The Priest

The Priest

Recent Blog Post

Is Marriage a Failed Institution?

Is Marriage a Failed Institution? Darwin taught us that only the fittest organisms survive. And as reward for their ‘efforts’, they get to pass-on their genes. For most organisms, for the most part, this

Read More »

December 15th, 2021

Category Archives: Self Awareness

Is Marriage a Failed Institution?

Is Marriage a Failed Institution?

Darwin taught us that only the fittest organisms survive. And as reward for their ‘efforts’, they get to pass-on their genes. For most organisms, for the most part, this is true. Humans, however, have turned this law on its head. In comparison to the Siberian Tiger or an African Bull Elephant, we are neither fitter nor stronger, yet we are outperforming all of them! And worse still, our action of hunting, is causing the extinction of some of these majestic and ferocious beasts; the Tasmanian Tigers that once roamed the Down Under and the Black Rhinos on the plains of African, are no more. What makes it possible then that the actions of a significantly weaker organism is causing the extinction of its stronger and fitter counterparts? The answer lies in our ability to form intentional coalitions. It is our ability to form and maintain relationships.

 

There are many forms of relationships, but this article will discuss the idea of marriage. We will attempt to answer the question: whether marriage is a failed institution? High divorce rates and infidelity are causing some to question its validity. To offer a fitting response, we need an understanding of what marriage means. And for that we need to begin from the beginning. This beginning is that every marriage builds on an existing relationship. Every marriage builds on friendship.

 

To the above, therefore, I answer that: No. Marriage is not a failed institution. The problem is that we have lost an understanding of what the concept connotes, and have come to perceive it as a mere social convenience or religious bigotry. To reorient ourselves, we need to clarify a few things again. First and foremost, marriage is a not an invention; it is not something created by society. It is rather an expression; society recognizing and naming what humans choose to do intuitively.

Statistics tell us that 1 in 2 marriages end in divorce. And contrary to some opinions, your marriage is not a piece of paper no more than an education is a diploma. Marriage is not what you do before a Judge or before some guy or gurl you got drunk with the night before in Vegas and he/she is now wedding you and the stripper that gave you a lap dance. But hey, who am I to judge? It is a free world, right? Right!

Marriage happens between you and your partner long after the “I do”. And prep work for it begins in you as an individual, long before you walk down that isle and continues in both of you long after you’ve had your first kiss. So, what does marriage mean? It is the self-giving of one for the good of the other. Genesis 2:24 says; “that is why a man leaves his father and mother and cleaves to his wife and the two become one flesh.” When we get married, something new is supposed to happen. Ideally, an entirely new entity is created. Because, after you marry two objects or elements, something new comes forth. Such is marriage. The intentional creation of a new unique entity, born from love and sustained with love, honor, integrity and commitment. Marriage is a solemn continuous declaration, because you’ll have to make a choice for that person again and again. In order words, when the two people decide, and get married, they are now a new creation, one person, of sorts, emerges after they profess, “I do”- hence “the two become one flesh.” This means that when you say “I do”, you declare your life for that person and more so, because none of you knows what the future holds, you are saying in those two words, “I do”; “hold me to my word. I’ll be there for you through thick and thin. I pledge myself and my resources for your welfare. On my honor, I am committed to you.” This is what your “I do” means. This is what marriage is- a union born of love, sustained by love-infused honor and commitment, declared for the good of the other. Marriage is a natural next step in a relationship between a man and a woman. It is unique to the couple. Everything else that now surrounds it; the courts, churches, pictures and paparazzi’s, are non-essential extras in the expression of a marital union.

If this is what marriage means, are prenuptial agreements necessary? In simple terms, no. To go into such a covenant that is supposed to rest on honor, integrity, commitment and love with a “just in case” clause, which is what prenuptial agreements are, “just in case you do not prove to be as honorable as I thought…, I got myself covered,” just means that supposed love, integrity and honor that are foundational to, and sustains a marriage are nonexistent or shaky at best. Therefore, there really isn’t a marriage. Cohabitation, maybe. I believe the idea of marriage as a mere social construct for the satisfaction of some religious zest, stems from ignorance; a general societal intellectual sloth that we have encouraged with our quick fixes and instant gratification. Marriage is at once a gift and a sacrifice. But it begins in friendship. But every friendship, relationship that’s worth its name, takes work. It will cost you something.

