Authenticity under Fire
Researchers
are calling into question authenticity as a scientifically viable concept
·
By Scott Barry Kaufman on June
14, 2019
·
·
·
·
·
Credit: Stanislaw Pytel Getty Images
Authenticity
is one of the most valued characteristics in our society. As children we are
taught to just "be ourselves", and as adults we can choose from a
large number of self-help books that will tell us how important it is to get in
touch with our "real self". It's taken as a given by everyone that
authenticity is a real thing and that it is worth cultivating.
Even
the science of
authenticity has surged in recent years, with hundreds of
journal articles, conferences, and workshops. However, the more that
researchers have put authenticity under the microscope, the more muddied
the waters of authenticity have become. Many common ideas about authenticity
are being overturned. Turns out, authenticity is a real mess.
Problems with Authenticity
One big problem with authenticity is that there is a lack of
consensus among both the general public and among psychologists about what it actually
means for someone or something to be authentic. Are you being most
authentic when you are being congruent with your physiological states, emotions, and beliefs, whatever they may be? Or are you being most
authentic when you are congruent with your consciously chosen beliefs, attitudes, and values?
How about when you are being congruent across the various
situations and social roles of your life? Which form of "being
true to yourself" is the real authenticity: was it the time you really
gave that waiter a piece of your mind or that time you didn't tell the waiter how you really felt about
their dismal performance because you value kindness and were true to your
higher values?
Another
thorny issue is measurement. Virtually all measures of authenticity involve
self-report measures. However, people often do not know what they are really like or why they
actually do what they do. So tests that ask people to report how
authentic they are is unlikely to be a truly accurate measure of their
authenticity.
Perhaps the thorniest issue of them all though is the entire
notion of the "real self". The humanistic psychotherapist
Carl Rogers noted that many people who seek psychotherapy are plagued by the
question "Who am I,
really?" While people spend so much time searching for their
real self, the stark reality is that all of the aspects of your mind are part of you. It's virtually impossible to think
of any intentional behavior that does not reflect some genuine part of your
psychological make-up, whether it's
your dispositions, attitudes, values, or goals.
This
creates a real problem for the scientific investigation of a concept such as
authenticity. As Katrina Jongman-Sereno and Mark Leary conclude in their recent
article "The Enigma of
Being Yourself",
"Given the complexity of
people's personalities, two seemingly incompatible actions might both be highly
self-congruent. People are simply too complex, multifaceted, and often
conflicted for the concept of a unitary true self to be a useful standard for
assessing authenticity, either in oneself or in others."
So
what is this "true self" that people are always talking about? Once
you take a closer scientific examination, it seems that what people refer to as
their "true self" really is just the aspects of
themselves that make them feel the best about themselves. All
around the world, people show an authenticity positivity bias:
people include their most positive and moral qualities-- such as kind, giving,
and honest-- in their descriptions of their true self. People judge their
positive behaviors as more authentic than their negative behaviors even when both
behaviors are consistent with their personal characteristics and desires.
Even
more perplexing, it turns out that most people's feelings of authenticity have
little to do with acting in accord with their actual nature. The reality
appears to be quite the opposite. All people tend to feel most authentic
when having the same experiences, regardless of
their unique personality. In particular, we all tend to feel
most authentic when we are feeling content, calm,
loving, enthusiastic, free, competent, mindful of the
present moment, and open to new
experiences. In other words, we tend to feel most authentic
when our needs are
being met and we feel
ownership of our subjective experiences. Not when we are simply
being ourselves.
Another counterintuitive finding is that people actually tend to
feel most authentic when they are acting in socially desirable ways,
not when they are going against the grain of cultural dictates (which is how authenticity is
typically portrayed). On the flip side, people tend to feel inauthentic
when they are feeling
socially isolated, or feel as though they have fallen short of the standards of
others.
It
makes sense that feelings of authenticity would so strongly tied to social evaluation
considering how important reputation and
acquiring a unique role within a group was across the
course of human evolution. This also may help explain why people's evaluations
of their authenticity is so strongly tied to their morality and most valued
goals. Behaving in ways that are consistent your "higher" goals
(such as announcing your new humanitarian nonprofit) is typically perceived as
more authentic by yourself and by others than authentically watching Netflix
while eating that stack of glazed donuts. Even though, sorry to say it, but
both behaviors are really you.
Therefore, what people think of as their true self may actually
just be what people want to be seen
as.
According to social psychologist Roy Baumeister, we will report feeling highly
authentic and satisfied when the way others
think of us matches up with how we want to be seen, and when our
actions "are conducive to establishing, maintaining, and enjoying our
desired reputation." If you think back on your own personal experiences of
when you've felt most authentic in your life (and are really honest with
yourself), you'll probably agree this largely rings true.
Conversely,
Baumeister argues that when people fail to achieve
their desired reputation, they will dismiss their actions as inauthentic, as
not reflecting their true self ("That's not who I am"). As Baumeister
notes, "As familiar examples, such repudiation seems central to many of
the public appeals by celebrities and politicians caught abusing illegal drugs,
having illicit sex, embezzling or bribing, and other reputation-damaging
actions."
Saving Authenticity
While
there doesn't appear to actually be such a thing as the one true self, the
concept of the true self may still serve a
useful function. The science of authenticity does show that feeling
in touch with your real self (even if there doesn't actually exist such a
thing) is a strong predictor of many indicators of well-being. Holding the idea
of your true self in mind can play an important meaning-making
function, and can serve as a useful guide to
evaluating whether you are living up to your ideal of the good life.
After
all, I do believe there is within each of us best selves--
aspects of who you are that are healthy, creative, and growth-oriented, and
make you feel most connected to yourself and to others. I would argue that
getting in touch with your best selves and intentionally actualizing your most
creative and growth-oriented potentialities is a much more worthy goal than
spending your entire life trying to find your one true self. In my view, there
is such a thing as healthy authenticity.
Healthy
authenticity is not about going around saying whatever is on your mind, or
actualizing all of your potentialities, including your darkest impulses.
Instead, healthy authenticity, of the sort that helps you become a whole
person, involves accepting and taking responsibility for your whole self as a
route to personal growth and meaningful relationships. Healthy authenticity is
an ongoing process of discovery, involving self-awareness, self-honesty,
integrity with your most consciously chosen values and highest goals, and a
commitment to cultivating authentic relationships.
As
long as you are working towards growth in the direction of who you truly want
to be, that counts as authentic in my book regardless of whether it is who you
are at this very moment. The first step to healthy
authenticity is shedding your positivity biases and seeing yourself for who you
are, in all of your contradictory and complex splendor. Full acceptance doesn't
mean you like everything you see, but it does mean that you've taken the most
important first step toward actually becoming the whole person you most wish to
become. As Carl Rogers noted,
"the curious paradox is that when I accept myself just as I am, then I can
change."
The views expre
Posts
