Why Trying to Shine for the Sake of Approval Leads to Failure
The current issue of Shukan Shincho, dated December 12, features a one-page interview with me in the form of a PR article for JT. The ongoing series is titled "Speaking of which, come on," and my installment is titled "Toward a Society Where We Can Forgive Each Other's Negativity."
To get straight to the point! The intro starts with the story of how "because everyone was told to stay home due to COVID and restaurants were closed, I conversely made drinking outside in the park my hobby," and in addition to the illustration in the magazine, I also reported on this in detail a year ago in "Reading Classics in Times of Crisis" (laughs).
So, what I would like to convey from that this time is—
Everyone wants to be approved by those around them and to think of themselves as "a person worth being in this place." That is why people achieve results or earn qualifications.
However, if you pursue the desire for approval in such a positive direction, there is no end to it, wanting more and more. If you satisfy your desire based on the standard of "I'm earning hundreds of millions," you would be hurt if your income dropped to tens of millions. Even though you are still quite impressive and can afford luxuries.
Rather, when you can share your negativity with those around you, you gain the most stable form of approval.
That's right. By now, "desire for approval" has completely become a derogatory term, hasn't it? When people say things like, "Isn't that just for the sake of approval?" what comes to mind now is the social media of that glitzy election PR consultant woman who is currently a hot topic.
But that is wrong in two ways. First, it overlooks the fact that there is "no one" who can live without being approved by others. Second, it is based on the assumption that the path to gaining approval is "to keep shining/glittering."
It is true that sometimes there are people (regardless of gender) who say macho things like, "I don't need anyone's approval!" but then why are you saying that in front of others (bitter smile)? If you truly didn't have a desire for approval, you could just be satisfied in silence, couldn't you?
Even regarding the concept of "harassment," which has expanded to include power harassment and moral harassment that do not involve sexual issues, it essentially refers to "an attitude of trying to use the other person as much as possible without giving them any approval," so those who claim to have no desire for approval have no right to complain about being harassed for the rest of their lives. If the person themselves says that's fine, then well, please live strongly (laughs).
The more serious problem is the second point. If the person just assumes, "I can't get approval unless I shine!" well, I guess it's okay to try that as far as it goes, but what has been notable in recent years is the movement to arbitrarily apply that to others as well.
The more people or organizations use the term diversity, the more they say things like, "Even people with disabilities can shine!," or "Let's make sexual minorities shine!" That is trying to fill the world with glitter, which is actually a very singular way of thinking, but the people involved don't realize it.
shop)
In the days when literature was considered a form of cultivation, one could instantly see through the absurdity of that.
For example, when you feel alienated from life and society, what supports your heart is the novels of Osamu Dazai, who dropped out of proletarian literature, the University of Tokyo's French literature department, and the Japanese Communist Party, not socialist realism that praises the activities of glittering heroic labor activists. But everyone has already lost the memory of such eras.
Social media and influencers are not inherently bad things, and it is wonderful to be able to live every day in a glittering way. But when that is combined with a society that makes light of such literary sensibilities, it causes tremendous negative side effects.
When I write "expert" with sarcasm, I am referring to "experts" who actually prioritize influence over specialized knowledge, and I also discussed why such people run rampant in the recent "Public" textbook interview.
Intellectuals who post on social media now have simply become avatars for their readers (followers). They are like the "characters" you use in video games. Users find a celebrity who looks like "this character seems strong," become a follower, and even though it was that person who won the argument and not themselves, more and more users feel the pleasure as if they had "controlled the character to defeat the enemy."
(Omitted)
Because they feel they have no value and that no one will listen even if they speak up, they become henchmen for people who already have power as influencers. They project themselves onto that person and feel as if they are fighting "on their behalf," creating the illusion that they themselves have won.
Once it gets to this point, it becomes important to have a clear winner and loser, so extreme arguments are better received than moderate compromises. In fact, the excitement reaches its peak when it becomes "we followers supported them and made them win" with extreme claims that would be impossible in common sense.
Once it reaches this point, it's the end for a scholar, and since a sense of glitter is far more "effective" than specialized knowledge to attract followers, before long, the content of their posts becomes no different from an influencer's Instagram. There are various examples that come to mind, aren't there? (laughs)
In other words, disparaging influencers who don't rely on scholarship as "anti-intellectual" and praising "experts" with PhDs won't solve any of the world's problems. But if so, how can we get out of this current situation that has been drawn into the end of the desire for approval that everyone has?
I believe I was able to introduce clues to that in the "Shukan Shincho" article and the "Public" textbook interview. I would be happy if it reaches the eyes of many readers!
Reference article: