7 ms·

I'm not so sure I buy into that theory of yours any more than the article. My personal theory is that self-esteem arises from the fact that you are aware of yo

I'm not so sure I buy into that theory of yours any more than the article. My personal theory is that self-esteem arises from the fact that you are aware of your acceptance in a social group. Knowing that you are welcome calms you and gives that assertive vibe. I don't think it matters how much you believe in yourself. At least not beyond a basic level. In fact, believing too much in a non-conforming self makes you a narcissist, and believing too much in a conforming self makes you vain.

csydas 9y ago
I would agree with this, and also that the 'damage' caused by "Everyone gets a trophy" is overstated immensely. My experience having coached children's basketball was that the consolation and participation prizes did little to nothing to console the children when they lost. Even if they got a ribbon or a tiny participation trophy, it didn't change their sour mood over losing unless the children genuinely weren't that interested in the competition to begin with, in which case I don't really think there's a problem in not being that invested in a competition. Undeserved praise and adoration does have negative side effects, and it likely isn't the healthiest way to raise children, but the over-emphasis on celebrating participation isn't the society ruining factor people make it out to be. At worst it's probably just a waste of resources and effort. On the other-hand, parents over-stressing and vicariously experiencing competition through their children is a very real problem, and the behavior of some of the adults I would see at gradeschool basketball games was just shocking, especially given that it was low division schools, so mostly just after-school sports. (i.e., there was no professional path here or proper competition for any child looking to take a chance at professional play someday - it was a bunch of 8 year olds running around the court, most of which couldn't even throw the ball high enough to reach the rim of the lowered basket). To see parents yelling and screaming at their kids to shove and hurt other children in order to win was just ridiculous.
- J-dawg 9y ago
  On the subject of "everyone gets a trophy", I can't believe this still happens, because I've only ever heard it described in derisory terms. I've never heard anyone say "the school gave my kid a 14th place ribbon, how cute!". It's always "can you believe they give out ribbons for 14th place now?!" Kids are pretty astute at picking up on this stuff, and I expect that being given a 14th place ribbon just feels a little sad and pathetic to a kid. It probably doesn't do any real harm either, apart from contributing to landfill waste!
  - sailfast 9y ago
    Most of the time kids just get "season" markers. Like, "Thanks for playing on our soccer team 2017" which I don't see as that harmful. They're trophies sometimes, simple white plastic base with some gold circle or whatever (at least the few times I've seen it) - it's a nice way to close out the season and have something on the shelf to remember, not a huge deal. I think kids notice when the trophy says "First Place." I know I knew the difference.
    - Bartweiss 9y ago
      Yep. I've never actually seen a "14th place" ribbon, because I think even optimists know it would just be read as an insult. All I actually got were 'participation' awards, which were basically a trinket to remember the team or event by. There was a "protect kids self-esteem" bit, but that was entirely at the top end - there was no trophy saying "First Place". I certainly never saw trophies 'celebrating' losses.
  - brians 9y ago
    By contrast, my kids (all <8) are highly motivated to go to swim class on cold days by the ribbons given out—every participant, every class.
    - Bartweiss 9y ago
      I wonder how much of this 'debate' is actually just people talking about different age groups? A participation ribbon might well have motivated me at age 6, and frankly I doubt both the morality and common sense of anyone saying a six year old is too happy at a swim class. Keeping kids involved at that age seems like the biggest goal. On the other hand, I have annoyed memories of getting participation ribbons at 15 for doing terribly in races. They felt downright insulting, because I knew exactly how I'd done and I was basically getting a ribbon for taking a bus to the meet. A shocking number of educational issues seem to boil down to "6 year olds are not 15 year olds". That, and "offering things is better than enforcing them" - participation ribbons are way better than banning score-keeping, which I also got to see.
- icc97 9y ago
  Parents on the side of sports games seems to be a problem the world over. I've heard of it directly in both Belgium and England with Football (Soccer) games. Parents will subvert the will of the coaches wanting their kid to shine rather than as part of a team. Parents and grandparents will continually scream to their children what to do or abuse at the referee.
- usmeteora 9y ago
  agreed, and this happens in academics too. The helicopter parents who make their kids feel worthless outside of their GPA and ability to get accepted into the top 10 colleges, is disconcerting. One of my college roommates parents was a Professor at MIT, and even though he got into an engienering school ranked right under it, his parents treated him liek the failure of the family and despite him being capable of great things, he had already been labeled as the failure in his family for ONLY having a 3.8GPA at the number 3 school in the world and mine as well work at McDonalds if he was going to destroy the family tradition of going to MIT, producing 45 patents, getting a PhD and writing 3 textbooks before the age of 30. The kid was capable and accomplished an amazing amount but he really viewed himself as quite worthless and had a hard time getting a job after college due to his crushing lack of self esteem. This is the opposite extreme but so is getting 35 trophies for a 5th grade soccer team. I think both are extremes and the conversation needs to be recentered around the idea of grade inflation and positive self regard. Again, you can have positive self regard for kids and NOT give them a trophy just for showing up to school. Theres a large medium here. The biggest benefit of consistent