Need we go beyond ‘I’, ‘ME’ and ‘MYSELF’?

Need we go beyond ‘I’, ‘ME’ and ‘MYSELF’ – the 21st centurian trio worshipped so religiously especially by the present younger so-called ‘Y’ generation all over the world? I mean, do we need stop using these three – ‘I’, ‘ME’ and ‘MYSELF’ in our conversations with others, be it the written or the spoken? Need we de-emphasize the use of these three in our life? In other words, should we stop taking seriously our self-existence? Should we stop trying to achieve what we wish to achieve in the life? Should we then lead our life like the dead vegetables?

Well, a few relationship-journo are of the view that one must not use ‘I’ to the extent that they advocate that you ought to use small ‘i’ instead of the capital ‘I’ if at all you have to use this troublemaker ‘I’! According to such school of the thought, the use of the capital ‘I’ reflects one’s ego!

Well, let us have our basics clear in this respect. First, no living organism works or can survive physically or otherwise without this sense of one’s ego. The world exists only in relation to the existence of the individual. The moment the individual perishes physically, so to say, the world around too perishes for such a perished individual despite the continuing existence of the external world for others around! Second, it is to satisfy one’s ego that a person does so many activities like competing and excelling in one’s field, thereby help advance directly or indirectly the cause of the civilization development.

The ego becomes a problem only if it is allowed to go or expand beyond the unreasonable limits. The safe moderation is the key. Within safe moderate limits, anything done to satisfy one’s ego may indeed prove useful both to the individual concerned and those around!

The problems like the unnecessary stress and tension in one’s life result primarily due to one’s trying to inflate one’s ego beyond the safe and reasonable elastic limits.

Each word carries two meanings. The one meaning is what the other listener of the word understands it to be. The other meaning is what the speaker actually means it to be. Thus, any given word can have two meanings depending on the two entirely different perceptions of the transmitter [speaker] and the receiver [other listener] of such a word.

Therefore, the use of the small ‘i’, ‘We’ and ‘Ourselves’ in place of the capital ‘I’ , ‘Me’ or ‘Myself’ is no guarantee that the user is not full of the unreasonable egoism! What matters most important is the internalities and not the externalities. The use of ‘i’, ‘We’ and ‘Ourselves’ is of not much use in leading a balanced life if the user is using these three only as an external façade to hide the internal overload of the unreasonable egoism!

It is true that a lot many people tell fake stories to brag about one’s own self to satisfy one’s unreasonable bloated ego. But, it would be wrong to dismiss outright each such story as a blatant lie. There indeed are true narratives told by people.

A few of the human-resources-hiring companies, human-resources-managers and bosses commit the blunder of generalizing wrongly the use of ‘I’ by any job-seeker/employee as showing that job-seeker/employee’s lack of the leadership quality to lead a team! Such an impression must be backed by the observation of the actual behavior displayed by the job-seeker/employee.

That is why the Services Selection Boards [SSBs] for the recruitment of the potential permanent commissioned officers in India use the individual and group tasks to observe the actual leadership-behavior of the potential candidate both as an individual and as a team member and then correlate this result with the impression of the candidate gleaned during the individual interview and the written psychological tests.

Of course, even the SSBs make mistakes, too in trying to judge correctly the behavior of the candidates! That’s why you see many of the selected candidates later on in their career and life are found displaying non-officer-like qualities as evidenced by their participation in the scandals and cases of unholy illegal corruption!

Let us accept the truth gracefully and with full honesty: Each of us has the innate need to prove ourselves whether we are aware of this need on the conscious level or not! There is no harm in this attitudinal aspect except that it must be kept within reasonable and safe limits.

Now, how to decide what is reasonable or unreasonable? How to differentiate the safe limits from the unsafe limits?

The answers to these questions may not be any over-generalization or over-simplification. The answers may vary from individual to individual. The individual has to do a careful self-introspection and find out the answers. However, generally speaking, anything that may take a heavy toll on one’s well-being in terms of one’s overall health can be concluded to be unsafe and unreasonable.


Steve Finnell said…
you are invited to follow my blog

Popular posts from this blog