Myth of Self-Esteem

[TIM BANDY]

Those who are familiar with me here are aware that occasionally I have made
the surprising statement that there has never been any proof of a thing called
"self-esteem." I have questioned the concept, which is used widely in our
culture as if it is an established truth. I regret now that I did not publish
my criticism of the concept which I wrote 20 years ago. The recent issue of
Business Week and last weeks New York Times contain summary articles
criticizing the whole notion of Self-esteem. Just as I said in my paper
written long ago, "Self-esteem" is a concept that was coined and presented
about 25 years ago by the education establishment and somehow it filtered into
the therapy and psychology establishments. It became a truism despite the
fact that there has never been any evidence of any kind relating to self-
esteem. I have questioned the concept for many years and have been attacked
for doing so, which I expected to happen, as attacks happen to anyone who
questions anything which is assumed to be true. I just want to let fellow
home schoolers here, who did not attack my questioning of the concept, know
that serious academic debate exists now over the entire concept.
What lead me to question "self-esteem" is this. As a boy, I began a
life long study of biography of famous people, of people who did anything
outstanding, of people who made some big mark. I am currently writing a book
about success and it is based on my study of prominent people. One thing I
knew early on is that there is no connection between self-confidence and
success or failure. In fact, many of the most successful and accomplished
people suffer their entire lives from self-doubt and insecurity. I also knew
that there was a major contradiction in psychology literature. One specialty
endlessly addressed the problem of the highly successful and\or accomplished
person who was ever fearful that their success was a mistake and that the
mistake will be found out. This is a common problem among the successful.
Meanwhile, psychologists speak endlessly about "low self-esteem" as the cause
for everything from spouse abuse to mass murder and simple juvenile
delinquency to classroom disruptions. Here are some interesting quotes from
the Business Week article by John Leo: "The self-esteem movement is one of the
marvels of our time. It goes on and on, even though its assumptions are wrong
and its basic premises have been discredited by a great deal of research...The
conception of self-esteem as a kind of commodity one can acquire by constant
self-affirmation now appears to be trivial and silly....The core assumption of
the self-esteem movement is that children cannot learn or develop properly
unless they form a positive self-image. But no study has ever demonstrated a
connection between feeling good about oneself and improved performance...When
Stevenson and Stigler tested the academic skills of elementary school students
in the US, China, Japan and Taiwan, The Asian students significantly
outperformed the American students in every area but the US students felt
better about themselves and their work! They had managed to combine high
self-esteem with poor work...Instead of bringing performance up, the pop-
therapeutic approach was helping to dumb down...." Self-esteem theory argues
(actually 'proclaims') that low self-esteem "is the cause of violence, hate-
crimes, and many other antisocial acts--has also been discredited...studies of
gang members and criminals show that their self-esteem is as high as that of
overachievers. One influential study concluded that violence is often the
work of people with unrealistically high self-esteem, attacking others who
challenge their self-image. Another study disproved the familiar theory that
welfare mothers become pregnant to boost their self-esteem."
Perhaps some participants here will understand from this example why I
raise so many questions about psychologists and their criticisms of average
respectable parents. As I have said, their is so little evidence behind what
members of these professions say. Dr. Bettleheim, America's leading
researcher and expert on children was a complete fraud. Psychologists and
therapists still worship him. Yet, he was not a doctor. He never attend
college. He came here from war torn Europe and managed to buffalo
psychologists and a lot of other people into accepting his claim that he
possessed a European Doctorate in psychiatry, that he knew Sigmond Freud and
worked with him, etc., etc. He was just a con artist who is still famous in
American child psychology circles. Dr. Benjamin Spock who dictated to an
entire generation of Americans on how to raise their children was completely
unqualified to speak about psychology or child-rearing. He was a
pediatrician, not a psychiatrist and he admitted and apologized in writing the
last decade of his life. He admitted that he was wrong about most of what he
preached about child-rearing! What did he preach? Give choices, explain
everything, reason with children instead of punish. He went further than
speak out against spanking. He spoke against punishment of any kind. Parents
were to be buddies to their children. We still hear this ilk from many
teachers and parents.
The next time someone you know seeks services from a child therapist or
seeks marital counseling have them ask the following questions: "Are you
married? Do you have any children? How old are they?" If the therapist is
married, ask : "how many years?" and ask about previous marriages. Ask how
old their children are. Ask if they vote. If they vote, ask about their
party affiliation. (The overwhelming majority identify themselves as liberal
democrats) You and your friend will learn some surprising things. Most child
and family therapists are female (about 90%). Most have a personal track
record of not being able to maintain a stable relationship with a significant
other. I think you will find that the majority of child therapists over the
age of 30 have at least one child but they are single (divorced) No wonder
marital counseling rarely works! No wonder that many men refuse to
participate after a few visits claiming that they feel ganged up on! ...Or, so
it seems to me.
Tim B.

[b...@webtv.net]

HI,
I really don't understand this "self-esteem" bit. Don't they have better
things to do with our tax money?
Maybe "self-esteem" has nothing to do at all with better work or study
performances, or how well one will succeed in life, but I would rather
my children have excellent self-esteem. I DO thing it hinders oneself
into doing our best. I know many times, because of lack of
"self-esteem", that I didn't participate or pipe up with answers I knew.
I would have loved to be involved in many more things than I was, but
due to lack of "self-confidence", I was unable. There are many people
who don't climb the corporate ladder because of "self-esteem". Some
people could be much more successful than they are today if they had
better self-confidence.
I do believe that your over-all work performance is not affected by
this, but how one works within a group, then it matters.
I try and teach my children to have great "self-confidence". this will
GET them far in life. This life is getting harder and harder. Our
children will have to fight pretty soon for even a job. They will need
all the help they can get.
What is so wrong with having "self-esteem"? I personally see it as only
a benefit.

Zehra