positive self regard (which can exist without trophies and claps for every minor positive step in life) is the ability to prevent downward spirals where kids beat themselves up and begin to internalize the negative feedback and continually snowball their lack of self esteem to where they really handicap their ability to grow, as illustrated by my friend in the example above. if a child is labeled as bottom 30% of the class or the team in middle school, negative feedback is more likely to keep him locked in the negative self image he has, instead of the belief by teachers that he/she has the ability to improve. Regardless of if the kid will ever be the top 10% or is naturally more talented than the top 10%, thats NOT the point of continual positive self regard. The point is to continue trying and learning and self improvement. Labeling kdis in boxes really does limit their ability to grow and change their status and lets be honest, teachers are NOT always the best/the most right about knowing who is more intelligent and smarter, and these things can change alot from middle school to highschool. You don't have to give the bottom 30% of the kids the same grades or trophies, but you can treat them with positive regard, and by doing that remind them they are human and that you believe in their ability to grow. Nothing sucks worse than a teacher immediately writing off a kid as locked in a certain status range. They might actually begin to believe it, and if you don't beleive individuals have the ability to grow and learn beyond their initial casting/grade heirarchy then you really shouldn't be teaching and furthermore, I find these justifications by teachers more of an excuse for the fact that the U.S. is bottom ranked globally right now as a first world country for education. Youre a TEACHER. you job is to enable learning not say its just the way it is that the Straight A kids will always be the straight A kids and vise versa and really you have no control over it. If you feel that way, then please go find another job. I would say negative feedback is far more damaging, and furthermore, the lack of negative feedback does not require trophies and delusional inflations of self worth that apparently according to the author also equal caccooning children from the consequences of life at every step. This is just false.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
sametmax 9y ago
> I don't think it matters how much you believe in yourself That's not what OP said. Quote: > Self-esteem is a byproduct of self-compassion Self-compassion is not believing in yourself, it's accepting yourself as-is. And not just accepting in the sense of "settling for it". But having the same respect and nice feeling about you that you have about the others your like. While outside validation helps a lot in one to avoid rejecting oneself, it just removes a (huge) barrier for building self-esteem. Self-esteem can't come from outside. The problem with other people validating you is that as soon as you loose it, you loose what you though was self-esteem. And you get angry, you blame, you can't find solutions, and you ever give you all the responsibilities or remove yourself from all of them. If you succeed and get praise, it then inflate your ego and narcissism. But once you build self-compassion, even when you screw up, you still like yourself. But you can still see your fair part of responsibility in all this. And when your succeed, liking yourself as you are, you know what's really you, and what's really coming from outside help and luck. And you don't inflate your ego.
- porjo 9y ago
  This is a great way to put it. > Self-esteem can't come from outside I do have to disagree here. Self-esteem ultimately must come from outside...just not from other people. As a Christian I believe that self-acceptance is rooted in knowing that I have intrinsic worth to God irrespective of what other people think of me. It's not about who I am or what I have or haven't done, but about who God is and what He's done for all of us.
  - sametmax 9y ago
    I'm not a believer, but I would assume that God is not outside (or inside, or in any location. As an absolute, this consideration feels like not applying to God. Hence can you define your relationship to God in a way that separate both from each others. Even the term "both" feels strange, as God is suppose to be everything and more. Coming from that, the idea of the acceptance from God is a concept you have in yourself. Maybe I got this wrong, intellectualizing spirituality is usually a terrible way to share about it.
rosser 9y ago
Is it really self-esteem if it's contingent upon acceptance within the social group?
- rimliu 9y ago
  Of course. Social group influences a lot how you perceive yourself. You can only establish a value of something by comparison.
  - crawfordcomeaux 9y ago
    I'm noticing some language trends in this whole thread worth pointing out: - In OP, I wrote self-esteem is the root of narcissism, when I really believe it's a potential root. It can also be symptomatic because pretty much everything in the brain can flow both ways, so one person's symptom can be another person's cause. - We tend to forget the importance of the word "can." I'd rephrase what you wrote as "Social group CAN influence a lot about how you perceive yourself." It doesn't have to. Also, comparison isn't needed. Here's how I do it: I recognize a few key facts: - every person is unique in some way - every unique property of a person reflects something to be learned, even if the lesson is the opposite of said property - neural networks learn and apply learning - we are walking neural networks - the past is changed by observing the present Therefore, everyone is valuable in some special way, including myself. My self-esteem stems from reminding myself that others' perceptions of my experiences do not define my reality, my value, or my past. Those are all mine to define and nobody else's. I don't need to compare my subjective experience with someone else's in order to value mine.
- Broken_Hippo 9y ago
  Not wholly, but partially. It doesn't matter much if you believe in yourself when few others do. The social group is more verifying your self-esteem.
  - crawfordcomeaux 9y ago
    I'd say it's easier to rely on external validation in many cultures because anything not well-defined is hard to teach. Poorly defined subjective experiences are even harder.

