Month: July 2025

“Imagine that you are standing on a theatre stage. If the house lights are on, you’ll probably be able to see all the way to the back of the hall. But if you’re under a bright spotlight, you won’t be able to make out even the front row. That’s exactly how it is with our lives. It’s because we cast a dim light on our entire lives that we are able to see the past and the future. Or, at least we imagine we can. But if one is shining a bright spotlight on here and now, one cannot see the past or the future anymore.” | The Philosopher in The Courage to be Disliked by Ichiro Kishimi and Fumitame Koga 

This was a beautiful way of reinforcing the importance of focusing on the present and on what we control rather than fretting about the future and over-analyzing the past.

It is a big part of the simplicity that Adler’s approach to life advocates.

It reminded me of a quote from a Zen master – “The essence of zen is the ability to do one thing at a time.”

Bright spotlight.

Focus on doing the best you can right now with what you have.

PHILOSOPHER: Why is it necessary to be special? Probably because one cannot accept  one’s normal self. And it is precisely for this reason that when being especially good  becomes a lost cause, one makes the huge leap to being especially bad—the opposite  extreme.

But is being normal, being ordinary, really such a bad thing? Is it something inferior? Or, in truth, isn’t everybody normal? It is necessary to think this through to its logical conclusion.  

YOUTH: So are you saying that I should be normal?  

PHILOSOPHER: Self-acceptance is the vital first step. If you are able to possess the  courage to be normal, your way of looking at the world will change dramatically.  

YOUTH: But …  

PHILOSOPHER: You are probably rejecting normality because you equate being normal with being incapable. Being normal is not being incapable. One does not need to flaunt one’s superiority.

——-

This was an interesting exchange from “The Courage to be Disliked” in the context of parenting. It got me reflecting on dysfunctional behaviors I’ve observed in youth sports – both from others and myself.

I remember the first time I was introduced to competitive sports as a parent. I felt just as involved in my child’s performance. A normal day in the sun wasn’t good enough.

I realized soon enough that my mindset (which admittedly lasted for the best part of a year) was robbing all the joy out of the activity. At the heart of that dysfunctional attitude was the absence of self-acceptance and a clear “separation of tasks.”

I see it now and understand it better.

“Happiness is the feeling of contribution to others.” | Alfred Adler

This simple definition of happiness was another one of the revelatory moments in “The Courage to be Disliked.”   

Adler’s thesis is that humans are inherently social beings. All our problems are thus interpersonal problems. And true happiness doesn’t come from approval, status, or success. 

Instead, it arises when you feel you’re contributing meaningfully to your community or to someone else’s life — whether through work, relationships, or simple daily actions. This idea is expressed in the german word – Gemeinschaftsgefühl – or “community feeling. “

This reminded me of the biggest takeaway from the longest longitudinal study we’ve ever run (“The Harvard study”) – the biggest indicator of our long-term well is the health of our relationships.

Adler would rightly point to Gemeinschaftsgefühl.

As we continue exploring some of the hard-hitting ideas in “The Courage to be Disliked,” the next one to tease apart is about vertical relationships and horizontal relationships.

Adlerian psychology makes the case that our default relationship pattern is that of vertical relationships – starting in our families and schools. These relationships have us positioned either above or below someone and are characterized by control and a need for praise/recognition.

Horizontal relationships, on the other hand, are built on mutual respect and, crucially, involve a separation of tasks. We focus on our role in the relationship and do not seek to control what the other person does. Crucially, this means a “separation of tasks” wherein we do our bit and leave it to the other person to do theirs.

An example – as a parent, if our child doesn’t want to do their homework, we’d force them to do in a vertical relationship. In a horizontal relationship, we’d explain the consequences of them not doing it and “separate tasks” – ultimately leaving the choice to them.

Here is a GPT generated image that summarizes the idea.

There’s a story I’ve shared on this blog over the years about a time when I asked a wise friend at the start of my career if he’d be my mentor. He shared then that he didn’t want to be a mentor. Instead he just wanted to be a friend. If his perspective was of consistent value, I might even refer to him as a wise friend (as I have done since).

