Two concepts I’m not sure I believe in anymore: “being true to yourself” and “living up to your potential.”
These are the foundations of my upbringing, the warm and fuzzy ideals of humanistic psychology. Perhaps many middle-class children of the 80s and 90s can relate. Be true to yourself! You are special! Follow your heart!
But who am I? What is the self, and is it something worth being true to? And why should I try to actualize this self, if I can define it at all?
It doesn’t make sense anymore. The self is a construction, an interaction of experiences and brain structures, always changing. A brain injury could destroy the memories and preferences and abilities that define this self. Even new experiences alone can cause significant changes in the brain. The self grows; it changes; it is not anything I can easily define or contain.
Be true to yourself. Be true to what? To this version of yourself, frozen at this point in time? To an interpretation of what you believe the self to be?
Live up to your potential. What, the potential of your genetic inheritance? Or the potential of all the abilities you have developed so far, based on your life experiences?
I used to believe in these ideas so firmly. I carried a heavy burden as a result, because I was trying to uphold standards that were ambiguous, ever-changing, and ultimately unattainable.
Part of growing up is realizing that much of our worldview has been founded on fairy tales. And realizing that we may not be able to replace that foundation with anything solid at all.