 

Many of us will make money, acquire degrees, build spectacular edifices, testaments to the creativity and intelligence of our specie. Yet none of these things fill us with content or regret when we are on our death beds. Rather, at that time, we seem to focus on our relationships; “I wish I spent more time with my wife and kids”, “I wish I was nicer to my sister”; “I wish I was a better friend.” If this is the one constant that we worry about when we are close to death, why are we not very effective at building and maintaining good relationships?

A very good friend of mine once told me that friendship is the foretaste of heaven. Careful thinking reveals the veracity of this statement. No one can deny the positive impact of good friendships. A scary statistic reveals that once every 40 seconds someone commits suicide. Leading to nearly a million deaths annually, twice the number of those killed in homicides.[1] The root cause for the above statistic have not been explicitly addressed, but we can reliably deduce from studies on well-being and happiness, that people that have close friendships or a support system generally report higher life satisfaction and are less prone to self-harm. Good friendships are indeed the bliss of life. However, we all know the saying, good friends are hard to find, and good relationships take work.

 

This is because in any true relationship, you are seen and loved exactly as you are, which however, does not mean the acceptance of mediocrity. To the contrary, it challenges and encourages you to be the best version of yourself which will not always be pleasant. But you are loved and can be secure in that knowledge. The nature of relationships being between two people means that conflicts are inevitable. These challenges are not necessarily negative. Conflicts or challenges are opportunities, but they are particular types of opportunities, of which the way you handle them have consequences. Uranium, for instance, is a particular type of element. Handled correctly, can generate immense power and very clean energy at that, but handled poorly will level entire cities and render them uninhabitable for years thereafter; Chernobyl and Fukushima are testaments. So too relationships, regardless of its nature and the inevitable conflicts that stem from them, are opportunities that if handled well, yields immense benefits, and if handled carelessly, can scar and mar people for life or at best, for a very long time. Take the case of a woman who is married but literally recoils at the touch of the man she loves and has married. Not because she is repulsed by him, but because the man who was supposed to have been her protector and guide, her father, molested and raped her when she was a child. Or consider the case of the man who serial dates and dumps women, leaving a trail of broken hearts, and thinks every female is a gold digger, because he was used and dumped by the woman he loved and invested time, money and energy into to see her through difficult times. Or the child, now a man who can’t hold down a job, did not graduate college and has no drive beyond to exist, because he believes that he has nothing to offer the world and is unintelligent, because his mother always said that he will never amount to anything, and teachers at school told him that he could not learn. Our relationships matter and the conflicts that naturally happen within them, have the potential to make or break us. Every relationship leaves a mark. Question is, what type?

The presence of conflict/challenges in your relationship does not mean all is lost. How they are resolved matter more than the challenges themselves. Challenges can be high or low quality. You want to have high quality conflicts in your life and avoid low quality ones. Imagine this scenario: a guy picks a fight with his wife because after she returns from her 8hr job, like himself, she does not race into the kitchen, whip up gourmet dinner, serve him, clean up the kitchen and gets the children ready for bed before 7pm. This is low quality conflict. Because it is driven by selfishness and pride. Now consider this conflict; a woman fights her man because he gambled away or bought a new car with the children’s college fund. This is high quality conflict. It is motivated by the good of the spouses. So, what quality of conflict predominantly happens in your marriage?

 

There are many reasons why conflicts happen in any relationship, but we can group most of those causes into two categories. 1. Ego. 2. Perspective.

Ego:  This simply means you are identifying personally with whatever the situation is. And you interpret any contrary statement that does not align with your own opinion as an attack on your person. However, this may not mean that you are an egotistical or an arrogant person, it just means you have personally identified with the situation, that you translate any challenge or contrary view as a negation of your person. For example, consider this exchange between two friends; John and Cindy. John: “Can you imagine what Tom did? That s.o.b took my promotion! Can you imagine?! And this is someone that’s supposed to be my friend!! This is why you should never trust anyone! No matter what you do for them, they will always stab you in the back!” Cindy: “Come on John… he did not take your promotion. The promotion was offered to him. And you must admit, the guy is good at his job. Also, he has seniority, the experience, knowledge and necessary skills. Then he has the contacts to pull necessary strings if our department finds itself in a bind. You know I care about you, but even I would have voted for Tom to get the promotion. Our department really needs his expertise and contacts.” John: “What sort of friend are you????! Fuck!” In this scenario, yes, John is qualified, but the fact that Cindy pointed out Tom’s strengths only made John furious. John may generally be a pleasant person, but in this particular situation, he wants what he wants and anyone not supporting him in the endeavor is an enemy. There are many similar situations in which if we believe our pride is hurt or is at stake, we will lash out. In those situations, we are blinded by the “pain” of our injured pride. It makes it hard to consider anything else anyone is saying.