csydas 9y ago

I would agree with this, and also that the 'damage' caused by "Everyone gets a trophy" is overstated immensely. My experience having coached children's basketball was that the consolation and participation prizes did little to nothing to console the children when they lost. Even if they got a ribbon or a tiny participation trophy, it didn't change their sour mood over losing unless the children genuinely weren't that interested in the competition to begin with, in which case I don't really think there's a problem in not being that invested in a competition. Undeserved praise and adoration does have negative side effects, and it likely isn't the healthiest way to raise children, but the over-emphasis on celebrating participation isn't the society ruining factor people make it out to be. At worst it's probably just a waste of resources and effort. On the other-hand, parents over-stressing and vicariously experiencing competition through their children is a very real problem, and the behavior of some of the adults I would see at gradeschool basketball games was just shocking, especially given that it was low division schools, so mostly just after-school sports. (i.e., there was no professional path here or proper competition for any child looking to take a chance at professional play someday - it was a bunch of 8 year olds running around the court, most of which couldn't even throw the ball high enough to reach the rim of the lowered basket). To see parents yelling and screaming at their kids to shove and hurt other children in order to win was just ridiculous.

J-dawg 9y ago
On the subject of "everyone gets a trophy", I can't believe this still happens, because I've only ever heard it described in derisory terms. I've never heard anyone say "the school gave my kid a 14th place ribbon, how cute!". It's always "can you believe they give out ribbons for 14th place now?!" Kids are pretty astute at picking up on this stuff, and I expect that being given a 14th place ribbon just feels a little sad and pathetic to a kid. It probably doesn't do any real harm either, apart from contributing to landfill waste!
- sailfast 9y ago
  Most of the time kids just get "season" markers. Like, "Thanks for playing on our soccer team 2017" which I don't see as that harmful. They're trophies sometimes, simple white plastic base with some gold circle or whatever (at least the few times I've seen it) - it's a nice way to close out the season and have something on the shelf to remember, not a huge deal. I think kids notice when the trophy says "First Place." I know I knew the difference.
  - Bartweiss 9y ago
    Yep. I've never actually seen a "14th place" ribbon, because I think even optimists know it would just be read as an insult. All I actually got were 'participation' awards, which were basically a trinket to remember the team or event by. There was a "protect kids self-esteem" bit, but that was entirely at the top end - there was no trophy saying "First Place". I certainly never saw trophies 'celebrating' losses.
- brians 9y ago
  By contrast, my kids (all <8) are highly motivated to go to swim class on cold days by the ribbons given out—every participant, every class.
  - Bartweiss 9y ago
    I wonder how much of this 'debate' is actually just people talking about different age groups? A participation ribbon might well have motivated me at age 6, and frankly I doubt both the morality and common sense of anyone saying a six year old is too happy at a swim class. Keeping kids involved at that age seems like the biggest goal. On the other hand, I have annoyed memories of getting participation ribbons at 15 for doing terribly in races. They felt downright insulting, because I knew exactly how I'd done and I was basically getting a ribbon for taking a bus to the meet. A shocking number of educational issues seem to boil down to "6 year olds are not 15 year olds". That, and "offering things is better than enforcing them" - participation ribbons are way better than banning score-keeping, which I also got to see.
icc97 9y ago
