Remarks on self-love
I've reached a turning point in my journey to save my soul. I recently stepped back from a meaningful commitment and now see it as a start to something more thematic. This post is the first of two to describe that change.
Here, I want to address Nikhil's call to stop loving oneself—found by way of angrybunnyman's response to it. Although I'm usually fond of the former's writing, I took several issues with the post.
For the rest of this post, I'll refer to Nikhil in second-person perspective; this also allows me to speak to those I intend to reach.
The pop psychology of today has conditioned us to believe that we should always love ourselves. But what if we are mediocre? If we keep celebrating ourselves without confronting that mediocrity — loving ourselves unconditionally regardless — we will never improve.
The initial premise is fair, but the counterpoint that self-love perpetuates mediocrity and thus prevents self-improvement is flawed. Is love for ourselves conditional—and conditioned upon achieving a level of 'good enough'? That seems to be the case for you, who posits some level of self-loathing as necessary.
You acknowledge that the term "self-loathing" is triggering, but you don't mean one should hate oneself. Sorry, but what is self-loathing if not that? If the key argument is to develop self-awareness of one's mediocrity in order to address it, why does one need to stop loving oneself and replace it with disgust? It's a toxic attitude to promote.
All meaningful transformation originates from a place of disgust. You despise the status quo to such an extent that you are driven to disrupt it. This notion of loving yourself regardless of who you are or what you bring to the table is crippling — and, frankly, annoying.
That's a bold claim to say all meaningful change stems from disgust. Discontentment and dissatisfaction with the status quo, sure, but there's an embedded sense of rugged individualism at the heart of this paragraph that overlooks how change is produced by systems. And to tie efforts of transformation to one's self-worth and what one can contribute? That's the real annoyance, because it's the idea behind hustle and grind culture.
You are not supposed to love yourself endlessly. You are not supposed to love anybody endlessly. Don't hate people for who they are, forgive them wherever possible — but loving them unconditionally is its own form of stupidity.
Where's the rulebook that stipulates these suppositions? This sounds like an arrogant imposition of one's worldview, and at this point I'm surprised by how much this messaging is in contrast to your [Nikhil's] usual temperament. What are you arguing for, anyways? Why should how another person chooses to live their life bring so much grief to you?
How can you improve if you are deeply in love with yourself? How will you enrich someone's life unless you master the art of accepting flaws — beginning with your own? You cannot genuinely accept someone else's flaws until you have identified and reckoned with yours first.
I suspect you may be surrounded by narcissists if what's quoted is construed as an argument. For one thing, loving oneself does not prevent self-improvement; it encourages it because it's a recognition that one deserves what's good. If you've ever gone through a depressive episode, then you know that lack of self-love (or self-respect) creates a cycle—the very one you believe that self-loathing can overcome. As for accepting flaws in oneself and others, and enriching another person's life, let's not tangle them up here. Humility is a virtue, yes, but there are some prideful people who, by virtue of wanting to be impressive, do impressive things. They're not mutually exclusive; why conflate the two?
We can only tolerate other people's idiosyncrasies when we can see beyond our own. That is precisely why this endless self-love doesn't work. It turns your gaze inward, away from the ways you might be an inconvenience to someone else. Accepting that you could be a problem to someone requires a clear-eyed awareness of your own shortcomings.
Counterpoint: I respect my time and energy enough to not let what others say or do bother me. (Present case excluded because I'm choosing to fight on this hill to prevent the spread of toxic ideas.) Introspection is what helps one recognize how they might be an inconvenience to another; it's because I am a level of self-absorbed and have a degree of fondness towards myself that I am mindful of how I relate to others. I think you mistake self-love for narcissism, in which case I suggest evaluating who you're around before making sweeping declarations about the human condition.
So cultivate disgust for the parts of yourself that fall short. I cannot stomach someone who casually announces, "Oh, I'm just not good with maths" or "Sorry, I'm bad at reading signs." What exactly am I supposed to do with that? Why should I be expected to absorb it?
Well, you're not "supposed" to do anything. But as a practice of decency, consider taking such statements at face value. Because we live in a society that's preoccupied with appearances, so when others display the humility of admitting their shortcomings, it might be an opportunity to normalize acceptance. Unless you're telling me that all shortcomings are equal and that we ought to devote our time and energy to mitigating each and every one? I'd rather hang out with someone who put in the effort to be a good listener or a good friend or a good collaborator than someone who was constantly berating and preoccupying themselves for sucking at trivial things like maths or reading signs. The real irony of your arguments is that you expect others to pursue a state of perfectionism, without regarding what it would mean to judge and be judged constantly.
It is only once you fix something that you realise it was fixable. Then you can decide whether to distance yourself from people who won't, or try to help them become better.
Counterpoint: forethought about what's worth fixing/addressing in the first place is wisdom. For instance, fixing/addressing the shortcomings in another person's life. Not sure where the savior complex (i.e., the idea that your role is to help others become better) comes from, but I'm more concerned about the near-dehumanizing approach to that salvation (i.e., distance yourself from those who won't help themselves).
Too much of anything is corrosive. Being excessively self-critical is equally damaging, because then you are viewing yourself purely through an external lens — as a subject to be judged rather than a person to be developed. The goal is to cultivate enough awareness that self-improvement becomes a continuous, natural instinct.
You reveal your biases here. You spend much of your post denigrating self-love and promoting self-loathing and self-disgust as pathways to change, but now you caution against being overly self-critical. You speak of judgment, but do not see how judgmental you've been throughout your whole post. So, this last bit reads as a preemptive defensive statement but it lacks conviction.
So, regardless of what Instagram psychology preaches, be harder on yourself when the occasion demands it. God knows the world is starved of good people.
I agree that the world is deprived of good people. Lord knows it has enough people who judge others without an appreciation that everyone fights their own battles, often invisible and silent.
My advice (if you'll receive it): Go all in on self-improvement, but keep it contained to your own affairs. It takes a lifetime to know oneself; why presume you can generalize how others ought to live without knowledge of what constitutes their lives?
Part 2 also addresses self-love, but is less argumentative and more introspective.