experiences, during and after
It’s a way to communicate our experiences and seek deep connection

If someone is mistreated or experiences a loss then sadness can be a way of valuing the experience to oneself – as well as expressing that experience to others. It’s okay to be unhappy, for as long as someone is satisfied being in that emotional state.

Using myself as an example, I used to blame other people for my emotions. This meant I felt like a victim whenever I was hurt (whether or not I was actually wronged) and my happiness relied on my relationships going well. When reading TCTBD, at one point the philosopher character says “When one is sad, one should be sad to one’s heart’s content. It is precisely when one tries to escape the pain and sadness that one gets stuck and ceases to be able to build deep relationships with anyone.” – This felt oddly liberating, and since then I’ve practiced letting myself be sad when I experience something I feel deserves sadness.

It’s not the fault of someone else, and it’s not because circumstances force a certain response; Its about honoring my experience. This has also led to less strain on my relationships.

Rather than emotions being tools people use against each other – to influence the behavior of others or to justify actions – we should consider emotions a way to honor our experiences and as a way to connect in an emotionally intimate way with other people.

We’re emotional beings; We’re built to feel. All feelings can and should be felt, but they shouldn’t be used against other people towards a goal. To use emotions in that way is manipulation. Communicate directly and honestly, without aggression.

Part Three – Personality

You can be whoever you want to be.

We often have the idea that personality and disposition are ways of being that someone is predisposed to or otherwise unable to alter, like inherent traits. This isn’t how attachment theory – the study of how attachments formed in early childhood influence development – understands it.

Attachment theory views personality as a collection of coping strategies for interpersonal life that someone learns in their childhood, and then carries with them into adulthood. This view is in line with Adlerian psychology, which considers personality to be a matter of habits (lifestyle according to Adler) and worldview.

Many people want to change but believe change is impossible. Like with happiness, this is self-limitation to avoid the discomfort of the process of change, and it’s usually not a conscious choice. In Adlerian psychology this is considered a “life lie.” Life lies are beliefs that hold people back from reaching their true potential. Here’s an article that covers various life lies.

Change is possible even if someone has spent their whole life up until now falling back on life lies. Someone can change as soon as they decide not to be held back by discomfort and fear.

Personal thoughts: The process of changing

Adlerian psychology claims change is possible immediately, and I don’t think that’s necessarily incorrect, but I also think it paints a picture that wont be accurate for most people. My way of seeing it is that change is a battle you have with the self you’ve built up. Undoing habits (for most people) takes time. Another way of seeing it would be like rebuilding a house while you still live in it.

Your worldview and mindset can change whenever you choose, but that change may not sustain itself indefinitely. You have to keep making the choice, over and over, to be whoever you want to be. You have to replace the old habits with new strategies to form a new lifestyle. And in that process there might be relapses. Like quitting addictions, a small number of people manage to quit “cold turkey” – while a larger amount of people need to wean off over time.

People can change by pursuing many different paths, and no matter which path you pick you’ll find that all your problems will connect. Your attachment issues will connect to your anxiety which will connect to your dietary habits, etc. You can start in any place and eventually it will lead you to the next problem.

Here are areas to focus on if you want to change:

Reshaping your worldview in a happier way, realistic optimism
Separating your life tasks from other’s (covered in part four)
Prioritizing your health (diet, exercise, sleep, self care, connection)
Attachment healing and learning to set boundaries
Learn to communicate without using your emotions as tools of influence
Cutting out people who don’t add more to your life than they take
Building up a support network (without fostering codependent habits)
Finding your place in society through your long-term goals in life

Pick a few to start with and as you progress you will naturally be lead to another – As long as you keep trying to become the person you want to be. The idea of who you want to be may change over time and that’s okay, the important thing is that you strive to be someone you can love being.

The first few steps in learning a new way of being might be clumsy, so be kind to yourself.

Part four – Interpersonal matters

“All problems are interpersonal problems“

Adler claimed all problems are interpersonal and can be summed up in three life tasks.

Tasks of work (work-related relations)
Tasks of community (getting along with others)
Tasks of love (emotionally intimate relationships)

The system of life tasks are a way to untangle the threads between ourselves and others, making it easier to navigate and improve our relationships.

