51–60 of 114 posts
Be yourself is a non-statement. I don't know what it means. Does it mean follow my primal urges? Follow my idealistic goals? It doesn't say anything.
I think it's supposed to be something like "don't only try to emulate others".
"Be yourself" as advice is bad advice if you take it uncharitably. It's good advice for individuals that repress their identities and discard their own happiness - e.g. gay men and women that force themselves to act straight (though not without caveat as death/execution/persecution is very real). If you reinterpret it as "be authentic" or "become yourself", it again takes a better meaning for those without fundamenta…
The variation I like is, "Become who you are."
Be yourself is a non-statement. I don't know what it means. Does it mean follow my primal urges? Follow my idealistic goals? It doesn't say anything.
Hoffman: ... are you being yourself?
Law [increduluous]: How am I not myself?!
Hoffman : "How am I not myself."
Law: _How am I not myself?_
Hoffman : "How am I not myself."
Law [distressed, starting to choke up]: How am I not myself.
Be yourself is a non-statement. I don't know what it means. Does it mean follow my primal urges? Follow my idealistic goals? It doesn't say anything.
In this more specific light, find your own path rather than copying and pasting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One thing I've found again and again is that a lot of advice is good for some people (even most people) but terrible for others. It all depends where you're starting.
What is an example of a person for whom this is terrible advice? I can only jokingly think of people who are naturally hostile or low on EQ. "They can't handle all this!" kind of people.
Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc.
The lack of self awareness in this article is cringeworthy. Just read the headline, that's as good as it gets.
I read it as mistaking the beginning of self awareness for being well along the journey. I try not to judge. Every time you look back the road ahead is longer than you thought it was at the time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One thing I've found again and again is that a lot of advice is good for some people (even most people) but terrible for others. It all depends where you're starting.
What is an example of a person for whom this is terrible advice? I can only jokingly think of people who are naturally hostile or low on EQ. "They can't handle all this!" kind of people.
And this is just one example. I have quite a few more of different flavors, all of which involve someone deciding that "being themselves" is all about destructive behavior. They don't lack EQ: In fact, I'd say almost all of them have very high EQs, but they are also either very damaged, or not very good people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it's not charitable, then at least it's usually correct. People giving the advice are generally unaware of what it's like to be naturally skilled at social interaction, and think it's just a matter or relaxing and enjoying yourself. If they think "you're naturally skilled at this", they're usually mistaken. My charitable version is what people would say if they could be honest and were aware of the relevant facts…
> If they think "you're naturally skilled at this", they're usually mistaken. We have completely different anecdata. I've said and heard people say "be yourself" many times. Rarely have I seen it go awry. Typically the people who say "be yourself" are naturally skilled at social interaction, so they can read whether the person is also able to socialize and make the right decision. But I can see how someone who lacks…
Most people are neither themselves nor know what they want, in the sense that both concepts are frequently constructed for them and not actually derived from the knowledge or best interest of the person. The first order of business when implementing either is to make sure they actually belong to you in the first place.
I.e., if your parents have pushed you to be an artist your whole life and you're actually meh on it, and if you go through social motions without seeing much value in them, neither of these is "you". Which is not to say that either of these things is somehow wrong or bad, but you should reexamine them for yourself to either see their value and keep them or identify them as of low value and discard them.
This is all completely orthogonal to the idea that other people should tolerate your behavior merely on the basis of it being authentic. That simply doesn't follow.