It was one of those exchanges that had a profound impact on me. I’ve since never sought mentors… and I’ve found myself chuckle when I’ve heard folks mention how they’ve impacted their many mentees.

I didn’t fully appreciate why until now.

The philosopher and youth were discussing how the philosopher navigated a difficult relationship with his father –

PHILOSOPHER: I think that until I encountered Adlerian psychology, I understood it in that kind of way. Because my father was a moody, taciturnperson. But to think to myself, He hit me that time, and that is why our relationship went bad, is a Freudian etiological way of thinking.

The Adlerian teleology position completely reverses the cause-and-effect interpretation. That is to say, I brought out the memory of being hit because I don’t want my relationship with my father to get better.

YOUTH: So first you had the goal of not wanting your relationship with your father to get better and not wanting to repair things between you.

PHILOSOPHER: That’s right. For me, it was more convenient to not repair my relationship with my father. I could use having a father like that as an excuse for why my own life wasn’t going well. That for me was a virtue. And there was also the aspect of taking revenge on a feudal father.

YOUTH: That is exactly what I wanted to ask about! Even if the cause and effect were reversed, that is to say, in your case, you were able to analyze yourself and say, “It isn’t because he hit me that I have a bad relationship with my father, but that I brought out the memory of being hit because I don’t want my relationship with my father to get better,” even then, how does it actually change things? It doesn’t change the fact that you were hit in childhood, right?

PHILOSOPHER: One can think from the viewpoint that it is an interpersonal relationship card. As long as I use etiology to think, It is because he hit me that I have a bad relationship with my father, it would be a matter that was impossible for me to do anything about. But if I can think, I brought out the memory of being hit because I don ‘t want my relationship with my father to get better, then I will be holding the card to repair relations. Because if I can just change the goal, that fixes everything.

---

This was another one of those hard-hitting exchanges in “The Courage to be Disliked.”

At the heart of this dialog is the distinction between Ateliology and Teleology.

Ateliology is the idea that events happening now are shaped by past causes. This is the basis of Freudian psychology and posits that our past traumas defines our lives.

Teleology, on the other hand, describes our actions as a result of a goal or purpose – even if it is unconsciously chosen.

So, if you, for example say – “I’m shy because I was bullied in school.” Ateliology would agree and say the trauma of being bullied in the past created your present.

Teleology, on the other hand, would say – you are choosing to be shy now to avoid rejection — that’s the unconscious purpose behind your behavior. So it flips the question from “what happened” to “what purpose is the behavior serving now?”

Adlerian psychology, as you can tell, is radically focused on teleology and the idea that we are not just passive products of our past. We are, instead, the authors of our future.

Or in the immortal words of William Ernest Henley’s Invictus – “I am the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul.”

It is only now that I have begun to understand the depth of insight in that line.

“There is nothing particularly wrong with the feeling of inferiority itself. You understand this point now, right? As Adler says, the feeling of inferiority can be a trigger for striving and growth.

For instance, if one had a feeling of inferiority with regard to one’s education, and resolved to oneself, I’m not well educated, so I’ll just have to try harder than anyone else, that would be a desirable direction. The inferiority complex, on the other hand, refers to a condition of having begun to use one’s feelings of inferiority as a kind of excuse. So, one thinks to oneself, I’m not well educated, so I can’t succeed, or I’m not good looking, so I can’t get married.

When someone is insisting on the logic of “A is the situation, so B cannot be done” in such a way in everyday life, that is not something that fits in the feeling of inferiority category. It is an inferiority complex.”| The Philosopher in The Courage to be Disliked by Ichiro Kishimi and Fumitame Koga

We choose how we deal with a situation that isn’t ideal. For example, if we feel there’s something lacking in us, we could use it to strive for growth and learning. Or we could attempt to compensate for it – either via an inferiority complex or by flipping toward attempts to project superiority and bravado. 

