Before finishing the other book, I got way too lineant and way too engrossed with another book. Somehow this isn’t a book that was recommended to me at all. I don’t know if this happens elsewhere, but it seemed like I was drawn to this book out of the blue. I haven’t heard of it from anyone and I don’t remember where I read it’s title first. I think I can chalk it up to doom scrolling where I might’ve picked it up.
Among other books that I’ve read through or tried to read through, most of them have been self help. Although, their initial promise of delivering THE answer, I’ve realized that I’m not looking with a particular question in mind. Reading the self-help books are more of result to consume/buy stuff more than improving oneself. It feels kind of free in admitting that the goal for buying the book was increasing, as they say, “book count” instead of actually improving myself. That was just an excuse to pick a genre, since I’m so bad imagination.
“The Courage to be Disliked” is a philosophy book which presents itself as a dialogue. I never realized this kind of medium exists in a book. The book says itself, philosophy has never been the kind of knowledge that was ever meant to be written down by the thinkers. It has always evolved in debates and dialogues. So why can’t that be the medium for a book.
I have never read through other philosophers but always heard their names in movies and songs. Freuds’ oedipus complex comes in a lot of time in various media and pop cultures. Hard to not learn about it. It’s a bizzare thing. The idea behind trauma and the effects of it is also something one can come up on their own, and isn’t really a hard thing to conjure up. Regardless, these things are pretty distant concepts for some one like me who hasn’t seen these extreme situations and is just OK. Just normal. That is where this book comes in for me and fills in the gap. It feels like it is for those mediocre personalities who don’t fit anywhere, would be molded by this book. It gives me a purpose.
Also, before I dive deeper, I want to clarify again that I picked up this book purely out of a drive to increase my book count. I want to imply by that I am in no need to feel fulfilled/happy/content with how things are currently. I’m not in the best state but its not something so dire that needs fixing. With that said, what I started understanding in this book is that it educates on how one must think of the next step that one is about to take. It basically guides you by telling you the way. I also think that it is very much aligned with the way I think. The talk about Life not being a competition and that one is responsible of one’s own happiness, is very much in line with Adler’s philosophy. In addition to them, it talks about the main objectives of being social and what it takes to be a part of the society. I wouldn’t have thought of it on my own. But it makes sense. If I have to be self sufficient, I can do that only by reinforcing/strenghthening my social “tasks”.
Furthermore, so far that I’ve read, I like the stance it takes on holding one’s self responsible. I like the idea that whatever is in the past is over and done with. It literally doesn’t exist. Like as literally as a thing can be. So all that remains, whatever is yet to come, is solely based on what one does RIGHT now. That’s it. If we think about it, and to someone who is struggling with anything right now, this is a damn hard pill to swallow. But that’s why this philosophy/psychology is actually life on Hard mode. This is actually, taking over complete control, and not letting life go on auto-pilot anymore. This IS the most human thing one can do!
I’m almost at the half of this book. It’ll be a happy day when I finish this book because i’d have gained a lot of understanding from it. ANd that is extremely rare for me. Hehe.