Be Yourself

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

Im sure you hear this phrase all the time. “Just be yourself, dont try to be something you are not.” I think this phrase is most commonly used in the two following circumstances. One is in the dating game, when someone would lie about themselves to impress their date. The other, and the one I would like to explore, is in teen socialization, where one would try to “fit in,” or join the “popular” group of kids. But they fail, and get ridiculed, and then comes along the reasuring adult figure or a self-confident friend or any inspiring force in their life, that tells the self-loathing youth to “just be yourself, theres nothing cooler than being yourself.” Im confident most people have heard a line similar to this in a kid tv show, or a cartoon, or even some disney movie. It seems prevalent in society, would anyone disagree?

Anyways, after some thought, ive concluded that as an attempt to make the youth feel better, this tactic may indeed be succesfull. But as a life lesson, or some kind of moral guidance, its actually contradictory to another American maxim of sorts, that being “follow your dreams.” This lesson I think is much more valid than “be yourself” and much more usefull in our lives.

What does it mean to “be yourself.” Its commonly a remark aimed at kids who would probably be considered “geeks” or socially inept in a high school. Or at least not considered as members of the social elite one could find in any high school across America. I would bet theres no place in America where social divides are as distinct as they are in our high schools. So, what is the problem that these social outcasts face when such a remark is required to uplift their spirits. I think its easy to conclude that for one reason or another, the kid desires to fit in with the popular kids, or whichever kids he wants to fit in with. And ofcourse he has failed in his endeavor, so he is understandably upset, and probably more importantly, feeling unfit, and having self-esteem issues.

But how does saying “be yourself” help in all this? If accompanied by comments of how naturally cool the kid is, or that being in a certain group doesn’t make you cool, or any such reasuring claims of self-worth, than as a mere self-esteem booster, its effective. But what is the “self” and how could we not be ourselves? What is missing is the understanding that desire is a part of self. Remember the maxim “follow your dreams” or “never give up on your dreams.” What is a dream if not a desire. “I want to be a fire fighter” says the little boy. All this is is a desire. What makes it a dream is that its not exactly an easily atainable desire. Looking at the social situation, its fairly obvious the “geek” desires to be “cool” or popular. So what is actually intended when “just be yourself” is said. Seems to me its bassicly: “Stop trying to be popular. Stop persuing your desires.” Now, this claim may still be valid, as its understable that some people wouldnt want us persuing certain dreams. Such as “I want to be a mass murderer.” Obvioulsy someone coming along and saying “Uh… no son, dont persue that dream, just let that one go…” would be ok. So the question becomes, what is it about the desire being persued thats not ok.

So what is it about trying to be popular thats so negatively regarded? I came to America when I was 5, and all throughout my younger years, I always had trouble making friends. I just didn’t fit in well. But around the middle of high school, I broke through so to say, and got into the “popular” crowd. I must mention, this was always my dream. I always wanted the respect the “popular” kids apparently got, and I also really wanted to be able to go to all the crazy parties I would always hear about, and wanted to be a part of the excitement. It worked out for me, but looking back now, I realize I did some sad things. I distinctly remember when I would bassicly whore myself for attention. Hoping maybe ide strike up a conversation with a cool kid and maybe start a relationship or something. Get invited to a party… anything. And I am sort of ashamed of that right now, but having been on both sides of the tape, I think im in a good position to say that theres nothing negative about persuing this dream. As a matter of fact, I think its a very beneficial endeavor, and heres why.

Its not about the actuall result of getting popular, though I admit it sure was more fun than not. But its the process that is most rewarding. What I would bassicly do is gravitate towards the popular kids. Ide sit down at their lunch tables, sit next to them in class, whatever I could do. Not for attention at this stage, but simply to learn. I wanted to hear what they talked about. I wanted to listen in on their manarisms. I watched how they walk, how they act, what they said, how they said it, and when they said it. (Apparently the when is really important. “Timing is everything” is extremely apropriate in this case) The whole process is analagous to the process a determined actor would go through in preparing for his role. If he was playing a new yorker, he would spend time in new york, observing the social standards and manarisms. So this is what I did. And eventually I would try my hand at actually socialising. I would say something I thought they would apreciate, stuff like that. And at the begining, most of the time I failed. But it was no big deal to me. I never felt as if I was worthless or anything. I really understood it was simply a game I was playing. And what felt worst was sitting at home on a friday night. So the motivation to win the game was, basicly to have a social life. And an exciting one at that. I had a friend here and there, and we would go see a movie on a friday night, or I would go over his house, play video games. But thats not what I wanted. I wanted to get drunk, smoke, get in trouble, go crazy bassicly. I wanted excitement. What can you do…

