Is A Self Actualized Being A Sociopath?

[sleepyj]

So recently I have been watching a lot of Leo's videos and taking his messages to heart. I was especially enamored with videos that dealt with how you should feel about other people, like: "How to Stop Caring What Other People Think of You", "Why You Should Stop Moralizing", and "Lifestyle Minimalism". All of these videos seem to propose the concept that a self-actualized being is one who shouldn't need the approval of others and the constant presence of others in their life in order to be happy. This concept appeals to me, but since I have grasped it, I have noticed that I have stopped caring as much about the people in my life (like my parents and friends). Don't get me wrong I am not rude or malicious, I simply seem to not want to spend as much time with them.

It goes much deeper than this though... After watching Leo's videos I am starting to see more and more how people (including myself) are selfish and manipulative in that people (parents, friends, and spouces) all want things from you; maybe not physical things, but other things like emotional satisfaction etc. This leads me to believe that there are no truly good people or deeds in the world. Everyone does everything for some personal, selfish reason. Anyway, this realization has caused me to lose interest in helping the world with my gifts. I purchased Leo's life purpose course, but more and more I am using it to discover what the most fufilling career for me would be, not the career that would benefit the world the most. I have almost no interest in helping the world anymore. I don't want to hurt anyone or anything, but I also don't want to dedicate my life to helping the world. I feel like some of this self-actualization work may cause us to become selfish and even sociopaths (not in a violent way though) in that we will all eventually want to go live in a cabin in the woods focusing on enlightenment, while not give a hoot about the rest of the world and people.

Edited June 19, 2016 by sleepyj

[Pav]

Not at all, I would even say it's the complete opposite; self-actualising people (I suggest reading some of Maslow's works directly if you want to understand what self-actualisation is, since this concept seems to act a lot like an ink blot rorschach test, people will project their of beliefs onto it. Leo's version of self-actualisation isn't entirely accurate) (an in depth description of self-actualising people can be found here from chapters 11 to 13) are much more capable of being truly loving people. 

An important concept Maslow defines is the difference between Deficiency-cognition and Being-cognition. Most people are stuck in Deficiency cognition, this is where people much too focused on their individual ego, they see the world only from that perspective (while Being-cognition is more objective perception). This explains your observations, the people you described are perceiving the world from the perspective of their ego, so they are motivated by deficiency (self-actualising people are motivated by love/joy); they only see in you what is relevant to them, for instance emotional satisfaction. However, it is certainly possible to love/admire/appreciate someone without needing anything in return. It must be done from a place of Being.

I'll let Maslow explain, since he does a much better job than I could do (taken from Toward a Psychology of Being):

Relationships:

Quote

In essence, the deficit-motivated man is far more dependent upon other people than is the man who is predominantly growth-motivated. He is more "interested," more needful, more attached, more desirous. 

This dependency colors and limits interpersonal relation. To see people primarily as need-gratifiers or as sources of supple is an abstractive act. They are seen not as wholes, as complicated, unique individuals, but rather from the point of view of usefulness. What in them is not related to the perceiver's needs is either overlooked altogether, or else bores, irritates, or threatens. This parallels our relations with cow, horses, and sheep, as well as waiters, taxicab drivers, porter, policemen or others whom we use.

Fully disinterested, desireless, objective and holistic perception of another human being becomes possible only when nothing is needed from him, only when he is not needed. Idiographic, aesthetic perception of the whole person is far more possible for self-actualising people (or in moments of self-actualisation), and furthermore approval, admiration, and love are based less upon gratitude for usefulness and more upon the objective, intrinsic qualities of the perceived person. He is admired for objectively admirable qualities rather than because he flatters or praises. He is loved because he is love-worthy rather than because he gives out love.

 

One characteristic of "interested" and need-gratifying relations to other people is that to a very large extent these need-gratifying persons are interchangeable. Since, for instance, the adolescent girl needs admiration; one admiration-supplier is about as good as another. So also for the love-supplier or the safety-supplier.

Disinterested, unrewarded, useless, desireless perception of the other as unique, as independent, as end-in-himself, in other words, as a person rather than a tool, is more difficult, the more hungry the perceiver is for deficit satisfaction.

Love:

Quote

The love need as ordinarily studied is a deficit need. It is a hole which has to be filled, an emptiness into which love is poured. If this healing necessity is not available, severe pathology results; if it is available at the right time, in the right quantities and with proper style, then pathology is averted. Intermediate states of pathology and health follow upon intermediate states of thwarting or satiation. If the pathology is not too severe and if it is caught early enough, replacement therapy can cure. That is to say the sickness, "love-hunger," can be cured in certain cases by making up the pathological deficiency. Love hunger is a deficiency disease, like salt hunger or avitaminoses. 

