[NF] NFs Is it easier to be a selfless individual, when you have low self esteem?

[Valhallahereicome]

Well, judging from my own experience, it comes more naturally to be selfless when my self-worth is high. When I don't feel like a valuable person, I tend to let people take advantage of me, but that's not selflessness so much as fear of repercussions and the desire to please. It's not done to make other people happy - it's done so that they'll treat me better in the future, which I would argue is actually a selfish motive.

Letting some people walk on me can actually hurt others, too, if interests clash - and I'd say that's also selfish, to deny one person something they deserved because I'm too busy seeking admiration from someone else. Like others have said, this tends to happen when you have low self-esteem: The people who deserve good things from you are those whose friendship already seems secure, so you shaft them to chase the respect of someone else. Real selflessness means doing what's right even when you'd rather not.

When I feel worthwhile - when I see everyone as equals, then I can freely choose the times I want to be generous without any motive except wanting that person to be happy. Feeling secure in myself lets me give without demanding back, because all I'm thinking is "I feel great, wouldn't it be awesome if everyone else felt great too!" rather than "I'm missing something, maybe if I give this person a ride 20 miles out of my way they'll like me and that will fill up this hole I have inside."

 

[Dwigie]

I'm quite radical with my terms. Self-less. To do something with absolutely no "return" towards oneself.
When you do something, you always get something in return, pleasure, pride, pain, gifts. You never do something without first thinking of how it could impact you. There's no such thing as selflessness in my eyes, immense generosity yes.

At times, selfless acts are used as "weapons" by passive aggressive people to give them a sense of entitlement and enable them to gain a favor or the likes from someone else. So no, I don't believe in selflessness. Call me cynic.

A truly selfless person would keep "giving" even if it was unpleasant and even then they do gain the "satisfaction" of doing the right thing. It's not really an act that is truly guided towards others since we ultimately do it to feel better. If we weren't feeling bad about a situation would we even bother making the effort of "being selfless?(ex: an empathetic response to someone in distress=> we feel bad because they feel bad. If they feel better I feel better=>"selfless act".)

Some get angry at the person for taking advantage of them while conveniently ignoring their own role in their "downfall". Well, this is true when things go sour but when things are going well "a selfless act" will not have a negative effect.(I think)

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for generosity, big scale generosity but I don't like to get intentions wrong.

I noticed that I give when I'm feeling good most of the time.When I'm having a low self-esteem I just gnaw at other's to feed my own. I don't do a lot of selfless acts actually. What a pain. I'll be generous but never again will I be "self-less" or at least if I ever do I won't fool myself in thinking I'm doing something for the other person when ultimately it's for me.

So yeah pretty much repeated a lot of what has been said. (I didn't read the entire thread just kind of skimmed.)

PS: I don't see taking care of ourselves first as something negative. I like straightforwardness and am honest as possible (with myself)I don't ever think I am doing this for someone. Maybe this isn't true for everyone but that is my take on selflessness and self-esteem because intentions count a lot to me.)

Someone mentioned that there are spontaneous acts of selflessness where the person has no forethought before the act.
It kind of changed my view of it. I'll have to think about that and get some information.

 

[Valhallahereicome]

^^^Definitely agreed that there is no such thing as a true selfless act. I think the closest approximation of selflessness for humans is giving while expecting nothing from the recipient, because all the benefits of giving are derived internally - such as the pleasure of seeing someone else eating a good hot meal for once. There are still benefits, though, and there's nothing wrong with that.

But it's much easier to get pleasure internally when you already have a good amount of happiness stored inside you, if that makes any sense.

 

[Mempy]

I'm pleasantly surprised by all the posts in this thread. I echo most of what's been said.

Well, judging from my own experience, it comes more naturally to be selfless when my self-worth is high. When I don't feel like a valuable person, I tend to let people take advantage of me, but that's not selflessness so much as fear of repercussions and the desire to please. It's not done to make other people happy - it's done so that they'll treat me better in the future, which I would argue is actually a selfish motive.

Letting some people walk on me can actually hurt others, too, if interests clash - and I'd say that's also selfish, to deny one person something they deserved because I'm too busy seeking admiration from someone else. Like others have said, this tends to happen when you have low self-esteem: The people who deserve good things from you are those whose friendship already seems secure, so you shaft them to chase the respect of someone else. Real selflessness means doing what's right even when you'd rather not.