Some examples of mixing your own life tasks with others:

Being preoccupied with the judgements of others
Avoiding changes you want that will upset the feelings of others
Worrying about how a relatives interests or behaviors will reflect on you
Fixating on unvoiced expectations you have for your partner

You should spend time focusing on what you can control – your own life tasks. You should care less about judgement from others because their opinions of you are not within your control, it’s not your task. This doesn’t mean you should engage in anti-social behaviors however, Adlerian psychology values the importance of community feeling and social interest (covered in section five.)

An example of the separation of life tasks from TCTBD:

A parent will force their child to study. They might claim this is for their child’s own good, but this isn’t entirely truthful. The parent is worried poor grades would reflect poorly on them, they’re worried about being judged by others. The rigid expectations may lead the child to resent studying itself, and potentially even resent their parent.

The correct approach would be to offer assistance but not to interfere with their task. A parent can explain why grades matter (though test based grading in itself is problematic) and say “I’ll help you with your studying whenever you’re ready” – This empowers the child without turning studying into a oppressive chore they come to resent.

Vertical vs horizontal relationships; Life is not a competition:

The standard way of viewing relationships is on a vertical scale. A child is below their parent, a boss is above an employee, a scholar is above a student. The problem with this way of viewing relationships is that it puts everyone in competition while it also assumes that someone lower on the scale is inherently less knowledgeable or proficient than someone on the higher end.

Even in the case of a student and a scholar, one should never assume they know everything or that someone of less experience can’t discover valuable new insights. Likewise, a parent shouldn’t assume they know better than their child just because they’re older – An older person can still be incorrect just as a young person can discover new information.

If everyone is in competition, and their worth as people is determined by their place on an arbitrary scale, this will naturally lead to inferiority complexes or superiority complexes (which in itself also comes from feelings of inferiority,) the perception that everyone is judging you. People will become enemies and you’ll have to earn your worth by climbing the scale.

All judgements of others come from the standpoint of vertical relationships.

The view practiced in Adlerian psychology is horizontal relationships:

Everyone is moving forward horizontally, at different speeds and at different points, on a flat surface. Feelings of inferiority removed from a vertical view don’t prevent happiness, instead they can be used to better oneself. The pursuit of superiority in this setting is taking steps forward for your own self-fulfillment, not to gain self-worth through devaluing or gaining power over others.

Adlerian psychology encourages rewiring your way of thinking about recognition and rejection. Don’t seek recognition and praise, don’t seek to win, seek fulfillment. Rejection is necessary for freedom and self-fulfillment. Live for yourself and be who you want to be, don’t sacrifice your self, your life and your freedom to be who you believe other’s want you to be. Face rejection and not only will it become easier, you’ll become whoever you want to be, because you’ll have gained the courage to be happy.

Consider this sentence: “You are the only one worried about how you look.”

If someone thinks you look unkept without makeup or they dislike your style of dress, and they voice this, why do you think they would choose to do that? It’s probably because you aren’t conforming to the same standards that they are, or whatever standards they want you to conform to. They might feel resentment for this, or they might feel some sense of superiority over conforming because that’s where they get their sense of worth. Do those judgements really hold any weight?

This can be applied to any lifestyle change – what matters is your own happiness.

Reward and punishment education and it’s problems:

This is unfortunately the most common way of educating, regardless of age. Reward desired behavior and punish undesired behavior, and the desired behavior in question is often cultural and ineffective for learning and growth (testing and memorization is not how effective learning works) – What reward and punishment education does do effectively is teach people to conform to be praised, and to view the failure to meet expectations as a personal failing, which in turn keeps people sensitive to rejection.

It’s also no wonder people strongly resent the idea of being wrong when being wrong is considered a failure in itself, and probably punished. Everyone is wrong – I’m wrong about something right now and I don’t even know it, the same is true for any person who reads this. When we’re all taught from an early age that rejection is a sign of failure and praise is a sign of success we internalize it. We defend against the idea that we might be wrong because we perceive it as a social threat. Admitting you were wrong or admitting fault doesn’t mean you’ve failed as a person. It’s human nature.

Another problem of punishment in educating children is that some children will learn to seek negative reactions in the pursuit of special attention. Any special attention is sometimes better than no special attention. If receiving good attention requires more work then negative attention might be chosen instead.

Ultimately this way of educating leads to an unhealthy view of interpersonal relationships, more conformation, less critical thinking, less fruitful discussion, less intellectual growth – And ultimately less happy (and poorly educated) people.

