Did Hitler and Mother Theresa have the same value to humanity?
Hi visitors,
I thought you might enjoy a great email I received from a fan named Jeffrey, along with my reply.
David
Dear Dr. Burns,
Thank you so much for the incredible effort that you and your team put into your blogs, podcasts, and Facebook sessions. I follow them religiously and found great value in every single piece of content.
As I read your blog on the meaning of purpose of life, I can’t help but want to ask a question that’s been on my mind since I read the Feeling Good book. I had a hard time understanding what you mean when you said that every human being has the same value.
Does Hitler and Mother Theresa have the same value to humanity? Some individuals offer so much more contribution to the world than others, how can they have the same value? I know you plan to address this question in your new book and I can’t wait to read it. In the meantime, I have a hard time resolving this dilemma in my head. I have been an achievement addict all my life.
Thank you again for your fantastic work.
Sincerely.
Jeffrey
Hi Jeffrey,
Thank you for your excellent question. I’m sure many people have similar concerns, and I’ve thought about this issue for decades, because I’ve had so many depressed patients who were convinced they were “worthless.” So I’ve had to ask myself this question—is it possible to judge the “worthwhileness” of a human being, or a “self,” as opposed to judging specific things they believe, do, or say?
It’s clear that we can judge specific thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. For example, you can make a decision about how interesting or worthwhile this post is, on a scale from 0 (not at all worthwhile) to 100 (extremely worthwhile). Are you with me so far? But to me, that is not the same as judging whether “I,” David Burns, am worthwhile. I don’t think you can judge how worthwhile “I” am! And I certainly cannot judge how worthwhile you, or any other human being, might be. That’s beyond my pay grade, and isn’t something I am interested in attempting either!
It is clear that we can judge many, but not all, of Hitler’s specific beliefs and actions as despicable, heinous, hateful, and destructive. And we can judge some (but not all) of Mother Theresa’s specific beliefs, words and actions in a positive way.
But how do we judge a “self?”
There are several issues I will address in my new book that might be relevant to your question.
- Is it possible to judge your own, or some else’s “self,” as opposed to something specific that we think, do or say?
- Can we define a “worthwhile” or “worthless” person in a meaningful way?
- Does the “self” even exist?
My answers to these three questions are no, no, and no! But then again, I may be missing something really important. And I know, too, that this issue will be intensely controversial, with heated argument, perhaps on both sides.
If you think you can define a “worthwhile” person, or if you think you know how to judge a “self,” as opposed to some specific thought, statement, or behavior, let me know.
One problem to the development of a consensus on this problem has to do with motivation, as opposed to logic. It can make us feel morally superior to judge others as “bad,” and to see ourselves and the members of our own tribe as “good.” Because of the mental high this type of All-or-Nothing Thinking causes, many will have no interest in giving it up.
This is the problem of positive distortions that I dealt with in an early Feeling Good Podcast, and also in one of my early Feeling Good Blogs some time ago. Positive distortions cause violence, hatred, and addictions, as well as mania and narcissism.
Hitler capitalized on Labeling and All-or-Nothing Thinking, telling the German people they were “superior” (e.g. “more worthwhile”), and insisting that Jews and other groups, like the mentally ill, were “inferior” (e.g. “worthless.”) And millions of Germans bought right into it, as do many Nazi’s and white supremacists today.
Humans LOVE to judge others! And motivation often triumphs over truth or logic.
Inherent worthwhileness as a human being is NOT the same as value to humanity, or how worthwhile a given action is or isn’t. Some people contribute a great deal to humanity, others very little, and most of us are somewhere in-between. Is someone who contributes more to humanity more worthwhile than other people who contribute less to humanity?
Can you imagine how weird it would be if you DID believe this? Let’s assume, just as a thought experiment, that you contributed a great deal to humanity, and you concluded that you were therefore “more worthwhile” as a human being.
You and I can have a little imaginary conversation, but you have to agree to several rules:
- You have to speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
- You are not allowed to rationalize or deny anything.
- You have to endorse and defend the belief that people who contribute more to humanity are “more worthwhile” than others who contribute less.
- You have to agree with the fact that you have contributed a tremendous amount to humanity, in fact, more than almost anyone. That will be something will assume for the purpose of this dialogue.