Think about the following questions for a minute: If there is a better way of doing something, why should your idea be adopted? If someone else is better suited for a responsibility, would giving you the job make sense? It takes humility to acknowledge the strengths of others. The book, Team of Rivals, by Doris Goodwin, does an excellent job of X-raying the virtue of humility, as exhibited in Abraham Lincoln. He saw and acknowledged the political savvy and pedigree of his ‘opponents’, then he coopted them to work with him, and together, they made history. It is a worthy read.

Perspective: We are products of our environments, coupled with our individual internal programing. Consider this tale of two ladies. Both are in a car and they see a man asking for change/food at the traffic light. One of them reaches into her purse, brings out two 1-dollar bills and hands them to the man. The other is upset and berates the one that handed the man the money for being wasteful, stupid and for encouraging laziness. Who do you think is right in this scenario? Before you pass verdict, consider their backgrounds. The one that gave the money comes from a middle-class family. Growing up, their parents taught them to believe that tomorrow will be a better day. As a family, they made it a duty to annually go down to the adoption center and spend time with the children there. They would bring them food and clothing and sometimes will have the children from the center over to their home for some of the holidays. Their parents encouraged them to be generous; asking them to periodically scan their closets for clothing they no longer use or had outgrown and they would go with them, the kids, to donate the articles of clothing to the adoption centers. Lady #2 that did the berating, comes from a rather wealthy family. Her upbringing was one where they were taught that people always want to take what belongs to you, therefore guard your possessions with your life. They were taught to work hard, that laziness leads to poverty. Now that you know their backgrounds and their perspectives on life, how do you now pass verdict?

The analogies above tell us that we all have different sets of assumptions, prejudices, biases and our egos, all of which influence the way we perceive and interpret the world around us. What are your prejudices, biases? How do they influence how you interpret situations? Do you know when your ego is acting up? If you are aware of these things, you are better able to hear and see objectively, otherwise, it will make these two apparently simple tasks, hearing and seeing, extremely challenging. More so in a marriage where you see the person every day and if care is not taking, you both begin to take each other for granted. The blindness and deafness are life altering.

Like we said earlier, conflicts are inevitable in relationships. And the difficulty stems from the fact of the various sets of assumptions and egos that we bring into them. They make it difficult to have necessary conversations. Challenging conversations however, are necessary to all relationships. It enables relationships mature and blossom into the best they can be. Some of us are conscious of our biases and prejudices, and that’s good. At least you know why you do the things you do. Hopefully you are working towards improving yourself. And for the rest of us, we are unaware of our driving perspectives and egos, which like we have stated are huge obstacles to any meaningful relationship. For the fact that you are unaware of your motivating influences; how and why they manifest in your life, and what purpose they serve, if any, when conflicts arise in your relationship, you may be blind to any resolution that isn’t what you imagined and how you envisaged.

What can we do then in our marriages considering that we all have these blinders and wax that seal our eyes and ears? Listen to yourself and to the other person. Whenever you are in a conversation, especially those difficult ones, periodically scan your body to see how you feel. If you feel any tightness in your abdomen, chest and or throat, know that you are not listening in that conversation. You are waiting to respond. And when you catch yourself like that, open up. Relax and reengage. Listen. What happens when you listen? You understand the person. You are not just hearing what they are saying, but you are also understanding what the situation or thing means to them. This in-turn helps you to be empathetic; that is, to walk in their moccasin, which does not mean you agree with them. It only means you understand how they feel about the situation. And because you are listening and can understand and empathize, you are able to come up with constructive responses. That is; your responses are generated directly from the situation. If you learn to listen, the quality of the conflict you’ll have will be high; because you are not in your ego, and neither are you hooked on your own perspectives alone. You can really see and hear your spouse. Part of what it means to be mature is to be able to hold and understand conflicting perspectives, without losing your own, especially within a dialogue-challenging dialogue.

