Inspiring social change through print, spoken word, and creative action.

"we but teach
Bloody instructions, which, being taught, return
To plague the inventor"
- Shakespeare: Macbeth, Act 1, Scene 7

Prepared by:
- Greg Bennick, Seattle WA
- Sheldon Solomon, Ph.D, Saratoga NY
- Patrick Shen, Los Angeles CA

The symbolic and temporal self

Each human being consists of both an inner self and a external body. From the beginning of each life, there is the confusion in the human animal about where "he" really is . Does the human being thrive in the symbolic inner self or in the physical body? Each realm is different. The inner self represents the freedom of thought, imagination, and the infinite…the aspiration to connect with the cosmos. However, at the same time as the person wants to feel infinitely connected, he or she also feels the drive to remain unique and individualistic in a body which looks only like its owner, and unlike anyone else. This duality of need presents an enormous psychological problem.

The body represents the temporal. A person learns throughout life that his/her freedom as a unique being is dragged back by this body. The body represents our connection to the animal world, and as such, suffers the limitations borne by the animal kingdom. While we might feel limitless in terms of our personal and spiritual potential, we live with an awareness of our eventual death. Becker wrote that if we fully accepted this fact, we would be thrust into a state of "abject terror", and would subsequently be unable to function. Man is the only creature who can look at himself from the outside, imagine himself in symbolic terms, and envision realities that do not yet exist. This intellectual capacity dooms us for it makes us aware of our eventual demise, and we react immediately. Man’s dominion is a product of our attempts to control our fear of our symbolic and the animalistic potentials, both of which deeply intimidate us.

Man’s response to self-awareness and to the struggle with our animalistic and symbolic sides is comprised of two conflicting reactions: awe and dread. We feel awe at the limitlessness of the potential in our existence, and we feel dread at the realization that it all, possibly without warning, will end suddenly, and certainly eventually, in death and decay. Our response to awe and dread develops on two levels: the personal and the social.

Awe and Dread

On a personal level, we react to awe and dread through a concurrent fear of death and a fear of life. Our state of awe for our potential to experience the universe leads us to fear death, the event that will bring the awe to an end. At the same time, the dread we experience makes us fear life. We are intimidated by the overwhelming potential of life. Our creation of personality, and our life projects give us self confidence, but Becker warns us that this character self is simply a shell of armor. He calls this armor a "vital lie" for it is necessary to root us in this world and is entirely illusionary all at the same time.

Otto Rank, basing his words on Rousseau wrote that "every human being is equally unfree, that is, we create out of freedom, a prison". Well, the prison is us. Our character and self definition trap and immobilize us, even as they allow us to live and breathe. If we abandon this project of the self, we experience terror, hopelessness and despair, for our security has been cast aside. If we maintain it, we live in a state of denying death, and even more terrifying, a state of never truly touching the world and of never truly experiencing life. Rather, we experience it from behind the wall of our defenses.

On social terms, we utilize our intelligence and process our anxiety collectively by creating immortality projects in the form of culture and religion and similar constructs designed to give us a sense of permanence above and beyond our physical selves. The tall buildings in our cities which aspire towards the heavens, the works of transcendent art meant to signify eternal beauty, and even the laws and rules and functions of governments and leaders who offer strength and guidance…these are all collective agreements made amongst individuals needing relief from anxiety. Dr. Sheldon Solomon wrote about these agreements, saying "They are psychologically necessary impositions giving an illusion of order in a chaotic world." And Otto Rank wrote, "All our human problems, with their intolerable sufferings, arise from man’s ceaseless attempts to make this material world into a man-made reality, aiming to achieve on earth a "perfection" which is only to be found in the beyond, thereby confusing the values of both."

The nature of human interactions

Human interactions present a deepening to the problem. Becker referred to the inevitability of our looking for reassurance and definition in other people as "the nexus of un-freedom". He made reference to this process as if we were under a "spell" of some kind. He identified that we were continually drawn to others for the creation of our selves. As we look to others for self-definition we are in denial of our own potential, thus in denial of life. Recall however, that we also deny death. So, we resist others as well. We do not want to be reminded as we look at the failings of others that we are like them. We want and need to be more than they are. We are unable to live together or apart. We are unable to live and unable to face death. And in terms of those around us, it is essentially impossible for us to get along and impossible for us to not get along. Every other person poses a threat to the personal, cultural, and social symbolic immortality structures that we have created. If we subscribe to the notion that our developments of culture and of personality are "right" or "true", then anytime we meet someone who differs in opinion or tradition, we necessarily will have a conflict on our hands. This conflict will be one that is not even remotely limited to surface issues. Rather, the threat to our sense of self that we experience in interacting with different others reaches the very core of our existence.

Our response to that threat occurs on four levels. In one response, we derogate the other. We disparage those who possess worldviews that are different than ours. A second response is to assimilate the threatening other. We do whatever we can to convince others of our worldview’s validity. In doing so, our existential foundation is reinforced. Thirdly, we accommodate the opposing worldview. We find ways to incorporate threatening ideas into our own beliefs and in doing so, eliminate the alternative viewpoint and therefore any existential threat. As history reveals to us, these three methods often lead to the last and most destructive method of regaining our faith in our own way of life. Annihilation of those who possess an opposing worldview eliminates that world view altogether and proves once and for all that the victor is right, justified, and closer to immortality.

The potential for change

Ultimately, competing immortality projects threaten each other. Sheldon Solomon writes, "All conflict stems from our psychological inability to tolerate those who are different from ourselves". Our feeling is that if the issues we have addressed here are a psychological manifestation inherent in all people, then perhaps it is possible to address this psychology in the public through policy or gentle persuasion. Therefore, even if violence is a given, perhaps through policy and persuasion the lashings-out which result from fear could happen with less frequency, less intensity, and with a less reactionary approach.

Back to World Leaders Project page