When I feel worthwhile - when I see everyone as equals, then I can freely choose the times I want to be generous without any motive except wanting that person to be happy. Feeling secure in myself lets me give without demanding back, because all I'm thinking is "I feel great, wouldn't it be awesome if everyone else felt great too!" rather than "I'm missing something, maybe if I give this person a ride 20 miles out of my way they'll like me and that will fill up this hole I have inside."

Great post. +1

I'm quite radical with my terms. Self-less. To do something with absolutely no "return" towards oneself.
When you do something, you always get something in return, pleasure, pride, pain, gifts. You never do something without first thinking of how it could impact you. There's no such as selflessness in my eyes, immense generosity yes.

At times, selfless acts are used as "weapons" by passive aggressive people to give them a sense of entitlement and enable them to gain a favor or the likes from someone else. So no, I don't believe in selflessness. Call me cynic.

A truly selfless person would keep "giving" even if it was unpleasant and even then they gain the "satisfaction" of doing the right thing. It's not really an act that is truly guided towards others since we ultimately do it to feel better. If we weren't feeling bad about a situation would we even bother making the effort of "being selfless?(ex: an empathetic response to someone in distress=> we feel bad because they feel bad. If they feel better I feel better=>"selfless act".)

Some get angry at the person for taking advantage of them while conveniently ignoring their own role in their "downfall". Well, this is true when things go sour but when things are going well "a selfless act" will not have a negative effect.(I think)

I've tried to explain this to someone before, but he just said, "You don't want to give anyone credit for anything, do you?" and told me my outlook depressed him. I don't see anything depressing about it. People still do good things for other people. There's still immense joy and kindness in the world. Nothing at all changes with this outlook, and frankly, I don't see how you can have a different outlook. To do good, you must get happiness from doing good. That's just how things are.

 

[CzeCze]

Is it truly easier to be a selfless individual when you have low self esteem?
Why or why not??

I think it's easier to be a doormat and an automaton that does whatever people push or tell or ask you to do. "Selfless" meaning loss of center and ego and sense of self -- then, yes, definitely with low self esteem you will become more 'selfless'.

If you mean selfless as in seeing the situation for what it is and giving appropriate value to everyone and everything and understanding consequences in actions and still choosing to do something to benefit someone else even when you really want to benefit yourself or your own comfort - then you have to have a realistic and strong sense of self first.

Otherwise, all is distorted and your actions are merely playing out your own lack of value to yourself.

 

[Winds of Thor]

I'm quite radical with my terms. Self-less. To do something with absolutely no "return" towards oneself.
When you do something, you always get something in return, pleasure, pride, pain, gifts. You never do something without first thinking of how it could impact you. There's no such thing as selflessness in my eyes, immense generosity yes.

At times, selfless acts are used as "weapons" by passive aggressive people to give them a sense of entitlement and enable them to gain a favor or the likes from someone else. So no, I don't believe in selflessness. Call me cynic.

A truly selfless person would keep "giving" even if it was unpleasant and even then they do gain the "satisfaction" of doing the right thing. It's not really an act that is truly guided towards others since we ultimately do it to feel better. If we weren't feeling bad about a situation would we even bother making the effort of "being selfless?(ex: an empathetic response to someone in distress=> we feel bad because they feel bad. If they feel better I feel better=>"selfless act".)

Some get angry at the person for taking advantage of them while conveniently ignoring their own role in their "downfall". Well, this is true when things go sour but when things are going well "a selfless act" will not have a negative effect.(I think)

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for generosity, big scale generosity but I don't like to get intentions wrong.

I noticed that I give when I'm feeling good most of the time.When I'm having a low self-esteem I just gnaw at other's to feed my own. I don't do a lot of selfless acts actually. What a pain. I'll be generous but never again will I be "self-less" or at least if I ever do I won't fool myself in thinking I'm doing something for the other person when ultimately it's for me.

So yeah pretty much repeated a lot of what has been said. (I didn't read the entire thread just kind of skimmed.)

PS: I don't see taking care of ourselves first as something negative. I like straightforwardness and am honest as possible (with myself)I don't ever think I am doing this for someone. Maybe this isn't true for everyone but that is my take on selflessness and self-esteem because intentions count a lot to me.)