Anyways, its this process of observation that is most rewarding. Anybody that tells you that being able to “fit in” is not an effective tool in life is lying to you. And to fit in either takes a naturally charismatic persona, being atractive, or having a keen eye and good observation skills. For the latter, its bassicly being able to learn how to act their way. And then being able to apply what you have learned. I have noticed for several years now that I am very socially adaptable. Meeting new people is no problem. I can quickly pick up the kind of people they are and the kind of people they like, and I am able to “fit in.” This is exactly what is called social skill. And ive come to the conclusion that I obtained this skill through practice in high school.

So the moral of the story is that, the desire to be popular is not really or shouldn’t be considered in a negative light or be advised against for youths. What should be explained is that all the social lines are really arbitrary, and dont really reflect the real world out there, so its no big deal if you dont get in. But do not discourage kids from trying. Its nothing but social practice. Its learning how to “fit in” through observation and trial. And what better place to hone these skills than high school, where you will find the most varied menagerie of cliques and social outfits around. So dont tell your kid to “be yourself” because its really not usefull guidance. Tell them to get some friends. Or at least try and learn how to.

2

Russian, there were some things you said that I agreed with and others I did not. But your post is so long and I don’t have much time right now so I’ll write a short blurb about the “Just be yourself” maxim.

First off, I hate that maxim. No, you should not always “be yourself”. When you go in for a job interview, you do not “be yourself”. When a policeman pulls you over, you do not “be yourself”. There are certain rules and ethics that you need to comply to. Such as social ethics. So maybe, as Russian may think, just as you’re supposed to behave a certain way at a job interview, maybe you’re also supposed to behave a certain way around others.

But theoretically, I don’t think it’s impossible to “be yourself” and “follow your dreams” (i.e. try to be popular) at the same time. In trying to be popular, you should of course try to “join” a popular group. There are other ways, but this is the course that Russian took. Thing is, popular people, and people in general, are naturally attracted to others who are like them. So of course you would want to try to pass yourself off as being just like them. And at first glance there is a thin line between you acting like you’re one of them, and you actually being one of them.

Very often you’ll be influenced by other people through your interaction with them. You’ll pick up their mannerisms and you’ll start to think like them. If you walk like them, talk like them, and quack like them, very often you find that you’ve become them. But theoretically you can act like them on the outside, and yet still have your own mind on the inside.

I’ve never been popular, but sometimes I’ll talk to a friend of mine whom I haven’t seen in a while, and during that time they’ve gotten quite popular while I’ve remained at the bottom rung, and I’ll find that they’ve gone quite braindead. Anyways, being popular and following your dreams are not everything, nor is only being yourself. I think it’s the views that always promote one single aim over all others that always fail.

3

Hey Golden Curry, thanks for the response, I thought this thread was dead in the water…

“But theoretically, I don’t think it’s impossible to “be yourself” and “follow your dreams” (i.e. try to be popular) at the same time.”