This is a recurring question that is explored in the book as a key tenet of Adlerian psychology is – if this is the situation, can we use the situation to strive for learning and growth? It is again an extension of the idea of being proactive and thus choosing learning over judgment once we accept the situation as it is.

This reminded me of “The Choice Map” by Marilee Adams – the act of choosing learning questions vs. judging questions opens up a relentlessly constructive approach to the challenges we face.

It then makes it easier to understand a key Alfred Adler idea – “The important thing is not what one is born with, but what use one makes of that equipment.”

Put differently, our life is what we make of it.

“In Adlerian psychology, trauma is definitively denied. This was a very new and revolutionary point. Certainly, the Freudian view of trauma is fascinating. Freud’s idea is that a person’s psychic wounds (traumas) cause their present unhappiness. When you treat a person’s life as a vast narrative, there’s an easily understandable causality and sense of dramatic development that creates strong impressions and is extremely attractive. But Adler, in denial of the trauma argument, states the following: ‘No experience is in itself a cause of our success or failure. We don’t suffer from the shock of our experiences — the so-called trauma — but instead we make out of them whatever suits our purposes. We aren’t determined by our experiences, but the meaning we give them is self-determining.” | The Philosopher in “The Courage to be Disliked”

Reading “The Courage to Be Disliked” by Ichigo Kishimi and Fumitage Koga was a revelatory experience. It is presented as a dialog between a philosopher and an angry student seeking resolution to his dissatisfaction with himself and his life and contains many a hard-hitting note.

This idea, as one hard-hitting example, is one that is explored in detail – the idea that we get to choose the meaning we give our experiences and traumas. It is along the lines of Viktor Frankl’s reflection on human freedoms – which, in turn, is a big part of Stephen Covey’s first habit – be proactive. Once we accept the stimulus, we get to choose the meaning we give it and thus the response.

In effect, suffering is real and so is agency. And meaning is chosen, not inherited.

Over the next days, I’ll share a collection of lessons from this book. A series of sorts as I reflect on these lessons and their implications.

After buying a camera to better capture memories from our National Park visits last year, I’ve begun to develop a better appreciation for great photography.

Especially those taken in the wild after hours of waiting. This award winning photo taken at a nature reserve in Madagascar showcases “The Lemur’s Tough Life.”

A Common brown lemur (Eulemur fulvus) carries her baby on her back while making a harrowing leap from one towering cliffside to another. This remarkable image was captured after a day of persistence on the photographer’s part—hiking an hour through rugged limestone terrain to her position. Only after waiting until the early evening did her patience pay off when this plucky primate emerged onto the scene, likely leading the troop in search of food. Ordinarily Brown lemurs have no set dominance hierarchy, with groups composed of males and females, old and young alike, but it appeared clear to this photographer that the focal lemur was the leader of the pack. This daring lemur navigated her group deftly through the sharp peaks and crevices of the stone forest, resulting in the immortalization of this once-in-a-lifetime leap.

Incredible.

A reminder of just how hard so many fellow living beings work to get the food they need for their sustenance.

A simple rule for async written communication – “Be extra nice and omit the sarcasm.”

It is very hard to read tone in async communication.

This over-correction habit goes a long way in making sure we don’t spend time cleaning up the inevitable mess when a message doesn’t land as we intended.

We go to our local Costco every weekend. It is always crowded.

When we get to the billing counter, we know to expect a long queue on the other side waiting to buy hot dogs and pizza.

The Costco Hot Dog is the stuff of legend. It was launched in 1985 for $1.50. That price has stayed the same since – for forty years! Costco founder Jim Sinegal reportedly told Costco CEO Craig Jelinek in 2013 that he’d kill him if he raised prices on the Hot Dog.

Costco sells 150 million to 200 million hot dogs annually. They could easily raise the price a couple of dollars and add a sizeable chunk of change to their top and bottom line.

But they choose to treat it as a symbol of what their brand is about – low prices and exceptional value. That’s clearly worth a lot more than the couple hundred million dollars they’d make.

Values aren’t values until they cost you money.