Now if everyone does these things, does it mean there will be no more divorces? No. It does not mean that. It only means that even when a divorce happens, it will be for the good of everyone involved. And more importantly, before one steps into a marital union, they will give it thought more than, she is good in bed and has a banging body, or, he can pay my bills! The institution of marriage is a human expression. It recreates the individuals into a new being. The challenges within them are opportunities for growth. Learn to listen. Give your marriage the opportunity it deserves to be the best it can be.

Michael  

[1] Hannah Ritchie, Max Roser and Esteban Ortiz-Ospina (2015) – “Suicide”. Published online at OurWorldInData.org. Retrieved from: ‘https://ourworldindata.org/suicide’ [Online Resource]

Self-Esteem or Self-Worthiness?

Self-Esteem or Self-Worthiness?

Self-esteem is a very familiar concept. High self-esteem is usually associated with confidence and success, while low self-esteem is seen to be related to lack of success and depression. However, in recent times, psychologists are rethinking this paradigm, contemplating whether the idea of high or low self-esteem is harmful or helpful. Some even think the term does not represent any concrete reality in humans, and as such does not exist. There are valid arguments on all sides, which makes evident the need for further investigation and thinking on the matter. I believe in the realness and value of  self-esteem. However, I also believe the terminology transposes competencies or lack thereof for our value as human beings. As such a terminology that captures the value of what it means to be human without equivocation is needed.

This discussion will utilize a pedagogical approach. First, it will address some of the different ideas of the concept of the Self, for the simple fact that it is the foundation on which the edifice of self-esteem is built. Next, it will attempt a definition of self-esteem and then propose a new paradigm, self-worthiness. Finally, it will discuss some helpful ways through which we can reclaim our sense of self-worthiness. We are adopting this approach because; the way a thing is understood, determines how we interact with it. The phenomena of the self is a composite of seemingly elusive constituents. Like Carl Jung said, until you make the unconscious conscious, it will direct your life and you will call it fate. Now let us begin with the first building block, the Self.

What is the Self?

The self has been viewed as synonymous with person and is identified as having the proper attributes of a human being, that is; something capable of engaging in rational activity.[1] Meaning that the self, a composite of body and soul, is capable of logical and moral abstractions. As such we possess the ability to distinguish between good and bad, as well as the capacity to arrive at logical conclusions from available premises. David Hume articulates the self very differently, as a bundle of experiences[2], implying that the self does not have a concrete reality, but is a conglomeration of events all of which culminate to form this entity called the self. Hume’s position does not seem to distinguish the experiences from the experiencing self. To take it further, we can even talk about the self that is aware of the experiencing self; for to be aware that the self is having an experience, implies that there is a self that is aware of the experiencing-self.

Eastern thoughts do not contest the existence of the self, neither do they try to define it They rather propose an understanding of it while not negating the challenge of the task.  In the Tao Te Ching for instance, Lao Tzu says, “he who knows other men is discerning. He who knows himself is enlightened. He who overcomes others is strong, he who overcomes himself is mighty.” In essence, equating self-awareness with wisdom and self-mastery or self-control with might. Then in the Bhagavad Gita, the Hindu holy book, the knowledge of the self is discussed as the hallmark of existence. It says, “self-knowledge alone eradicates misery.”[3] An ancient corollary of the saying, pain is inevitable, but suffering is optional. Both thoughts presuppose that the concept of the self is not in contention, and then affirm that the task of the individual is first to understand why the self exists, then secondly, to act in accord with that quintessential raison d’etre.   

Some contemporary thoughts define the self as the sum total of all that one possesses.[4] The self, according to this definition, has several constituent parts; the material self (things we rightfully own), social self (recognition/status from/in society), spiritual self (our truest self; our faculties), and pure Ego.[5] This definition sees the self as a possessing entity. That is, to articulate the idea of the self, look no further than what a person owns. Yet again, the question remains, if the spiritual self is our truest self, does it mean that the other components of the self are less of the self?

Looking at these definitions, two ideas emerge: 1. the self has the potential for actions,  rational and moral abstractions, along with the ability to possess things. 2. It has the capacity for self-knowledge and mastery. But applying these to our idea of self-esteem, a disconnect becomes apparent. Our current idea of self-esteem seem to only takes into consideration the individuals subjective sense of competence, without any reference to self-awareness or self-mastery. For if high self-esteem correlates with success, it should also correlate with optimal inter-human interactions. But we know this isn’t the case. 

