I think this is a question that many people struggle with from time to time. The apparent conflict lies in thinking in terms of "being autonomous/independent versus connected" as if these are two opposite ends of a continuum. If you also see them that way I invite you to take a different perspective – considering them as two different dimensions rather than being the polar opposites of the same dimension.
How you create that vision can either take an independent/ autonomous form with you tapping into your unique being, your desires and dreams - in a way very similar to tapping into your ideal-self. Or you could create a vision more in line with the expectations of others (e.g., family, friends, colleagues) and the norms of the groups you belong to (e.g., the company you work for, the society you live in) without too much reference to your unique potential. This latter way is parallel to emphasizing your ought-self when you create that vision.
Then it is not a good idea to pit autonomy against connectedness, but rather encourage both. But why are we sometimes tempted to think one would come at the expense of the other?
I think that comes from an assumption we make: “to be connected I need to incorporate other people’s expectations and desires into the vision I create for myself”. And I believe this assumption is partly sustained by the desire to fit in. It is important to become aware of that belief and to question if that is indeed a valid assumption. I invite you to do that with an open mind…
References
Kurt, A. (2002). Autonomy and relatedness: A comparison of Canadians and Turks. Paper Presented at the Annual Convention of Canadian Psychological Association; June 2002, Vancouver, BC.
No comments:
Post a Comment