The healthy person, not having this deficiency, does not need to receive love except in steady, small maintenance doses and he may even do without these for periods of time. But if motivation is entirely a matter of satisfying deficits and thus getting rid of needs, then a contradiction appears. Satisfaction of the need should cause it to disappear, which is to say that people who have stood in satisfying love relationships are precisely the people who should be less likely to give and receive love! But clinical study of healthier people, who have been love-need-satiated, show that although they need less to receive love, they are more able to give love. In this sense, they are more loving people.

I have already described in a preliminary fashion the contrasting dynamics of B-love (love for the Being of another person, unneeding love, unselfish love) and D-love (deficiency-love, love need, selfish love).

1. B-love is welcomed into consciousness, and is completely enjoyed. Since it is non-possessive, and is admiring rather than needing, it makes no trouble and is practically always pleasure-giving.

2. It can never be sated; it may be enjoyed without end. It usually grows rather than disappearing. It is intrinsically enjoyable. It is end rather than means.

3. The B-love experience is often described as being the same as, and having the same effects as the aesthetic experience or the mystic experience.

4. The therapeutic and psychogogic effects of experiencing B-love are very profound and widespread. Similar are the characterological effects of the relatively pure love of a healthy mother for her baby, or the perfect love of their God that some mystics have described.

5. B-love is, beyond the shadow of a doubt, a richer, "higher," more valuable subjective experience than D-love (which all B-lovers have also previously experienced.) This preference is also reported by my other older, more average subjects, many of whom experience both kinds of love simultaneously in varying combinations.

6. D-love can be gratified. The concept "gratification" hardly applies at all to admiration-love for another person's admiration-worthiness and love-worthiness.

7. In B-love there is a minimum of anxiety-hostility. For all practical human purposes, it may even be considered to be absent. There can, of course, be anxiety-for-the-other. In D-love one must always expect some degree of anxiety-hostility.

8. B-lovers are more independent of each other, more autonomous, less jealous or threatened, less needful, more individual, more disinterested, but also simultaneously more eager to help the other towards self-actualisation, more proud of his triumphs, more altruistic, generous and fostering.

9. The truest, most penetrating perception of the other is made possible by B-love. It is as much a cognitive as an emotional-conative reaction, as I have already emphasised. So impressive is this, and so often validated by other people's later experience, that, far from accepting the common platitude that love makes people blind, I become more and more inclined to think of the opposite as true, namely that non-love makes us blind.

10. Finally, I may say the B-love, in a profound but testable sense, creates the partner. It gives him a self-image, it gives him self-acceptance, a feeling of love-worthiness and respect-worthiness, all of which permit him to grow. It is a real question whether the full development of the human being is possible without it.

Independence of Others:

Quote

The needs for safety, belongingness, love relations and for respect can satisfied only by other people, ie, only from outside the person. This means considerable dependence on the environment. A person in this dependent position cannot really be said to be governing himself, or in control of his own fate. He must be beholden to the sources of supply of needed gratifications. Their wishes, their whims, their rules and laws govern him and must be appease lest he jeopardise his sources of supply. He must be, to an extent, "other-directed," and must be sensitive to other people's approval, affection and good will. This is the same as saying that he must adapt and adjust by being flexible and responsive and by changing himself to fit the external situation. He is the dependant variable; the environment is the fixed, independent variable. 

In contrast, the self-actualising individual, by definition gratified in his basic needs, is far less dependent, far less beholden, far more autonomous and self-directed. Far from needing other people, growth-motivated people may actually be hampered by them. I have already reported their special liking for privacy, for detachment and for meditativeness. 

Such people become far more self-sufficient and self-contained. The determinants which govern them are now primarily inner ones, rather than social or environmental. They are the laws of their own inner nature, their potentialities and capacities, their talents, their latent resources, their creative impulses, their needs to know themselves and to become more and more integrated and unified, more and more aware of what they really are, of what they really want, of what their call or vocation or fate is to be.

Since they depend less on other people, they are less ambivalent about them, less anxious and also less hostile, less needful of their praise and their affection. They are less anxious for honors, prestige and rewards.

More Objective Perception of Reality:

Quote

We may not be aware when we perceive in a need-determined way. But we certainly are aware of it when we ourselves are perceived in this way, eg, simply as a money-giver, a food-supplier, a safety-giver, someone to depend on, or as a waiter or other anonymous servant or means-object. When this happens we don't like it at all. We want to be taken for ourselves, as complete and whole individuals. We dislike being perceived as useful objects or as tools. We dislike being "used".