Parents on the side of sports games seems to be a problem the world over. I've heard of it directly in both Belgium and England with Football (Soccer) games. Parents will subvert the will of the coaches wanting their kid to shine rather than as part of a team. Parents and grandparents will continually scream to their children what to do or abuse at the referee.
usmeteora 9y ago
agreed, and this happens in academics too. The helicopter parents who make their kids feel worthless outside of their GPA and ability to get accepted into the top 10 colleges, is disconcerting. One of my college roommates parents was a Professor at MIT, and even though he got into an engienering school ranked right under it, his parents treated him liek the failure of the family and despite him being capable of great things, he had already been labeled as the failure in his family for ONLY having a 3.8GPA at the number 3 school in the world and mine as well work at McDonalds if he was going to destroy the family tradition of going to MIT, producing 45 patents, getting a PhD and writing 3 textbooks before the age of 30. The kid was capable and accomplished an amazing amount but he really viewed himself as quite worthless and had a hard time getting a job after college due to his crushing lack of self esteem. This is the opposite extreme but so is getting 35 trophies for a 5th grade soccer team. I think both are extremes and the conversation needs to be recentered around the idea of grade inflation and positive self regard. Again, you can have positive self regard for kids and NOT give them a trophy just for showing up to school. Theres a large medium here. The biggest benefit of consistent positive self regard (which can exist without trophies and claps for every minor positive step in life) is the ability to prevent downward spirals where kids beat themselves up and begin to internalize the negative feedback and continually snowball their lack of self esteem to where they really handicap their ability to grow, as illustrated by my friend in the example above. if a child is labeled as bottom 30% of the class or the team in middle school, negative feedback is more likely to keep him locked in the negative self image he has, instead of the belief by teachers that he/she has the ability to improve. Regardless of if the kid will ever be the top 10% or is naturally more talented than the top 10%, thats NOT the point of continual positive self regard. The point is to continue trying and learning and self improvement. Labeling kdis in boxes really does limit their ability to grow and change their status and lets be honest, teachers are NOT always the best/the most right about knowing who is more intelligent and smarter, and these things can change alot from middle school to highschool. You don't have to give the bottom 30% of the kids the same grades or trophies, but you can treat them with positive regard, and by doing that remind them they are human and that you believe in their ability to grow. Nothing sucks worse than a teacher immediately writing off a kid as locked in a certain status range. They might actually begin to believe it, and if you don't beleive individuals have the ability to grow and learn beyond their initial casting/grade heirarchy then you really shouldn't be teaching and furthermore, I find these justifications by teachers more of an excuse for the fact that the U.S. is bottom ranked globally right now as a first world country for education. Youre a TEACHER. you job is to enable learning not say its just the way it is that the Straight A kids will always be the straight A kids and vise versa and really you have no control over it. If you feel that way, then please go find another job. I would say negative feedback is far more damaging, and furthermore, the lack of negative feedback does not require trophies and delusional inflations of self worth that apparently according to the author also equal caccooning children from the consequences of life at every step. This is just false.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