I’ll play the role of myself, you can play the role of Jeffrey, a fellow who has contributed enormously to humanity.
Now let’s see what happens:
David: Hi Jeffrey, I heard through the grapevine that everyone agrees that you have contributed enormously to humanity, more than almost anyone. Is this correct?
Jeffrey: Yes, that’s correct. My contributions to humanity are legendary! I can’t deny that! In fact, many put my contributions right up there next to those of the Pope and Mother Theresa. And if you wanted to argue that I have contributed MORE than either of them, who could argue with you?
David: That’s so cool, and I really admire all that you’ve done for others. And to be honest, I’m honored, and a bit intimidated, to have this chance to speak to you face to face. I did have a personal question, though, that I wanted to ask, if it wouldn’t be too much of an imposition.
Jeffrey: Oh, you can ask me anything you like. I always answer questions. That’s just one small part of my way of contributing to society and humanity.
David: Great, thanks! So, here’s my question. You’ve stated, I believe, that people who contribute more to society are more worthwhile human beings. Right?
Jeffrey: Right on, David!
David: And it is a fact that you have contributed vastly more than I have. My contributions would be considered average at best. So, you are you thinking, then, that you’re more worthwhile than I am?
Jeffrey: Well, David, it does kind of follow, doesn’t it?
David: So, are you looking down on me right now, thinking that I’m less worthwhile? And do you kind of look down on almost everyone, since your contributions to humanity eclipse those of almost everyone?
Now, it seems like you have two choices. You can either decide that contributions to humanity do NOT, in fact, make you “more worthwhile.” If you take this direction, then you’ve agreed that people who contribute more to humanity are not, in fact, “more worthwhile human beings.”
Or, you can insist that you ARE “more worthwhile” than other people because of all your contributions to humanity. In that case you’ll look like an ass!
The issue here is NOT whether contributions to society are worthwhile. The issue is whether your contributions, or your success, or anything else about you, can make you “more worthwhile” than other people.
It may seem like a subtle distinction, but the implications are tremendous, involving severe depression, if you conclude that you are “worthless” or “less worthwhile,” or aggression, hatred and violence, if you conclude that certain other classes of people are “worthless” or “less worthwhile.”
So here’s the brief answer: “value to humanity” is NOT the same as “(inherent) worthwhileness” as a human being.
You can also argue that inherent “worthwhileness” as a human being is a nonsensical concept, but that brings us to the same conclusion. We can judge the worthwhileness specific thoughts, feelings, skills, traits, or behaviors, but we cannot judge the worthwhileness of a human being.
My take on it only! Thanks so much for keeping the dialogue alive.
David
Coming Soon! Register Now!
Advanced, High-Speed TEAM-CBT for the Treatment of Depression and Anxiety
We warmly invite you to attend this fabulous, one-day workshop by Drs. David Burns and Jill Levitt on Sunday, May 20th, 2018. Click on the link above for registration and more information.
- 6 CE Credits
- The cost is $135
- You can join in person or online from wherever you live!
You will enjoy learning from David and Jill, working together to bring powerful, healing techniques to life in a clear, step-by-step way. Their teaching style as a team is entertaining, funny, lucid, and inspiring. This is a day you will remember fondly!
In the afternoon, you will have the chance to do some personal healing so you can overcome your own feelings of insecurity and self-doubt. David and Jill promise to bring at least 60% of the audience into a state of spiritual and psychological enlightenment, WITHOUT years of meditation. That’s not a bad deal at all!
You will LOVE this workshop. Seating for those who attend live in Palo Alto will be strictly limited, and seats are filling up fast, so move rapidly if you are interested.
Jill and I hope you can join us!
Explicit conversations as in your example above is not the norm in human society, but there is such a thing as status throughout the animal kingdom. People are interested in having favorable interactions, like sharing resources and cooperating, with those who have achieved high status and success. Females prefer high status males. Even lobsters, like humans, become “clinically depressed” when they keep loosing fights. Their serotonin level declines as they tumble down the social hierarchy.
In all your case examples of people fretting about their achievment in some area, the fact that the patient DID achieve success in some OTHER domain always sneaks in. This wouldn’t need to happen if achievement was truely irrelevant, would it?