Sure, theoretically… But… if you can be yourself and be popular, I sort of assume its no challenge. For instance, ile use the dumb blonde bimbo stereotype here. (nothing against blondes, I luv em!) A hot, but retarted girl can be popular. Some popular guy will scoop her up and all of a sudden shes part of the popular group. Not to mention hot girls usually stick together… Anyways, she has to do nothing. Her physical apearence makes her populer. She doesn’t neccissarily have to change the way she acts so she can be herself. Also, humor seems to be a fastrack into popularity. Some kids ive just noticed are damned funny. I assume thats just a natural characteristic, though they could have potentially worked on it. Anyways, those people are coveted among popular groups, in my experience. But if you start off with nothing that the popular kids want, than you have to get something they want to be a part of them. And like you said, people like to be around people like themselves. Thats why you learn to be them. And its this process that if fails, is the target of the maxim “be yourself.” And rightly so… If you fail at it, apparently you dont have something they want. YOU, your being, youself, is not what they want. So obviously, who you are then is what failed to be what you wanted to be. And thats why it is apropriate to say “be yourself.” If you introduced yourself to the popular kids and instantly they accepted you, than “yourself” is what they want. So the only time “be yourself” is used is when there is seperation between who you are, and who you want to be. But isn’t this exactly what a dream is? You dream to be something you are not… There is seperation between who you are, and who you want to be. And most of the time people say “follow that dream.” Only when attempting, and failing, at being popular, people say exactly the opposite.

"Very often you’ll be influenced by other people through your interaction with them. You’ll pick up their mannerisms and you’ll start to think like them. If you walk like them, talk like them, and quack like them, very often you find that you’ve become them. But theoretically you can act like them on the outside, and yet still have your own mind on the inside.

I’ve never been popular, but sometimes I’ll talk to a friend of mine whom I haven’t seen in a while, and during that time they’ve gotten quite popular while I’ve remained at the bottom rung, and I’ll find that they’ve gone quite braindead. Anyways, being popular and following your dreams are not everything, nor is only being yourself. I think it’s the views that always promote one single aim over all others that always fail."

These two go together. Indeed, I was definatly influenced by the group I was accepted in. I learned to like every part of who they were, who we were. Only, they didn’t respect everything they didn’t know, or everything they didn’t understand. So people that didn’t act like them were looked down upon. I never saw it that way. And this is part of the reason I am so adaptable. Ive said many times before on this site that im probably the most tolerant person ever. I think everyone is just diffirent, but in no objective qualification. No person is just “better” than another. Certainly they may be better at certain things, and I may even apreciate a person more than another. But I understand the relativity. And thus I accept everyone as diffirent. My friends… they naturally think they are the best. Everything else is just stupid and makes no sense. They always say, poiting at a really goofy kid or some very socially inept person:

“How can they live like that. Why dont they just be fucking normal.”

And I luagh alongside them: “yea, what a wierdo.” But the great thing is… I understand the BOTH of them. I completely understand why my friends see things their way, and so its not really a lie to laugh at the wierdo, im not just trying to fit in. Actually, the wierdos can be pretty funny… But its like I have multiple perspectives. I CAN step into others’ shoes. You know how they tell the bully to imagine being in the shoes of his victim. Well, I can do that, only I do it for the bully’s shoes too. I feel like I can understand them all. Its best put like this: People preach total tolerance. They say you should be tolerant of everyone. But implied in that is to be intolerant of intolerance. Thus some say total tolerance can never be achieved, and this is the relativists argument. Being intolerant of intolerance just makes you intolerant yourself. Well not so for me… Im tolerant of everything, even intolerance. Im not saying I would enjoy being punched. I wouldn’t, but I am only speaking in terms of any objectivity. My desires and beliefs are as relative as everyone elses, so in terms of any objectivity, we are all the same, with our relative beliefs.

So the point is, I am all. I can have a great conversation with my “braindead” friends about hot girls and football, than chat with the geek about World of Warcraft and the meaning of life (not that philosophers are geeks or anything, but try bringing up anything remotely philosophical around my friends… and, well… it gets ugly.) Its not like I have to swich who I am. I am always being “myself.” And I apreciate them both. Probably not equally… I think I like the more intellectual conversations more. But those are just my relative desires. My friends like other things, which I like too, and I really do enjoy the time I spend with them. But I feel like I understand, or can understand them all. All of these characteristics of mine are perks of being an amoral determinist. Just thought ide put that out there. True tolerance sure is a great thing.

4

In retrospect I think my message was actually quite Nietzschean. If it’s no challenge for anyone to simply become popular, there are always other challenges to chase. Overcome all challenges, and become the ultimate warrior :slight_smile: .

I’ll agree that people only say to “be yourself” when your poor ass has failed. But I hate how the saying is so prevalent in society.