Because self-actualising people ordinarily do not have to abstract need-gratifying qualities nor see the person as a tool, it is much more possible for them to take a non-valuing, non-judging, non-interfering, non-condemning attitude towards others, a desirelessness, a "choiceless awareness". This permits much clearer and more insightful perception and understanding of what is there.

The most efficient way to perceive the intrinsic nature of the world is to be more receptive than active, determined as much as possible be the intrinsic organisation of that which is perceived and as little as possible by the nature of the perceiver. This kind of detached, Taoist, passive, non-interfering awareness of all the simultaneously existing aspects of the concrete, has much in common with some descriptions of the aesthetic experience and of the mystic experience. The stress is the same. Do we see the real, concrete world or do we see our own system of rubrics, motives, expectations and abstractions which we have projected onto the real world?

Growth Motivation:

Quote

The coming-to-rest conception of motivation becomes completely useless. In such people gratification breeds increased rather than decreased motivation, heightened rather than lessened excitement. The appetites become intensified and heightened. They grow upon themselves and instead of wanting less and less, such a person wants more and more of it, for instance, education. The person rather than coming to rest becomes more active. The appetite for growth is whetted rather than allayed by gratification. Growth is, in itself, a rewarding and exciting process, eg., the fulfilling yearnings and ambitions, like that of being a good doctor; the acquisition of admired skills, like playing the violin or being a good carpenter; the steady increase of understanding about people or about the universe, or about oneself; the development of creativeness in whatever field, or, most important, simply the ambition to be good human being.

Activity can be enjoyed either intrinsically, for its own sake, or else have worth and value only because it is instrumental in bringing about a desired gratification. In the latter case it loses its value and is no longer pleasurable when it is no longer successful or efficient. More frequently, it is simply not enjoyed at all, but only the goal is enjoyed. This is similar to that attitude toward life which values it less for its own sake than because one goes to Heaven at the end of it. The observation upon which this generalisation is base is that self-actualising people enjoy life in general and in practically all its aspects, while most other people enjoy only stray moments of triumph, of achievement or of climax or peak experience.
Partly this intrinsic validity of living comes from the pleasurableness inherent in growing and in being grown. But also comes from the ability of healthy people to transform means-activity into end-experience, so that even instrumental activity is enjoyed as if it were end activity. 

Deficiency-need gratification tends to be episodic and climactic. The most frequent schema here begins with an instigating, motivating state which sets off motivated behaviour designed to achieve a goal-state, which mounting gradually and steadily in desire and excitement, finally reaches a peak in a moment of success and consummation. From this peak curve of desire, excitement and pleasure fall rapidly to a plateau of quiet tension-release, and lack of motivation.

The schema, though not universally applicable, in any case contrasts very sharply with the situation in growth-motivation, for here, characteristically, there is no climax or consummation, no orgasmic moment, no end-state, even no goal if this be defined climatically. Growth is instead a continued, more or less steady upward or forward development. The more one gets, the more one want, so that this kind of wanting if endless and can never be attained or satisfied.

 

[Toby]

The Wilber Pre-Trans-Fallacy applies also to morality: pre-moral, moral, trans-moral.

[Corte]

Sleepyhead,

This is a great place to be. Just remember that this is but only one of many levels of understanding. You've made progress, but this is not the end and there will never be one. If you begin to feel sadness or dread, it's likely because you are staying put for too long. You were open to becoming this, now remain open for what comes next.

[charlie2dogs]

8 hours ago, sleepyj said:

So recently I have been watching a lot of Leo's videos and taking his messages to heart. I was especially enamored with videos that dealt with how you should feel about other people, like: "How to Stop Caring What Other People Think of You", "Why You Should Stop Moralizing", and "Lifestyle Minimalism". All of these videos seem to propose the concept that a self-actualized being is one who shouldn't need the approval of others and the constant presence of others in their life in order to be happy. This concept appeals to me, but since I have grasped it, I have noticed that I have stopped caring as much about the people in my life (like my parents and friends). Don't get me wrong I am not rude or malicious, I simply seem to not want to spend as much time with them.

