Prismatic responded to my extended arguments in another thread (in which I emphasized the universality of the human need for Approval) with this comment:
Well, I guess the following will be a bit of a surprise for you then, my friend. Narrow? Shallow? Pessimistic? Not so much…
Instead of seeing this Need for Approval as a damnable curse that needs to be somehow overcome, I see it as the key to our happiness and our hopes for the future of humanity.
Far from being a bane to the well-being of humankind, or a personal defect that one should apologize for, I proclaim it to be the ‘missing ingredient’ that will enable us to finally free ourselves from one of the most essential fears that humans have of each other: their fear that others will notice their emotional vulnerability.
Any way you look at it, both as individuals and as a collective, we face the challenge of finding a way to convince those ‘others’ out there that it would be a good idea for them to go out of their way to provide us with the emotional-need-satisfaction we desire.
How to accomplish such a goal? I say the key is changing people’s perceptions of what they are seeing when they interact with each other in social environments.
Currently, when people in social situations witness the performances of others----the displays of indifference to slights, the confident affectations that are a part of appearing ‘cool’----it makes them feel threatened on a fundamental level.
They feel threatened because (A) they are quite aware of their own emotional vulnerability, and (B) they believe that many of the humans standing before them are not vulnerable in the same way. If I have a need for approval that makes me emotionally vulnerable and you do not have the same vulnerability, then I am indeed at a serious disadvantage.
It is this perception that a potential threat exists which inspires us—instinctively—to hide our vulnerability from the view of others and to use the various defensive strategies I’ve reviewed elsewhere to try to distract the attention of others away from it.
My thesis is that this perception of threat is something we can change. It requires that we achieve two goals simultaneously:
1) People need to ‘see’ the emotional vulnerability that exists inside of every human being at all times, and…
- Every individual must become acutely aware, when in social situations, that his/her own emotional vulnerability is clearly apparent to everyone else.
If we can make arrangements to achieve both of these goals at the same time, our relationships with each other will begin to change in a profound way.
To get an idea of what I am talking about, imagine yourself encountering a group of people some time in the future, most of whom you have never met. After greeting them with a friendly “Hello!”, you immediately say something like:
Then, in keeping with the ritual, each of those present takes a turn verbalizing her own ‘Declaration Of Emotional Vulnerability’ while looking each of the others confidently in the eye.
Every member of the group gives voice to his confession without communicating any hint of apology or embarrassment. By the time the ritual has reached its conclusion, participants will notice that they do not fear each other.
They will not fear each other because they will see vulnerability in the humans standing before them instead of threat. They will see vulnerability not because they had seen tears or fear, but because they just heard every individual at the gathering say that he is emotionally vulnerable.
It is my contention that a ritualistic ‘greeting’ of this sort would be one example of an initiative that would achieve both of the key goals I emphasized earlier in a rather straightforward manner.
All those participating in the ritual would see the vulnerability that exists inside of all the others AND—at the same time—they would also be aware that their own vulnerability is abundantly obvious to everyone else.
As long as these two perceptions are maintained within the active consciousness of any humans gathered together in a group, it will ‘shut down’ both the Fear and the Anger instincts of all those present.
It is because these two instincts are always ‘on the lookout’ for any indication of potential threats, they will take notice when they perceive precisely the opposite: emotional security in perhaps its purest form.
It is one thing to know that everyone else out there has the same vulnerability/needs that you have (in spite of their efforts to pretend otherwise) and quite another thing to actually hear them admit it to you in a public setting.
New assumptions ==> New perceptions ==> Changed behavior.
After all, in a social environment where everyone has just admitted his/her emotional vulnerability to you----and you have confessed your own to them----it no longer makes sense for you to use ‘mean’ humor to…well, distract the attention of others away from your emotional vulnerability.
Indeed, if everyone is on the same page re: The Emotional Facts of Life, instead of people continuing to hide their emotional vulnerability from each other, why wouldn’t it be much more likely to hear them boast about their emotional vulnerability in mixed company?
It’s not an imperfection that anyone needs to apologize for; it is, in fact, the key to our happiness, for if we did not have this need for each other’s approval, how would it be possible for us to make others happy with a few kind words?
How can it be an undesirable feature of our existence if it makes us dependent upon the giving actions of others? Because of this fundamental need for Approval, people have to be good to others in this life if they want to be happy.
You could even throw in a little religious context to this by claiming that this Need for Approval is a gift from God to give humans an inborn incentive to overcome their other, ‘animal’ instincts, and be good to each other.
____________________
As I hope you can see, Prismatic, pessimistic feelings are generated by a recognition of this Need for Approval ONLY if one is viewing it from an individualistic perspective, where one seeks above all else to become “complete within oneself.”
The alternative approach to dealing with this Need for Approval that I am proposing is definitely one which represents a contrarian revolt against some of the most popular assumptions of academic theorists across most of the academic disciplines that contemplate human behavior.
For any who have been immersed in the individualistic perspective for quite a while (which values an idealized conceptualization of happiness that cannot ever be threatened by other humans), my proposal is likely to sound vaguely threatening, but I would suggest to them that they give it additional thoughtful consideration.