Encouragement and gratitude in education:

The approach to education in Adlerian psychology is to avoid praise, rebuke and intervention entirely. Instead it suggests a focus on encouragement and expressing gratitude.

Praise and rebuke are judgements that come from a vertical way of thinking. Praise is the passing of judgement from a person of ability to a person of perceived inability. When someone praises a child, it reinforces the idea the child is lesser. It reinforces that the child is incapable and unintelligent by default and therefor has to be rewarded for doing things “correctly,” which may result in the child feeling they’re naturally incapable. This can be internalized and they might believe they need others to do things for them, or that they’re helpless to complete tasks on their own. It can add anxiety, whereas encouragement empowers the child to realize their own potential.

Both praise and rebuke are forms of manipulation, the difference (as it’s put in TCTBD) is “the carrot or the stick.” Instead we can just encourage, offer assistance, and express thanks.

Humans are all equal, but not the same:

The way we view children is especially impacted by the view of vertical relationships. They’re assumed to be at the bottom, and therefor they answer to people above them. As a believer in youth liberation, I was very happy to learn Adlerian psychology doesn’t believe in treating children as lesser.

Children are not the same as adults, but they are, as people, equal to adults. How we talk to children should come from a place of sincerity rather than a place of authority. We should treat them as people and talk to them as fellow human beings. They don’t need to be protected from difficult or sensitive information, or from knowing of an adult’s experiences or emotions. It’s by talking to adults in honest discussion about these things that can prepare – and therefor better protect – children in both the present and future.

Personal thoughts: Selfishness is not inherently negative, and power dynamics

Selfishness: I will add that selfishness is not an inherently negative thing. I think we’ve only come to see it that way because of reward and punishment education, the standard of pleasing others and conforming to standards to mean “good.”

It’s in animal nature to put oneself first, and within reason, that’s the way it should be. Even if you want to help others, you can’t effectively do that if you don’t take care of yourself. You’ll end up enabling behaviors and feeding into destructive habits – intentionally or not. By learning to care for yourself you can lead by example and teach others how to do the same.

By living to please others you hurt not just yourself, you encourage the others to hurt themselves in the same way as you. You add to the societal expectations we all face.

On the topic of praise and power dynamics: I don’t think praise has to always be avoided, in the context of an equal relationship where a consensual power dynamic is opted into I think it’s a fine choice. Just be mindful that the vertical nature of the relationship is firmly planted in the realm of fantasy, otherwise it will become an actual vertical relationship and potentially lead to codependency.

Part Five – Community feeling (CF)

The goals to be self-reliant and live in harmony with society

Adlerian psychology is also called individual psychology, however it also intersects with community psychology. This aspect of Adlerian psychology is considered somewhat spiritual in nature, it’s about the human need to feel connected to other people to feel a sense of worth. It’s considered a key ingredient for happiness, alongside self acceptance, and the courage to be disliked – freedom.

Community feeling: The feeling that other people are comrades and that we have refuge among them. A sense of belonging that comes from a commitment (through addressing one’s interpersonal tasks) to community. The feeling of belonging comes from giving to others in some way.

The steps to achieving community feeling are outlined below.

1a – Switching from attachment to self to social interest.

Attachment to self: Obsession with recognition from others which results in someone thinking almost entirely about themself in their interactions. Being attached to self will result in viewing people through the lens of what they offer. This limits the ability to connect.

Social interest: Genuine concern for others and their experience of being. Not using interpersonal relationships to seek recognition and praise.

One reason people seek recognition is due to reward and punishment education. Another reason is because it’s a shortcut to the feeling of contribution – Of feeling valued by others. However, if you source your sense of worth in recognition it will lead to a loss of freedom. You’ll end up conforming to the expectations and standards of others and prioritizing those over your true desires.

1b – To make the switch from attachment to self and social interest, self acceptance is necessary.

Self acceptance and affirmative resignation: Accepting yourself as you currently are, flaws and all, and moving forward in whatever way possible. Accepting what isn’t in your power to change and improving what you can change.

Without self acceptance someone will always be looking for recognition and therefor fearing judgement and rejection, which in turn will limit the ability to establish community feeling.

2 – CF requires the view of others as comrades, which requires confidence in others.

Confidence in others: Believing in others unconditionally, without credit. Whether someone intends to take advantage of you is their own task and not something you can control. Even if you only trust selectively, there will still always be the chance of betrayal. If you operate from a place of vigilance your connections will always be strained by doubt. You’ll end up always searching for (and finding) evidence to affirm those doubts, and as a result get less enjoyment out of your relationships.