I have a theory, and it’s that “being yourself” in the conventional way we might think of it actually limits the person. To me, the ultimate person would be the person who can do everything. A person’s “self” (i.e. the person’s identity) is defined by the person’s mind. It’s like a work of art, always changing and evolving into a better and more refined substance. For instance, the person’s “self” is like a painting, and the painting is always being more refined, colors are added, etc. so that the painting gets better and more beautiful.

But when a person actually defines their own identity, when they say “I am a certain kind of person. I am a person who likes orange pies and hates blueberry muffins”, then they actually limit themselves. It is like the painting finally being finished, but then the painting cannot improve anymore.

I always used to have a hard time in elementary school when I’d have writing assignments where I write about what I like and dislike, because I didn’t really like or dislike anything. In a sense I had not discovered my “self” yet. But if there’s a kid, and he has a clearly identified “self”, then he’ll like some things and hate other things, and he won’t have much room to change. He’ll always hate pickles for the rest of his life and he’ll always like cartoons for the rest of his life (until he rejects his “self”, perhaps in his teenage years). This is why one of my roommates pisses me off, because he has this clearly defined idea of himself, and because of that he restricts himself from eating certain types of foods, and exposing himself to different types of things, not because of any religious beliefs but simply because he’s defined for himself that he is just this kind of being. Like, if he’s never tried onions before, he refuses to ever try it. I think this sort of acting limits the mind’s ability to grow. The person is less willing to improve themselves, to shed their bad habits, to change their negative aspects, etc. I guess what I’m saying is that it might not be so bad if a person doesn’t define for themselves an identity.

But you seem to have it pretty good, in that you’re adaptable and flexible to different styles. But you seem aweful confident in your own abilities.

I also noticed what you wrote about being able to place yourself in others’ shoes. I feel like I have that ability as well. But the human mind always changes. Some people think that they have me figured out, they know what kind of person I am, but they’re always wrong about me (after all, how can you figure out what kind of person I am when I myself haven’t done that?). It’s dangerous to hold expectations and assumptions of other people, when there are so many different types of people in the world. You can never know exactly how a particular person’s mind works, especially when the human mind is always changing, and there’s really nothing more annoying than another person trying to enter your brain.

5

Oh, and one more thing:

I would disagree here, and say that it’s more challenging to be yourself (maintain an independent mind or identity) and be popular, or be among people unlike who you normally are. For a hot blonde girl, she can maintain her own identity, but she’s not trying to fit into a group of people unlike herself. Trying to fit into a group of people unlike yourself is the challenge, because you have to act like them and sort of get into their mindset in order to accomplish this, but all the while you maintain an independent mind. I think in most instances a person will be quite surprised at how much influence other people have on them.

6

“Just be yourself, don’t try to be something you are not” v.s “fitting in”.

I agree that the lessons we learn while trying to “fit in” will definitely mould us into better individuals. I’ve seen kids make what would appear to be bad decisions but then they’ll later turn into a socially accepted version of a good individual because of their experience. The idea of popular is different for different people. For example, there are different cliques and depending on the person and their values a certain group may be more appealing than another. And so I would assume “fitting in” is as much apart of your true self since it requires finding a group you’re mostly interested in or feel connected to.

Peace

7

I don’t find the expression ‘be yourself’ to be even the slightest bit useful.
In fact, I think it is quite counterproductive, and to a teen even possibly confusing.
Telling someone to be themselves is to tell them they are currently being someone other than themselves.
Quite ridiculous actually.No matter what someone does, it is always something they would do. They did it, after all.
From another perspective, the expression be yourself was created in an atmosphere of living up to an ideal, a norm, a mold.
I think when someone tells someone else to ‘be themselves’ they are telling them to be what they(the teller) think they(the tellee) should be.
No matter what, you are always yourself. That includes all the insecurities, disaproved of behavior, and whatever and everything else.

8

Be yourself? Who the fuck else could I be? It’s not like there’s a hell of a lot of choice.

9

The idea of “being yourself,” does make a certain amount of sense in regard to the just about anyone.