Someone mentioned that there are spontaneous acts of selflessness where the person has no forethought before the act.
It kind of changed my view of it. I'll have to think about that and get some information.

Yea you may get something back in return, but who's to determine the source? I mean, not from the recipient of the gift necessarily!

 

[Mondo]

I don't think it is easier to be a selfless individual if you have low self esteem or if you have high self esteem.
I think it just matters by how much you care for the other people you are being selfless with- which is irrelevant to self-esteem.

 

[Winds of Thor]

First of all, I think you have good intentions. I also think you have been treated unfairly or seen people treated unfairly.

A truly selfless person would keep "giving" even if it was unpleasant and even then they do gain the "satisfaction" of doing the right thing....

Not me. I may be giving but I'm no fool.

....It's not really an act that is truly guided towards others since we ultimately do it to feel better.

That's easier to see in retrospect. What was in the heart before it happened? Where is the source of the inkling to give? I see many reasons people give. Sometimes there doesn't need to be a reason.

If we weren't feeling bad about a situation would we even bother making the effort of "being selfless?(ex: an empathetic response to someone in distress=> we feel bad because they feel bad. If they feel better I feel better=>"selfless act".)

Yes. That's just the kind of guy I am.

Some get angry at the person for taking advantage of them while conveniently ignoring their own role in their "downfall". Well, this is true when things go sour but when things are going well "a selfless act" will not have a negative effect.(I think)

I'm sorry if this has been someone's experience. That seems selfish to me.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for generosity, big scale generosity but I don't like to get intentions wrong.

Your intentions are good I have no doubt..What you describe here..I believe that not to be in the spirit of giving. That too I would deem selfish.
Why do people give if it only inure's themself later? This makes no sense...Why even do it? Yes there are some stupid people.
It's not to say one should expect anything in return.
If someone gives me something, I accept it. It's not for my gain, it's for them to enjoy giving. I don't reject their gift.

I noticed that I give when I'm feeling good most of the time.When I'm having a low self-esteem I just gnaw at other's to feed my own. I don't do a lot of selfless acts actually. What a pain. I'll be generous but never again will I be "self-less" or at least if I ever do I won't fool myself in thinking I'm doing something for the other person when ultimately it's for me.

Why? I don't think about it that much.

PS: I don't see taking care of ourselves first as something negative. I like straightforwardness and am honest as possible (with myself)I don't ever think I am doing this for someone. Maybe this isn't true for everyone but that is my take on selflessness and self-esteem because intentions count a lot to me.)

A dichotomy on this is selfishness against selflessness. It can easily become mixed up as a paradox. I would suss it out to get the clarity later.

Someone mentioned that there are spontaneous acts of selflessness where the person has no forethought before the act....

Right! Why not?

It kind of changed my view of it. I'll have to think about that and get some information.

That's nice..I'm glad to hear that

 

[Splittet]

People can be truly altruistic, although it's very rare, but genes are always selfish.

 

[prplchknz]

I get stuck as the door mat most of the time, I don't realize it's happening until it's too late. So I guess if that means I'm selfless, then ok it works. But I don't think that's being selfless, I tend to be alot more selfish, and always get oh you're so nice. And I'm like I was going to the store anyways, are you going to pay me back now?or it's no problem it wasn't out of my way. Like if it's not inconveint I'll do something for someone, but if it isn't then i won't.

 

[cascadeco]

And I'm like I was going to the store anyways, are you going to pay me back now?or it's no problem it wasn't out of my way. Like if it's not inconveint I'll do something for someone, but if it isn't then i won't.

;-) Sounds similar to me, when it comes to everyday things. I definitely don't go out of my way w/ that sort of thing.

Similar to what others have said, I tend to be much more spontaneously helpful and giving of myself when I'm happy and confident. When I have low self esteem, I am uber-focused on that fact, so am completely self-absorbed. There is little to give, and I'm very selfish in trying to maintain and carve out my own needs - although at the same time am uncertain so don't have much backbone when it comes to saying no or asserting myself and my own views. It's a weird conflicting state. I suppose it's a sort of resentment - the act of giving, when I myself am not happy or solid.

