Continuing on from last week’s new year’s resolutions and productivity theme, I want to talk more generally about something all humans desire: to be of some use - to make some sort of positive contribution to the world. What image does that conjure up for you? Do you think of politicians or key workers? Tech entrepreneurs or loving parents? Or do you think of yourself and the many good things you do each day?
I somehow doubt the last one. But why not? Why don’t we bask in our own self-worth? Why don’t we see the usefulness of our own activities? Is it simply because we feel we’re useless, especially in comparison to all those important people?
I think there’s more to it than that. I think our own lack of self-worth is a reflection of how we’ve learned to see the world - a mindset of control vs connection. From a control mindset, your worth is determined by clear and obvious outcomes: doctors saving lives, politicians making policy, scientists discovering vaccines. From this point of view, you’re probably not that worthwhile in the grand scheme of things. There are many other people doing much more impressive things than you will ever do, no matter how hard you try. Sorry about that.
But things are different from a connection mindset. Your worth is measured not by clear and obvious outcomes, but from your long-term influence within complex networks and systems. We’re all intrinsically connected. Your personality is connected to the traumas experienced by your ancestors. Your values are connected to your socioeconomic status and the society you live in. Your likelihood of being happy or committing suicide is influenced by your friends’ friends’ friends.
In the rest of this post, I want to explore three key ways in which your self-worth looks very differently depending on which of these mindsets you take.
According to the control mindest, what makes you useful is achieving big important outcomes. If you care about climate change, for example, what matters is reducing your carbon footprint or successfully campaigning to introduce a carbon tax. These outcomes are typically hard to achieve. Moreover, when it comes to massive collective goals - like preventing climate change - your individual achievements are not likely to make that much difference. You are just one person, after all. There’s only so much you can do to save the world. Your achievements will always be a piss in the ocean.
In contrast, from a connection mindset, big important goals aren’t achieved through your achievements alone. Goals are accomplished through millions of people’s activities over long periods of time. This is the moral of Rebecca Solnit’s book on activism, Hope in the Dark: Untold Histories, Wild Possibilities. She shows how radical activities that looked like failures at the time (such as Occupy Wall Street) ended up creating the possibilities for successful future initiatives (e.g. an enduring environmental movement). On an individual level, everything you do has echo effects, even if this influence cannot be neatly measured, quantified and shouted about.
Switching your mindset from the achievements-you-make to the multiple-influences-you-have is a scary switch to make. Why? Because you can never know the extent of your influence. By its very nature, it’s dispersed and fragmented. How you parent, for instance, is not likely to cause definite outcomes in your children. But it will certainly influence them throughout their lives, which will in turn influence many others (which will in turn influence many others, and so on). You’ll just never know exactly how. Instead, you must rely on faith: that, ultimately, you’re doing a good job.
From the perspective of control, if you want to achieve big things, you often need to be part of a larger team. Want to prevent climate change? Then you better become an environmental activist. Join Extinction Rebellion if you’re more alternative, or Oxfam if you’re not. Eventually, these group memberships become part of your identity. Your worth is partly determined by your status as an important member of the tribe.
Again, from a connection mindset, things look very different. You do not need to be a member of an explicit group to be of use. By the very nature of reality, you’re already connected to multiple groups and networks: your family, friends, community, society. That’s not to say you shouldn’t join groups of interest, like XR or Oxfam. But your worth doesn’t depend on them. It is not simply the case that your individual influence is worth less than the activities of a well-organised tribe. Both matter. It’s not an all-or-nothing affair, where your worth is reduced to your group identity.
In practice, this change in perspective quietens many of the internal shoulds you carry around with you - that you should be more productive, politically active, generous, charitable, sociable, or whatever. “Shoulds” have an inherently social nature - they’re designed to make sure people coordinate without thinking about what’s in their own best interest. This is a good thing when it comes to group cooperation. But they’re not necessary as part of the general self-talk you submit yourself to on a daily basis. From a connection mindset, you don’t need to beat yourself into compliance, to be a good team player. Instead, you’ll be motivated to do what’s right and useful in the long-term simply because you believe - and trust - it’s the right thing to do.
The last different I want to consider is the separation between work and the rest of life. In modern societies, people are typically asked “what do you do?” as a means of introduction, as if all that matters about people is their occupation. From a control mindset, this can be translated to “what do you do of worth?” or “in what way are you of use in society?” Seeing people primarily in terms of their work reduces them to objects or machines - things that are valued purely for their productivity and utility.
But from a connection mindset, this separation between work and life doesn’t really exist. You can be just as useful and influential within your relationships and leisure activities as you can throughout your work life. We’ve already seen that the influence you have on others in your social networks has far-reaching consequences. The same is true of your interests, hobbies, and passions. What might seem like relatively trivial activities - like gardening, listening to music, or playing video games - can in fact foster better values, help solve real-world problems, or create new social networks. All these activities can be viewed as the fabric from which lasting changes can be made.
Consider, as an example, another book by Rebecca Solnit, Orwell’s Roses, reviewed in the article linked above. Solnit talks about how the political theorist and activist, George Orwell, was also devoted to gardening, and, in particular, growing roses. She describes how this seemingly trivial hobby had a profound impact on Orwell’s life, his thoughts and actions. The idea that humans “cannot live off bread alone” - that we all need beauty and love in our lives - not just bread, but roses too - continues to inspire political movements to this day. These activities wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for the fact that Orwell loved growing roses in his so-called “spare time”.
I hope these three ideas - and differences in perspective - help you see some of the ways in which your life has worth, well beyond your overt achievements and recognised accomplishments. It’s tragic how some people feel useless when the very fact of their existence has such profound impacts on others, especially the people they love. As James Baldwin said: “All lives are connected to other lives and when one man goes, much more goes than the man goes with him. One has to look on oneself as the custodian of a quantity and a quality — oneself — which is absolutely unique in the world because it has never been here before and will never be here again.”
So please take good care of yourselves in 2022. For you are the only custodian of the quantity and quality that is you, and all the intangible changes you make to the world.