When people are young sometimes they are not fully sure of their thoughts, feelings, and attitudes toward a variety of subjects. In other words, they have not yet solidified a full philosophy of life. So, they will sometimes adopt the persona of admired figures as a means of gaining a quick and full personality. Currently, it seems popular to act like a rapper. When I was a kid it was popular to act like a rock star of someone like James Dean. Later the persona of the unthinking beer drinking sports idiot was a popular cover for many potentially complex people. Another recent trend in my area is for guys to shave their heads in order to look tough. There could be nothing less tough than wanting to look tough. Many of these styles are not natural choices, but rather states that one puts oneself into as a means of projecting an image.

That means that one is always calculating how to maintain that image. This can create a situation where the person never shows the world what they think about, thus resulting in existential isolation. It can also be a problem that the person is not spontaneous with others because their calculated persona is too slow moving to adapt naturally to others.

So, “being yourself,” means that you are acting in such a way that most filters are turned off as well as preconceived notions about how one must act toward others. For instance, if one thinks that it is necessary to treat a girl in a certain way then one might become self-conscious in front of her as one attempts to maintain a “script” that dictates the behavior. Deviation from the “script” will then create nervousness. However, if you view her as just another person then you can speak to her naturally and about anything.

The ideas presented work very well in the world of sales and any kind of public speaking situation. If you look at yourself and others as being just people, rather than iconic figures, then things will go much more smoothly.

10

Monsieur Zenith,

Yes, this understanding, that we are all people, and these iconic figures are just arbitrary social trends is an important understanding. And my only point was that the process of trying to fit in can be a very beneficial one. Theres no need to get all worked up about not being able to adhere to certain social standards. If you understand its just arbitrary, you shouldnt worry too much about it. But like I said, BEING ABLE to adhere to social standards can come in very handy. And thus, trying to do just that in high school is just good practice.

11

Again I think of Sartre to make use of this point.

In Being and Nothingness he brings up an example of a waiter to demonstrate what bad-faith would be, but in the case of the waiter it wasn’t tragic, it wasn’t a negative bad-faith. The Role of the waiter was both historically contingent and a result of radical freedom, or his ‘existence precedes essence’ improvisation.

He explained that the waiter acted too perfectly, as if the movement and gesturing was rehearsed. The Waiter was trying for the Role. The waiter wasn’t a ‘waiter’ as if that were some essence…as if one could be a Waiter. Rather, his playing the role of the waiter was the existence of the idea of the Waiter, making the waiter a role rather than inventing it. Although it is an invention of his choices and actions, he believes that he is following a script. This is a lesser degree of bad-faith and a damn good example.

You can extend this to the entire scope of Image and Style, or what I am refering to here as the Role.

The moment a human being assigns to themselves a label other than their name, an entitlement, class or job description, they are practicing bad-faith by having to play the role. Why? Because one doesn’t become a father or a waiter or a police-man or an astronaut. They improvise the role and the existence precedes the essence. One doesn’t ‘step into’ the type. The identity of the Self is the enmeshment of a freedom to deviate from a role, thus inventing it, and an inauthentic attempt to be what one is inventing. Which is impossible but paradoxically true. A traditional classification of any type is not a Platonic human essence. No Role is determined but conventions produce rough boundaries.

The Tank is right, I think, when he says that the lines between are arbitrary. When ever there is a class or style dispute it is inevitably bound to the inauthentic practice, the ‘playing-of’, the Role that one takes up. Since everyone is trying-to-be, nobody is anything they didn’t decide to be, but at the same time there is no essence such as ‘human.’

12

What does ‘being yourself’ mean when most acquire ‘self’ from the other and where self is defined in that relationship between the inner and the outer?

How can one be ‘himself/herself’ when you don’t even know what that means or what that self is, often?

What is meant by ‘be yourself’ is mostly being genuine within the limits of social/cultural acceptability and if this self is not too threatening or disgusting to those that demand this honesty.
Not surprising then that most are themselves by imitating others being themselves.

13

Government maybe?

Good post btw Tank, here’s my 2 cents.