 

[prplchknz]

i relate to not having a back bone when it comes to the same things. which may be why i end up as the doormat. I should just tattoo welcome on my back, so everyone knows to wipe their shoes on me.

 

[Totenkindly]

To mirror what others have said, if someone is focused on their self-esteem, they don't really do things for others; they're doing things in order to build/protect their self-esteem.

This sounds like a subtle difference in priority but it has profound ramifications when a situation becomes stressful or hard choices must be made.

 

[redacted]

When I had a lower self-esteem, I spent all my time "helping" those around me. I always answered my phone, I'd drop anything to talk a friend through a tough time, etc. But I wouldn't consider that selfless, I'd consider it stupid (and selfish, like everything else)...

I'm much more helpful to people now that I have more healthy boundaries. This way they don't learn to rely on me, I don't build as many resentments, I can lead by positive example, etc.

 

[Anja]

Sounds like we're talking about the difference between healthy and unhealthy behaviors. The act is the same; the motive differs.

The concept of "too-much self-esteem" is probably better named, "narcissism."
The concept of "too little self-esteem" could be called submissiveness.

And not only is the motive behind the act different, but the result for the doer is different.

A selfless act can bring joy to the doer. A submissive act is more apt to bring resentment.

This has been a long-time measure for me in whether I am responding out of need or generosity of spirit. How am I going to feel afterwards? Only learned that by crossing the line enough times to figure out where it was.

 

[INA]

Is it truly easier to be a selfless individual when you have low self esteem?
Why or why not??

Well, yes, if you derive self-esteem from a sense that you have some expertise to "help" others. It's not because you care. It's because you (perhaps correctly) think little of yourself and 1) helping others affirms to you that you have some competency in something, and 2) helping others helps you to condescend to them in some way by imagining yourself in some way more gifted than they are in the area of your self-designated expertise. Otherwise, the incentive to prove yourself is low.

 

[Anja]

I understand what you are saying, Ina, but I'm caught up with the idea that anyone should "perhaps correctly" have low self esteem. Low self-esteem is never a correct attitude to adopt from my perspective.

How would you determine when you were doing this? How would you judge your accuracy?

 

[INA]

I understand what you are saying, Ina, but I'm caught up with the idea that anyone should "perhaps correctly" have low self esteem. Low self-esteem is never a correct attitude to adopt from my perspective.

How would you determine when you were doing this? How would you judge your accuracy?

Fair point, though I don't see low self-esteem as an attitude, but a state. It's not something you adopt but something that adopts you.
Sometimes people have low self esteem because they are living way below their capabilities or indulging in self-destructive behavior or not addressing a problem (past/current) that gnaws at them. In that case, low self-esteem is a signal to change aspects of their lives. One way of doing this is to become good at something. Of course, outside affirmation/confirmation of these skills is a sign that you're not delusional.

 

[prplchknz]

Fair point, though I don't see low self-esteem as an attitude, but a state. It's not something you adopt but something that adopts you.
Sometimes people have low self esteem because they are living way below their capabilities or indulging in self-destructive behavior or not addressing a problem (past/current) that gnaws at them. In that case, low self-esteem is a signal to change aspects of their lives. One way of doing this is to become good at something. Of course, outside affirmation/confirmation of these skills is a sign that you're not delusional.

exactly, no one with true low self esteem wakes up and goes you know it's tuesday i think I'm going to have no self esteem. It is not that simple. I mean esteem is not built or torn down over night. You can take steps to improve, but it's not going to be you're going to wake up one day and think you're the shit, if the day before you thought you were shit. You might think you are, but even if you feel good about your self for a split second if you have low self esteem you'll go right back to your "normal" mode of being self critical.

 

[Anja]

Yes, I agree that self-esteem seems to be more of a mind-set than an attitude. The question remains for me how one determines they are afflicted with it.

Some people are self-aware and know that it is an issue for them. Others have developed their own coping skills to hide it from themselves/others. It will manifest to others as attitude/behavior and others can make good guesses that that may be something that a person needs to work on from what they can see.

And prpl makes good points at how very stubborn that mindset can be.

So now, I just had a thought. Could doing things for others possibly be a way one could work on building healthy self-esteem? Or would an attitude of service always be maladaptive for someone with low self-esteem?