sametmax 9y ago

> I don't think it matters how much you believe in yourself That's not what OP said. Quote: > Self-esteem is a byproduct of self-compassion Self-compassion is not believing in yourself, it's accepting yourself as-is. And not just accepting in the sense of "settling for it". But having the same respect and nice feeling about you that you have about the others your like. While outside validation helps a lot in one to avoid rejecting oneself, it just removes a (huge) barrier for building self-esteem. Self-esteem can't come from outside. The problem with other people validating you is that as soon as you loose it, you loose what you though was self-esteem. And you get angry, you blame, you can't find solutions, and you ever give you all the responsibilities or remove yourself from all of them. If you succeed and get praise, it then inflate your ego and narcissism. But once you build self-compassion, even when you screw up, you still like yourself. But you can still see your fair part of responsibility in all this. And when your succeed, liking yourself as you are, you know what's really you, and what's really coming from outside help and luck. And you don't inflate your ego.

porjo 9y ago
This is a great way to put it. > Self-esteem can't come from outside I do have to disagree here. Self-esteem ultimately must come from outside...just not from other people. As a Christian I believe that self-acceptance is rooted in knowing that I have intrinsic worth to God irrespective of what other people think of me. It's not about who I am or what I have or haven't done, but about who God is and what He's done for all of us.
- sametmax 9y ago
  I'm not a believer, but I would assume that God is not outside (or inside, or in any location. As an absolute, this consideration feels like not applying to God. Hence can you define your relationship to God in a way that separate both from each others. Even the term "both" feels strange, as God is suppose to be everything and more. Coming from that, the idea of the acceptance from God is a concept you have in yourself. Maybe I got this wrong, intellectualizing spirituality is usually a terrible way to share about it.

rosser 9y ago

Is it really self-esteem if it's contingent upon acceptance within the social group?

rimliu 9y ago
Of course. Social group influences a lot how you perceive yourself. You can only establish a value of something by comparison.
- crawfordcomeaux 9y ago
  I'm noticing some language trends in this whole thread worth pointing out: - In OP, I wrote self-esteem is the root of narcissism, when I really believe it's a potential root. It can also be symptomatic because pretty much everything in the brain can flow both ways, so one person's symptom can be another person's cause. - We tend to forget the importance of the word "can." I'd rephrase what you wrote as "Social group CAN influence a lot about how you perceive yourself." It doesn't have to. Also, comparison isn't needed. Here's how I do it: I recognize a few key facts: - every person is unique in some way - every unique property of a person reflects something to be learned, even if the lesson is the opposite of said property - neural networks learn and apply learning - we are walking neural networks - the past is changed by observing the present Therefore, everyone is valuable in some special way, including myself. My self-esteem stems from reminding myself that others' perceptions of my experiences do not define my reality, my value, or my past. Those are all mine to define and nobody else's. I don't need to compare my subjective experience with someone else's in order to value mine.
Broken_Hippo 9y ago
Not wholly, but partially. It doesn't matter much if you believe in yourself when few others do. The social group is more verifying your self-esteem.
- crawfordcomeaux 9y ago
  I'd say it's easier to rely on external validation in many cultures because anything not well-defined is hard to teach. Poorly defined subjective experiences are even harder.