>Imposter syndrome literature takes this a step further by implying that no one knows what they’re doing, that everyone is equally bad, and that there are no ad

>Imposter syndrome literature takes this a step further by implying that no one knows what they’re doing, that everyone is equally bad, and that there are no adults in the room. The goal isn’t just to lift people up, it’s to mentally bring everyone else down. It may seem like that at first, but carry it to the logical conclusion. Assuming one does have imposter syndrome and isn't just incompetent: 1. Other people in your field are not as highly skilled or immune from mistakes as you think 2. You are not as far below them as you think 3. Their amazing accomplishments, which had convinced you of their inhuman skill and your incompetence, are still amazing. And how can you call somebody who achieves amazing things incompetent? 4. So, if there's less distance between you and them than you thought, the only explanation is that you're not as incompetent as you thought. >Instead, we should be giving people skills to accurately self-assess without tying current abilities to their self-worth Is it any better to tie self-worth to future abilities? I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but it might just be delaying the problem.