We therefore see definitions of self-esteem such as: “Self-esteem is … a positive or negative orientation toward one-self, as an overall evaluation of ones’ worth or value…” influenced by complex social and environmental systems that may fluctuate due to time and context.[6] This fluidity implies that the idea of self-esteem oscillates depending on situations, circumstances and one’s internal disposition at a given time. This is a highly problematic and an unreliable position to be in. Because you cannot actually have a stable sense of self, which invariably means a constant questioning of who you are, depending on what is going on around you and how you feel about those things. Lauren Slater in the New York Times article, The Trouble With Self-Esteem, tried to create an objective picture of what the concept means by juxtaposing our contemporary idea with its corollary antithesis such as in the works of Roy Baumeister and Nicholas Emler.[7]  Emler argues that no justifiable evidence exists that low self-esteem predicts lack of success, if anything those with low self-esteem seem to try harder at things, which inevitably leads to success. Baumeister ups the ante a notch by saying that high self-esteem can actually cause harm. He and other psychologists have conducted studies that demonstrate that those with high self-esteem pose a greater threat to people around them than those with low-self esteem. Lauren then goes ahead to suggest self-control as the term we should employ instead of self-esteem, since discipline which drives self-control leads to a balanced person.

Now, I do not think there is anything essentially wrong with the concept of self-esteem. Neither do I see a problem with proposing high self-esteem as a standard to strive for. The problem, I believe is in our understanding of the self and self-esteem, which we explored earlier. For if as a self, I am only that which is capable of possessing; intellect or material goods, then it will make sense that my understanding of self-esteem high or low will flounder because my sense of esteem, high or low will be proportionate to how much I think I possess a certain sought after prize as determined by my environment. For instance Baumeister comments, “people with high self-esteem may indeed have accurate perceptions of their many fine qualities. But they may also just be arrogant.”[8] One can say the same of someone who has low self-esteem, who thinks their qualities are below par while in actuality they are sincerely modest. In the one case, the perception of competence is correct, but self awareness is lacking, while in the other, some degree of self-awareness may be present, but does not seem to permeate the whole person.

The understanding of the self and of self-esteem should be after a manner that is honest, objective and detached. But since this is not the case, we therefore seem to interchange competence with self-esteem. And we perceive self-esteem, not as an objective phenomena, but an absolute subjective, which is not only dangerous but also foolish. Because if I believe that I am absolutely capable of flying a Fighter Jet plane because I have played countless hours of Fighter Jet video games, not only am I delusional, but  am also dangerously simple. 

On the positive side, these definitions of self and self-esteem reveal that both concepts imply autonomous agency and responsibility. But in our everyday interaction we hear expressions such as, “that’s how I am” or “I can’t do such as such” languages that indicate a lack of agency. Seeming to imply that the way we experience ourselves in a certain situation is all that there is to us. That our actions and behaviors are indelibly etched into our DNA and therefore our personalities are determined by unknown forces beyond our control.

Assuming this is the reality, it becomes impossible for anyone to rebuild their sense of self; a person with low self-esteem can never have high self-esteem and a jerk with high self-esteem, well…we got to put up with him/her because that’s what nature has given us. And we cannot demand any standards from them, because they are not responsible for their actions. I therefore believe a new paradigm is necessary. Self-worthiness maybe a better paradigm through which to address our issues of esteem. The value or worth of a human being is in the fact of being human, not in our competencies. Self-worthiness acknowledges that you are worthy because you are human, but it also challenges you to be the best human you can possibly be. It does not admit of degrees, because what makes you worthy is not in anything you do or don’t do. You are worthy because you are human. Self-worthiness demands certain responsibilities of you. It demands; Self-awareness, Self-mastery and Rationality, all of which requires an objective, unbiased look at oneself. It may also require soliciting honest and objective feedback from others.

Reclaiming your Self-Worthiness

How then can we take back the control we had relinquished so as to recover our sense of worthiness? First, acknowledge that we have relinquished control. The Alcoholics Anonymous 12 step program has a set of a dozen principles. The first is, “We admitted we were powerless over alcohol-that our lives had become unmanageable.”[9] The meaning behind this first dictum is the realization and acknowledgement of the problem. If the alcoholic does not acknowledge that s/he is an alcoholic, there is no way they will make effort towards being sober. The same applies to our need to reclaim our sense of self-worthiness, which really is our sense of balance and psychological congruency. We first have to recognize and acknowledge that we have relinquished control for the responsibility for our lives. We have to stop the blame game; blaming everyone else about how shitty our lives have become. But then, how does one even begin to acknowledge something that he does not even know exists? There are a few things that have helped me and many others over time attain and retain a certain sense of clarity and internal guidance. I’ll now share them with you.