I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Hi Sigal,
Thanks for the excellent comment! You are so right. People like individuals with high status and achievement, that’s for sure. Our experience adopting cats also shows us that status and hierarchies dominate in the animal kingdom, too. Everyone seems to love a winner!
The question I am addressing is whether or not you want to base your own feelings of self-esteem on status, achievement, love, or success. There are pros and cons, so when I’m treating someone, a Cost-Benefit Analysis can be one of many useful tools. Unconditional self-esteem tends to be more relaxing and freeing that basing your self-esteem on something you think you “must” have to be worthwhile.
And once you’ve developed unconditional self-esteem, you can get rid of it as fast as possible, once you realize you don’t even need it any more! If you are interested, you can read more about these concepts in the chapters on the Love Addiction and the Achievement Addiction, as well as other Self-Defeating Beliefs, in my book, Feeling Good: The New Mood Therapy, or in The Feeling Good Handbook.
david
Hi David, I have to disagree with you on Hitler and Mother Teresa having equal value as a human being. What Hitler did was unconscionable, and I believe in your stating this discount the horrendous pain that his victims endured. He may have had some good in him, but as a human being he is not worth my time of day. I do agree that someone who contributes more in society isn’t more valuable and worthwhile than someone who doesn’t though
Thanks, Debby, cool questions! And important ones, too!
What I am saying is hard to grasp at first. What Hitler did was horrific, and if we could go back in time and kill him it would be a good thing! I would cheer!
The horrendous pain his victims endured was unimaginably horribly. In fact, the dark side of humans is often horrible beyond belief, and may cause a bit of a bad prognosis for our long term survival.
I condemn horrific actions and beliefs. I am not able to judge “human worthwhileness” as that is a term that has no meaning, at least to my way of thinking. The concept is, for me, an “empty set.”
I don’t and cannot judge what a person “is,” but I can judge and condemn what he or she does.
Again, when you hear something that you don’t like to hear, you can ask yourself if you comprehend what the other person is saying, or you can ask yourself if you agree or disagree with it. I think comprehension has to come first. But some concepts are so simple that they are hard to teach or learn. The Buddha has this problem 2500 years ago, and the 20th century philosopher, Ludwig Wittgenstein, had this problem prior to his death in 1950. He is rumored to have solved all the problems of philosophy, but his “solution” was so basic and obvious that almost no one could grasp it. Sometimes, it seemed to elude his understanding, too! He was super lonely and depressed much of his life because people couldn’t “get it.” That’s partly why he never tried to publish anything when he was alive. His now famous book, philosophical investigations, was based on notes found in a metal box under his dormitory bed after he died. d
Our laws and morality systems do not try to judge what a person “is,” but rather what a person does. When you try to judge what you “are,” or what someone else “is,” you open yourself for a world of hurt.
My thinking only, and remember that I am often wrong! But the goal, I think, might be to try to grasp what I am saying. But once you “get it,” it can be a bit of a lonely road, because most humans don’t grasp what I am trying to say about judging a “self.” Most of us are constantly judging ourselves and others.
We can praise Mother Theresa and other terrific teachers and leaders, not for what they “are,” but for what they believe and what they do.
david
I,also, have a question on what you consider a violent person to be. For example, If someone feels like punching someone out and doesn’t does that make them a violent person for feeling it? I would say no because they never acted on it.
You may be trying to define something that does not exist. Violent urges exist in varying degrees at varying times in all human beings. Violent thoughts, feelings, urges and actions exist. But a “violent person” does not exist. My thinking only, and many will undoubtedly “violently” disagree, and not even comprehend, perhaps, what I am saying. Humans have a dark side, and the extent is on a bell shaped curve. The denial of the dark side is arguably worse than the dark side, since violence is generally carried out in the guise of some religious principle, or some kind of “truth.” david
The way I like to think of it is in terms of formulas. You may have done many wrong things (or acts of value to the community) over the course of a lifetime. But there were many moments when you didn’t and in fact may have done right things or neutral things (or performed mediocrely in other areas of value to the community). So what is the formula for a worthwhile self when you consider these many moments (or areas)? Anyone have it? Please pass it on.
Another way to look at it is not to judge a book by its cover. Just because it looks like a snake doesn’t mean it is. It may be an artificial snake, a toy.
