Why Practical Philosophy is the Better Self-Help

Mark Vernon once mentioned to me that philosophy tends to attract a very particular crowd of people. While I can't recall his exact words, the sentiment was along those lines.

I believe philosophy is something that should attract every crowd of people.

And I'm certainly not the only or first one who thinks so. Plato believed that everyone should engage in philosophy to some extent, as it was crucial for leading a virtuous and examined life. However, he didn't advocate for servants to pursue philosophy to the same extent as the ruling class or guardians in his ideal society. Instead, he suggested that their main focus should be on fulfilling their duties to the state and supporting the philosopher-kings in their governance. Well, this notion doesn't quite align with contemporary ideas of social justice or with the philosopher-queen.

Additionally, many people are already practicing an impoverished version of philosophy, nowadays called self-help.

The Mechanisms of Self-Help

Let’s look a bit into how self-help works. And before I begin, I want to acknowledge that there are many fantastic people out there who don't fit into this overgeneralisation, such as the Climate Coaching Alliance.

That being said, the self-help sphere I've encountered tends to be dominated by individuals who have undergone significant life changes because of a specific tool they use. They often promote this specific tool, like the 5-second rule, which they then market as a universal solution for achieving similar results. The fact that more people are consuming self-help literature than ever before suggests that this approach might be as fruitful as a rotten apple. What works for one person may not necessarily work for another.

Essentially, self-help often involves trying to impose one's worldview onto others: "If only you start thinking like me, you will also get millions of dollar and all you ever wanted."

So, what are the drawbacks of this approach?

It assumes that humans work like machines: Attempting to provide formulas and tools for individuals assumes that humans operate like machines we can program to copy our actions every time we press command+c. As beautiful and simple as these solutions might sound, they fail. What's overlooked in this approach is that we are complex beings deeply influenced by our surroundings. Our existence is intricately connected to the environment in which we live. We aren't isolated entities acting upon nature; rather, we are profoundly shaped by the dynamic relationships within the ecology we inhabit. This means that any tools or formulas that may work for one person, especially those that are overly simplistic and generalized, are unlikely to be effective for someone whose lived reality is vastly different.

It forgets confabulation: People are wonderful mysterious beings. Who can’t be trusted. Not because they might steel and scam us, but because they make up coherent stories that are free from substance. Invented, just to make sense of the world. Derek Sivers calls this confabulating. He writes

“To confabulate is to create an explanation that you believe to be true. “Con” means together, and “fabula” means story or fable, so: to put together a story. Confabulate. To fabricate. When you don’t know why you did something, your subconscious invents an explanation that you think is a fact.

The clearest example comes from people who have a disconnect between the left and right hemispheres of their brain.

A researcher shows a patient a message in his right eye, saying, “Please close the window.” The patient gets up and closes the window. Then the researcher shows a question to that patient’s left eye, “Why did you close the window?” The patient says he chose to do it because he was cold.

A researcher says, to only one ear, “Please walk.” The patient starts walking. Then they ask the other ear, “Why did you walk?” The patient says she was walking because she felt like getting a drink.

The patients don’t think they are inventing explanations. They completely believe that those are the real reasons.

That’s confabulating. Similar to rationalizing: to justify and explain with a rational-sounding reason. We all do it all the time. We think our reasons are true.”

That’s what self-help coaches with a one and easy solution often do, they rationalise a success they’ve had and reason that it was a certain tool they used. And while I am not denying that this tool was helpful for them and might even was exactly what they needed to tip them over towards the bright sight of life, there was always also so much more to the story - all their very specific and unique entanglements and life situations - that are not replicable and thus likely don’t work for you.

It’s static: What’s more, and perhaps you've had this experience: You read a book and the prescribed tool actually proves to be incredibly useful and it dramatically improves your life. Then, suddenly, it stops working. You might find yourself wondering what went wrong. It's easy to blame the entire concept and conclude that it simply didn't work for you. And you'd be right—it doesn't work. Anymore. Life circumstances and entanglements change, rendering what once worked ineffective. Assuming that one tool would serve us for a lifetime overlooks the fact that we are complex beings who evolve, not static machines.