Self-Awareness: At the temple of Apollo at Delphi, one of the expressions over the arch way entrances into the temple reads, “Know thyself” and for our Greek scholars, γνῶθι σεαυτόν, (hope that tickled). Self-awareness is more than just knowing what color jeans you’d like to wear out to the club tonight. It is more in understanding yourself; knowing why you do what you do. Understanding why you make the choices you make. Knowing what propels you and why. Understanding why the things that make you happy, sad, excited, or enraged get you there. It is understanding what you are capable of, both good and bad, and how it is you became capable of such things. Self-awareness is in knowing your strengths, weaknesses and their degree. A few things that can help you with being self-aware are: meditation; it helps to keep us grounded within ourselves. Then there’s Journaling; which helps one reflect and encourages accountability for ones thoughts and actions. Establishing meaningful relationships; not every relationship is worth keeping. If a relationship is not helping you become your best self, let it go. Engaging in meaningful conversations; these are conversations about things that will help you improve. It is not office gossip or talking about reality tv shows.

Helpful links: https://www.headspace.com/https://mindfulnessexercises.com/ (I have never used any of these, but people say they work). Any quiet place in your home or in nature (any park or the beach will do, for me at least).

Meaningful Work: St. Thomas Aquinas says that the human person finds fulfillment through study and work. Hence, part of reestablishing one’s sense of self-worthiness is engaging meaningful work. This is not the job you do to pay your bills, though it can be that as well. This type of work is one that allows us to expand and expend ourselves beyond our comfort zones for the good of others. It can be volunteering as often as you can at a place that people can really use your help. It can also be your regular job, insofar as you are doing it not just for the paycheck, but for the good of the people you serve through your job.

Helpful links: https://www.volunteermatch.org/ https://www.humanesociety.org/volunteer

Generosity: It can be with anything you possess; your time, money, material, knowledge, etc, anything. In short, it refers to whenever and however we can spend ourselves for the good of others. That said, it is sometimes difficult to be generous and at other times it will go unnoticed or unappreciated. However, like Theresa of Calcutta would say, “… do it anyway…. It was never between you and them anyway.” When we are generous, it brings a sense of happiness, but more importantly, it makes us more grateful. It reminds us of times we too received generosity from others. It helps create a spirit of gratitude. To begin practicing; you can donate financially to a cause, (even overseas. There are great needs for simple basic things and you can partner with someone, a church, an organizations, overseas or locally and fund children’s schooling, feeding families, etc); you can lend your expertise to people who need it; you can give  away those articles of clothing or anything else from your home that are still in good condition that you no longer make use of. My own rule of thumb is, anything I don’t use after 6 months, I give away.

Helpful links: https://dressforsuccess.org/https://baby2baby.org/

Self-esteem is a good concept but it leaves room for equivocation. Self-worthiness removes that equivocation and addresses the core of what it means to be human.

Recommended Reading

1. https://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/03/magazine/the-trouble-with-self-esteem.html

2. https://teachlikeachampion.com/wp-content/uploads/Baumeister-RE-THINKING-SELF-ESTEEM.pdf

 

[1] http://jraissati.com/PHIL201/Aristotle-DeAnima-BooksII-III-EN.pdf

[2] On Human Nature, David Hume

[3] The Bhagavad-Gita with the Commentary of Sri Sankaracharya.pdf, pg 15

[4] William James-1890 Principles_of_Psychology_vol_I.pdf, pg 291

[5] Ibid

[6] Rose, C. A., Slaten, C. D., & Preast, J. L. (2017). Bully Perpetration and Self-Esteem: Examining the Relation Over Time. Behavioral Disorders, 42(4), 159–169. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26660184

[7] https://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/03/magazine/the-trouble-with-self-esteem.html

[8] https://teachlikeachampion.com/wp-content/uploads/Baumeister-RE-THINKING-SELF-ESTEEM.pdf

[9] https://www.aa.org/assets/en_US/smf-121_en.pdf