An example: Someone is always worried their partner is cheating on them so they’re constantly looking for signs of cheating. They might go out of their way to check messages, they might infer that a friendly tone from their partner when speaking to their sex or gender of attraction is an expression of interest. This results in more stress and tension, all while their partner may be entirely faithful.

If someone has broken your confidence then severing the relationship can become your task.

3 – Contribution to others to become aware of your own worth and achieve CF.

The feeling of worth, from the perspective of Adlerian psychology, comes from the feeling one is of some benefit to others. Being able to feel that you’re able to contribute positively to other people. This feeling of worth leads to courage, in turn making it easier to face rejection.

The nature of this “use” to others doesn’t need to be something visible, what matters is someone has the subjective sense that they contribute something of value.

The essence of work, viewed through Adlerian psychology, is a contribution to the common good. Not for the purpose of money, but for the purpose of contributing to the benefit of others. It includes all kinds of contribution including homemaking, volunteering, donating to charity, etc.

4 – Value on the level of being, not the level of acts.

Even someone who isn’t performing acts to the benefit of others is still of value, just by being. By practicing encouragement and offering gratitude (as opposed to rebuke) someone can gain the courage and desire to contribute. One’s feeling of worth may come from knowing one contributes to others, but we shouldn’t judge the worth of others based on visible contributions.

Additional notes on community: Adler considered community to be all encompassing; From family, school, workplace, nations, the Earth, and the entire universe. Adler himself considered this understanding of community to be an ideal, and many people criticized this view.

If we focus entirely on the smaller communities that we can see immediately in our lives, and if we feel rejected by those smaller communities, someone might feel rejected by all of society and feel helpless to find belonging. This why there is importance in viewing the full scope of community – even if you’re rejected in your smaller communities there’s still refuge in community elsewhere.

Personal thoughts: Using myself as an example for the feeling of contribution

I like to offer relatively well-informed unsolicited advice. Not all of the people I do this for respond to me well, some respond negatively, many don’t respond at all. I can’t say objectively that this is useful to all of those people, but I do it anyway because I feel my insights have value. Even if it turns out I’m incorrect, I think it’s better for me to share those thoughts that could help than to say nothing. This gives me a sense of contribution regardless of how those people react.

Aside that, my system used to think the idea of needing community was stupid. We also became much happier when we found our place on the fediverse and in the pro-paraphillia community. I can safely say I feel happier (and feel a greater sense of worth) now that I can contribute to a wider community.

I think just having a human brain means you probably require the same basic need of any social animal: To belong. If someone doesn’t feel they need others at all then I think there’s probably some kind of life lie to avoid discomfort involved, but who am I to say for certain.

6 – Personal power and the present moment

I’ve combined these two points together because personal power is practiced in the present moment. This is a part of Adlerian psychology I really love, because it’s entirely about empowering every person to enact the change they want to see in themselves and the world.

Defeatism and hopelessness are sadly very common all around the world, and I believe that’s because most people choose conformation over freedom and happiness. People get used to the way things are and settle, in doing this they sacrifice their personal power and freedom.

This learned helplessness is entirely backwards and is the real reason nothing changes as quickly as people want it to. Every single person makes up the community of humanity we share – our societies. Every person who changes can create and influence more change around them.

A quote from The Courage To Be Disliked:

“If I change the world will change, no one else will change the world for me.”

There are many other similar quotes out there from different people but I believe people diminish the significant truth of this message in their minds, in an attempt to resist discomfort. I know that was my system’s experience as well. You have to be the change, and this isn’t done in the distant future, it’s done in the present moment. All choices happen in the “now.”

Another statement from TCTBD is that the greatest life lie to live in the future and past instead of the present. Whether it’s being defined by trauma or trying to meticulously plan your future. Life isn’t a line from start to end, it’s a series of many dots – Each of those dots is a moment.

If you spend your life living defined by the past, or planning for the future, then you avoid truly living in the “now” – And if your life was to end early, because nobody plans on illness or accidents, could you say you truly lived it in meaningful way that brought you fulfillment?

I’ll end this with another quote from Adler:

“Someone has to start. Other people might not be cooperative, but that is not connected to you. My advice is this: You should start. With no regard to whether others are cooperative or not.”

Thank you if you read all of this, and good luck. Have a nice day 💙