
The myth of self help has replaced religion (translated from Swedish) - colund
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=sv&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.svd.se%2Fkultur%2Funderstrecket%2Fmyten-om-sjalvhjalp-har-ersatt-religionen_3318636.svd&act=url
======
cdoxsey
And a sorry replacement it is.

In his Institutes John Calvin argues that knowledge consists chiefly of two
things: knowledge of ourselves and knowledge of God. When we dispensed with
God we thought we'd finally found the key to human happiness: freed from the
constraints of ancient superstition we'd usher in a golden age of human
flourishing. What we got instead was an unimaginable amount of human
barbarism, empty, meaningless pleasure seaking (ala Brave New World) on the
one hand and an oppresive, omnipotent police state (ala 1984) on the other.
Ours is a decadent culture, post- and anti- everything, which no longer stands
or believes in anything.

We were supposed to get Star Trek, what we got instead was the Walking Dead.

This is the paradox of happiness:

> Happiness cannot be pursued; it must ensue, and it only does so as the
> unintended side effect of one's personal dedication to a cause greater than
> oneself or as the by-product of one's surrender to a person other than
> oneself. - Viktor Frankl

Man was never meant to worship himself, as Augustine says:

> You have made us for Yourself, and our hearts are restless until they find
> their rest in You.

And CS Lewis:

> Aim at Heaven and you will get Earth 'thrown in': aim at Earth and you will
> get neither.

~~~
Zigurd
Those are pretty fancy conclusions to draw from the fact that one's brain is
wired for religion, in the same way it is wired to make you jump if something
that could be a snake moves in your field of vision, or to think that one's
luck will change.

We have a inherited a lot of propensity toward various delusions from our
ancestors. Sometimes we can make a decision not to wallow in them. Are you
sure it is a morally defensible position to, even tacitly, encourage such
delusions?

------
Zigurd
It's interesting that this particular article should bubble up at HN. You only
have to look at all the self-help and New Age gurus clogging up PBS and the
top of the Amazon best sellers to realize that a huge number of people got
stuck somewhere between realizing that religious beliefs are unlikely to be
real and accepting that their consciousness is an emergent phenomenon.

The honest try to get the masses un-stuck. The dishonest and evil people
exploit them or justify a tawdry and easy elitism through this situation.

~~~
gargarplex
The HOnest?

Tawdry easy elitist much?

~~~
Zigurd
Am I less honest than a "spiritual advisor?" More elitist than a Straussian?

------
hownottowrite
Actual book referenced - Stephen Briers "Psychobabble: Exploding the myths of
the self-help generation"

[http://www.amazon.com/Psychobabble-Exploding-myths-self-
help...](http://www.amazon.com/Psychobabble-Exploding-myths-self-help-
generation-ebook/dp/B00AN4XVZY/)

------
michaelfeathers
I wish I understood this translation:

"Against "self-esteem" Briers wants to make the concept of "self-esteem",
meaning that they have no basis for their self-image, that you act in order to
feel satisfied with their effort.

"If it were possible to wait for the man himself would come into a room,"
wrote British writer Rebecca West, "so there are not many of us who would feel
his heart swell with anticipation when we heard the handle is pushed down."

It is a black and provocative image, but maybe it can be taken as the basis
for our efforts to improve ourselves, trying to be such that one feels a
thrill of joy when that door opens"

~~~
emilga
Norwegian here.

I can't really translate your first quote, but a better translation of the
second one is:

" 'If it were possible to wait for one-self to enter a room', the British
author Rebecca West wrote, 'then there is not many of us who would feel their
heart swell in expectation when we heard the door-handle being pushed down.'

This is a dark and provoking image, but perhaps it can be taken as a starting
point for our struggle to improve ourselves: to attempt to become such that
one feels a thrill of joy when that door is opened."

~~~
michaelfeathers
Thanks. That makes much more sense.

------
jfmercer
Sounds about right.

------
lutusp
To be more accurate, the myth of self-help has replaced the myth of religion.

------
BugBrother
The article is about the pseudo scientifical life advice that is popular.
There is not much about religion. After a spammy first half a book is
discussed which sounded interesting.

Religion is generally just not discussed in Sweden, which is the most non-
religious country on the planet. It is considered a bit embarrassing to
discuss faith, like your toilet problems or something. (At least Sweden used
to be the leader. The statistics might be different after the large
immigration wave.)

(This service provided for anyone trying to use translate.google.com :-) )

~~~
JoeAltmaier
I like that attitude. Someone wrote religion is like genitals - its ok to have
it, be proud of it, use it, but just don't go waving it around in public.

~~~
blowski
The same is true of any advice, generally. Giving people diatribes on all
that's wrong with Windows and all that's right with Ubuntu doesn't produce
many converts, and probably gives Ubuntu a bad name. But if someone says "I
hate Windows, because it's expensive and made by Microsoft" then it would be
entirely appropriate for me to talk about Ubuntu.

I'm that way with religion. I don't walk up to people outside the station
telling them to repent, but if someone told me they were having a hard time in
life right now, I might suggest coming to church with me one Sunday.

~~~
bryanlarsen
You caused me some cognitive dissonance. Why does the latter strike me as
offensive, but the former doesn't? My reaction to the latter is "preying on
the vulnerable". The former is also, so is the reason that only the latter
offends me is that I'm an Ubuntu using atheist?

------
Dewie
"Self help" is a vague term, but they tend to be rooted more in New Age
concepts than in Western monotheism. New Age concepts tend in turn to be
linked to Eastern religions or spiritual practices. So no, I don't think that
self help books have filled the void of Western religions. It might be only in
the existential questions that they answer, but then again, the Buddhist idea
of an "afterlife" is very different from the typical Christian one, and has a
very different appeal.

(I think that this is more of a Maslow's Hierarchy kind of thing. But oh
well.)

Perhaps the typical self help consumer is too wide-eyed and expects too much
of life. It might also be that they are turning to un-scholarly, unlicensed
authors because no established science or human institution has been able to
give them the kind kind of knowledge that they want. In such a case, these
psychologists in this article might be wise to think of their professions
monumental failure to inspire confidence in the general population. If
psychology had found results that were relevant to the common person, I expect
them to have been incorporated into the common vocabulary. Instead, psychology
is not associated with anything that a _healthy_ person might be in need of;
only the 'crazy people'. Of course these psychologists think that self help is
too optimistic, when the field has historically been so pre occupied with
illness (how old is 'positive psychology', again...?).

We might know how a good life is lead, but there is no authority, currently,
on _how_ to achieve it (taking into account human motivation and all that).
Some will turn to bestselling authors because, really, having sold a lot of
books is about as good of a mark of quality in this field at this point. Then
perhaps start to proclaim that we are all ONE, because _quantum physics_. What
these might have in common with the archetypical religious person is wishful
thinking.

These people should consider just giving up on this whole self help thing,
anyway, as there are simpler alternatives. Our understanding of the world - at
least the world outside of ourselves - is so well understood that we can use
this as a sleeping pillow. Gone are the days when a rationally inclined mind
would have to also be a philosopher, in order to fill in the gaps where the
obvious models of the world don't make sense. Now, you can just 'like' "I
fucking love science' on Facebook, make the occasional off-hand joke about
homoeopathy, and you're safely in the in-crowd of modern, pseudo intellectual
rationalists. "If I can't see it, I don't believe it" is as simple as "If
there is no study about it, I don't believe it". What these people have in
common with the archetypical religious person is close-mindedness.