And Dr Burns has hit it on the mark as usual. The reason we want to think of ourselves as worthwhile beings is because we want to think we are somehow better than others which automatically implies we look down on these others. What an obnoxious way to be! That’s what the dialog in the blog post revealed to me
Thanks, I love it! I have ooze to love cats, and treat them with warmth and affection and respect. My wife and I do not see them as “less than,” just unique in their own way, social, vulnerable, and worthy of love and a happy life, which we try hard to provide for our 9 year old SweetiePie, who we adopted after her first “owner” died. We love her. Two summers when I was in college, I had the honor of working as a construction laborer (member of the AFL union 383). My skills were not as good as the other construction laborer’s, but we treated each other with lots of respect and I had a ball. I earned $3.10 an hour! Seemed like big money at the time! HOpe this makes sense. No need to feel especially “worthwhile,” just grateful. Best
Love it! We don’t have to be ‘special’ to gain or give respect. As you say in the Death of the Special Self in Feeling Great, when you give up the idea that you are special, life becomes special.
On reading my previous comment, realized that I didn’t make my judging a book by the cover and snake analogy clear and relevant. Someone may be ‘evil’ like Hitler (or a snake) on the outside. Go into the depth of his psyche inside you may just find an emotionally disturbed person inside striving to cover up his own inadequacies with a superior self like all of us wanting to be worthwhile. Someone may be a saint on the outside like Mother Theresa, but as has been revealed since, she was someone with many flaws. What weight do you give to her flaws as well as her good deeds so that in the end you can say she is a worthwhile being?Is every good deed cancelled by a flaw or by 2,3, how many? Opinions on that will vary with no fixed way of coming up with a formula. Hence no fixed formula exists As the Buddhists would say, worthwhileness is an ‘empty’ concept.
I hope I haven’t rambled on too much, the blog post and your books are so interesting!
Please don’t post it if it doesn’t clarify
Thanks. I don’t try to judge people as “worthwhile” since, as the Buddhists say, it is a nonsensicl concept, an empty “non-concept,” so to speak. Best, david
I think lots of people like these dialogues, and have similar questions. We can judge acts, behaviors, thoughts, and so forth, but not “selves.” d
🟦 #StandUpToJewishHate. Wanted to post this. Thought it was as good a place as any to post this
Thanks! Good thinking! Best, david
Haha yes, non-concept! Clearer that way, I agree rather than an empty concept. The concept dissolves into a non-concept on analysis like trying to come up with a formula.
Thanks, I am really happy you “get it.” Moslty, I’ve been unsuccessful trying to convey my thinking, but comfort myself that a number of historical figures ran into the same stone wall! Best, daaid
P.S. What I am trying to say is no formula is objective since it won’t get agreement from everyone. Sense of superiority is thus purely a subjective rather than an objective matter.. Then since it is a subjective way of thinking, it makes sense to get into the pros and cons of thinking that way. The cons are listed by dr burns in his blog post very well
Yes, many, perhaps most, people love feeling superior, and this addiction is the cause of most of the suffering in the world, in terms of depression (thinking you’re not “special” or “good enough”) as well as violence and hatred (thinking that you’re better or more worthwhile than others, or certain categories of people.) And often, these “we’re superior” attitudes and feelings are comingled with religion, hence a lot of violence gets perpetrated in the name of this or that religious idea or religion. Religions, like people, can be incredibly flawed! Most people are happy to point out the flaws in other religions, but get verry defensive about the flaws in their own religions.
My thinking only!
Best, david
yes those who are religious and believe that a God knows the facts(of your superiority), are you sure you can stand up to scrutiny by a God? Or as Dr Burns says the feelings of superiority are often comingled with religion leading to the cons he stated. Well put!
TGhanks, hope people enjoy the dialogue! Best, david
The point of getting a distance from your greatness or evilness is to help you get over debilitating feelings of pride or shame
Good point! Thanks, david
And the way to get a distance from your greatness (or shame) is to realize there are causes for your greatness (or shame) which depend on other causes which depend on other causes and so on. So it’s not like you are great on your own. Were it not for those causes, with them often not having much to do with you, you would not be great (or be ashamed) Thank you Dr Burns for posting my comments. I won’t send any more comments.
Always happy to get your comments. I am trying to promote critical thinking and creative thinking too! Best, david