It offers tools: Tools are the McDonalds of self-help. Just like Mcmindfulness, a term coined by Ron Purser, which refers to the commercialization and oversimplification of mindfulness practices in contemporary culture. Purser is a professor of management and criticizes the way mindfulness has been commodified and transformed into a marketable product, often divorced from its deeper ethical and spiritual roots. In his critique, Purser argues that the mainstream adoption of mindfulness has been stripped of its original context, reducing it to a tool for personal stress reduction rather than a holistic practice that encompasses ethical considerations, self-awareness, and a deeper understanding of the interconnectedness of individuals with society and the world. He argues that mindfulness, when divorced from its ethical and transformative dimensions, can become a superficial and individualistic pursuit, losing sight of its broader potential for personal and societal well-being.

Something similar has happened with self-help tools.They are often completely detached from ethical considerations and the respective socialecological realities. They also tend to be about being successful, thin and rich and are focused on individual pursuits, which enforces an individualistic culture. Relational values such as the common good and care for something beyond ourselves are seldom considered. And that’s despite research showing that it is the pursuit of contributing to something beyond ourselves that actually makes us happy.

By offering a practical tool, we always risk offering a simplistic conceptualization that narrows our understanding. As Latour points out, tools are never mere tools ready to be applied: they always modify the goals you had in mind.

Not that tools are useless per se, but prescriptive tools without context are. The reason why the 5-second-rule works so well for Mel Robbins is because it was invented by Mel Robbins. We each make our own best tools.

Practical Philosophy is the Better Self-Help

The origins of self-help can actually be traced back to philosophy. In ancient times, practicing philosophy was their version of self-help. It encompassed a blend of deep contemplation, coaching, and psychotherapy, deeply embedded in local communities. Greek philosophy was not only about theoretical inquiries about existence, reality, and knowledge but also practical aspects related to leading a good life and achieving personal well-being. In this way, elements of philosophy were intertwined with what we now recognize as self-help.

Reviving and rewilding practical philosophy can enhance our current approaches to self-help by:

• Providing a process rather than a one-size-fits-all tool. It presents a proposition that can initiate conditions for emergence, remaining open-ended. This is crucial because the idea that specific actions lead to defined outcomes doesn't align with how transformation occurs in complex systems.

• Emphasizing a relational, fluid, dynamic process that prompts deep reflection on our entanglements and contexts. In our times, this means recognizing our connections to issues like biodiversity loss, climate change, inequality, and pollution.

• Encouraging individuals to contemplate their interconnectedness with the world around them, unlike many self-help approaches that focus solely on individual empowerment or personal improvement in isolation.

• Being deeply contextual and considering the specific circumstances in which philosophical inquiry occurs. Just as plants need to be rooted, philosophical reflection is most effective when grounded in the realities of one's time, space, and relationships. In contrast, self-help methods that disregard these contextual factors may fail to address the root causes of individual or societal challenges, leading to feelings of disconnection or meaninglessness.

This process-relational perspective of practical philosophy fosters a deeper understanding of the complex challenges we face today, such as environmental degradation and social inequality, and can help us to engage with these issues in a meaningful and fruitful way.

🤓Life Advice to Self

Do we follow reason, give way to sensual desires or be faithful to our ethical duties?

Some questions are eternally frustrating because we never seem to find the answer. If questions seem impossible to answer, it is likely that is because they are unanswerable. And they are unanswerable because they are based on false assumptions.

The assumption in the question above is that distinct parts within ourself can be chosen. This perspective is founded on the compartmentalization of values and goals, and obstructs the unity of our personality. If we think ourselves into pieces within, we don’t know which way to go.

For example, I can conceive of regenerative living as a predominantly ethical duty. When it becomes an ethical duty to me though, I know I am on the wrong track.

This compartmentalization leads to an undermining of the unity of me as an individual, and I - in pieces within and without - do not know which compartment to follow.

Spinoza in the seventeenth century used the word reason, to describe an attitude toward life in which the mind united the emotions with the ethical goals and other aspects of the “whole man.”

We are not subject to reasoning alone. We are also not subject to desires alone.

Regenerative living then is a re-integration of reason, passion, needs and ethical duties.

📚Things I enjoyed reading, watching or listening

📝 Article: In praise of glitches by

Steve Thorp

📝 Article: Why We Need New Words for Nature by Becca Warner

📝 Article: Attention and Reformation by

AE Robbert

🎥 Exile from the Kingdom of the Well with

Sophie Strand

and

Amanda Palmer