I totally agree with you too. For instance, I used to live in Surrey, BC. (Canada), this is about as far west as you can go on the mainland, when I was in grade 7 I moved to Nova Scotia, which is about as far east as you can go. One extreme to the other, a myriad of culture and religion to old fashioned traditions and values. From fast paced to slow. Anyways, in BC was ‘that kid’, I’ve always been fairly funny IRL and as a kid this elevated me and my friend to being the center of popularity while I was there. But suddenly I was yanked out of this (admittidly exhausting… though I didn’t know it at the time) role, and into one where I knew no one.

When I got here, I used my humor to get people to talk to me, by saying funny things in class discussion, I made myself stick out. My first group of friends I made were with some guys that would most likely admit themselves to being ‘nerdy’, I didn’t care though… I’ve always been into computers and fantasy, I liked it and so did they, we didn’t care what other people thought. But as puberty hit I wanted to hang out with girls and so needed to migrate to the ‘cool group’. This wasn’t overly hard, after a couple walks with my dog to where they hung out, and some clever jokes I had infiltrated the group, and who else to do it but the awkwardly tall half black guy (this was a 90% white community).

Since I had already been that ‘cool guy’ I didn’t really feel like I was selling out to ‘being myself’ because in a way that was myself, and this is my point. In a way, everyone are the things that they hate, they just don’t know it. I know some people who make fun of the trendy, ‘cool’ people i know… and how they act. But the thing they don’t realize is that to possess the incredible social adaptability they possess, sometimes you have to say unoriginal things, it’s all part of devoloping your self. I know alot of you guys can write out truly amazing posts, but how many could convey the same idea to a bunch of strangers in a room? One of the best tools I picked up from High School was learning when, and how to enter/sustain conversations. Timing really is the key to comedy, and comedy is more often than not, the key to acceptance. Who doesn’t want the funny guy around?

So basically I see ‘following your dreams’ and ‘being yourself’ as the same. Only I would call it ‘knowing yourself’ instread of being it. Anyone can exist, but the task is in knowing the self that is along for the ride. I don’t think being a bookworm (who is knowledgable as hell, but) constantly introverted as knowing themselves that well… here’s an example of why:

An A-Class entertainment agent, or maybe a fine retail salesperson can make that same ‘genius’ feel small and weak, not because of any sort of insult thrown at them, but because of the sheer power of the fast talker to coerce the best of us into doing or buying something we know we shouldn’t be. There is no feeling of moral superiority in this case. There are people here who would explain in a rational manner (to themselves) why they are still ‘better’ than the sleazy, but effective salesperson… but it is only those of us who can convince the salesperson to let you sleep with his sister, and then write an award winning philosophical work on her beauty that is the real ‘genius’ in my mind.

You’re always being yourself, but to follow your dreams you must see your entirety.

14

Someone else who is used to being the funny guy. More than one attention whore is too many.

I think a better way to say “be yourself” would be “don’t give up or change your beliefs for acceptance”, though “be yourself” rolls off the tongue a good deal better.

15

I already stated this in my post, but I think changing your beliefs is enevitable, those who don’t end up as social rejects… think about it, what would happen to someone who stayed true to his beliefs ever since he realized he had beliefs?. It would be so simplistic and narrow.

16

Sure it is, but I still think that is what people mean when they say be yourself. If your attitudes change, fine, but if you pretend to have one set of beliefs different from your own just for acceptence, you will only cause stress for yourself.

17

Why should it cause stress though, we’re arguing as to which is more effective in the long run. I think adapting, like Russiantank originally said is more of a bennificial arrangment, and I argeed with him.

Do you get a grasp of what the different arguments in a thread are before you post?

18

Why on earth do you respond to posts this way? Are you only interested in discussing with people that agree with you?

I clarified my interpretation of the euphamism. The end.

19

Exactly, you didn’t present an argument you just stated your opinion without backing it up.

I guess it’s my fault for responding, but unlike the people that would just ignore you for bringing nothing to the table (and maybe that’s what you want… if so that’s fine) but I’m at least trying to help…

I’ll admit it wasn’t in the most polite way… and for that I appologize.

20

That was the point of the thread; why one thinks the phrase is used and what one thinks it means. What evidence is there to be had other than anecdotal (which is more or less worthless).

I felt that the interpretations of the meaning of the phrase were incorrect and provided my own; I don’t feel the need to quote every example when that is the point of the thread.