It goes much deeper than this though... After watching Leo's videos I am starting to see more and more how people (including myself) are selfish and manipulative in that people (parents, friends, and spouces) all want things from you; maybe not physical things, but other things like emotional satisfaction etc. This leads me to believe that there are no truly good people or deeds in the world. Everyone does everything for some personal, selfish reason. Anyway, this realization has caused me to lose interest in helping the world with my gifts. I purchased Leo's life purpose course, but more and more I am using it to discover what the most fufilling career for me would be, not the career that would benefit the world the most. I have almost no interest in helping the world anymore. I don't want to hurt anyone or anything, but I also don't want to dedicate my life to helping the world. I feel like some of this self-actualization work may cause us to become selfish and even sociopaths (not in a violent way though) in that we will all eventually want to go live in a cabin in the woods focusing on enlightenment, while not give a hoot about the rest of the world and people.

you are making assumptions about things that you know nothing about. self actualization has nothing to do with enlightenment,  your perception of everything you talked about here shows what a warped perception of life that you have.

you said: I feel like some of this self-actualization work may cause us to become selfish and even sociopaths (not in a violent way though) in that we will all eventually want to go live in a cabin in the woods focusing on enlightenment, while not give a hoot about the rest of the world and people.

how would you focus on enlightenment?, what would you do?, why would you focus on something that you think might make you a sociopath?  (most) of the 4000+ on this forum should work at personal growth and forget about enlightenment or self realization as it should be called, because your warped perceptions of it will only create more problems for you in attaining it, if you ever do. most have run from one teacher to another and are still confused why is that?  that is because most of your teachers are not self realized, they just think they are or belief they are, you can believe anything but that dont make it real or true.  most of these so called teachers have only made enlightenment a complex, confusing variations of various practices, philosophies, doctrines, and beliefs, much of it is about making money. most humans could not and would not hear a self realized being to the degree that is needed to achieve enlightenment or self realization,  you will have to give up your way, your thoughts, your beliefs, your programing, and your identity before you will become self realized, most are imprisoned by the programing and false belief system they have created for themselves, and most will remain stuck for a very long time,  yes i know about all the levels, the experiencing life, the paths, the journeys, that are going no place.  There are no levels in enlightenment or self realization, you are, or you aint. most will do what is important to them at the time, and that will be controlled by their programing and false belief system and the desires of their flesh at that moment.

[Mal]

@charlie2dogs @charlie2dogs

Bravo!

I agree. The guy just sounds paranoid..

 

 

[Huz]

@charlie2dogs What are your views on the videos Leo has posted on Enlightenment?

Edited June 20, 2016 by Huz88

[Mal]

@Huz88

Maybe @Leo Gura should do a video on the delusion of altruism?

What do you think?

[charlie2dogs]

7 minutes ago, Huz88 said:

@charlie2dogs What are your thoughts on the videos Leo has posted on Enlightenment?

actually i havent watch many of his video's so i cant really comment.  and your next question might be something like, well what are you doing here, i didnt come here for personal growth, or seeking what i already have. i came to share the reality of my experience as a being of consciousness and the reality of that.  There is nothing to seek, no journeys to follow, no teachers to cling to, no practices to adhere to, its about a state of being of the real you inside of that body that you wear, living life in the moment as the master of your own being.

[Huz]

1 hour ago, Mal said:

@Huz88

Maybe @Leo Gura should do a video on the delusion of altruism?

What do you think?

I think this would be a good topic for him to make because it will make people aware of how they are deceiving themselves from an egoic perspective. The average person who abides to the principle of Altruism does it to make him/her self feel like they have done good. It would be a good video to expose an aspect of how people lie to themselves and others. I have been doing this quite a lot in my life.

Edited June 20, 2016 by Huz88

[Huz]

19 minutes ago, charlie2dogs said:

actually i havent watch many of his video's so i cant really comment.  and your next question might be something like, well what are you doing here, i didnt come here for personal growth, or seeking what i already have. i came to share the reality of my experience as a being of consciousness and the reality of that.  There is nothing to seek, no journeys to follow, no teachers to cling to, no practices to adhere to, its about a state of being of the real you inside of that body that you wear, living life in the moment as the master of your own being.

I wasn't planing of asking that. I am very grateful that you are here. Your advice is helpful for people on the forum. I think Leo's videos can easily fool you into make enlightenment a goal, and your contribution puts things back into perspective.

[Mal]

@Huz88

Yeah, the system I use to conceptualise these phenomena is the "tiers" system. Altruism is a 1st tier perspective that as far as I can see begins at blue when the ego is subjugated in favour of taking a 2nd person perspective or "social" perspective. 

After that, altruism is then internalised and takes on an individual flavour, in that it is no longer a value imposed on one from the outside, but something that one feels called to as part of their internal moral compass.

This is appropriate for these stages, orange exit and green.  Yellow sees the concept of altruism is just a concept and feels altruism is actually a ball and chain around ones neck because altruism taken to extremes can be very marginalising.  

The beauty of ego development through the stages is that if done properly, upon exiting green we have access to altruism as a tool rather than a values system, in order to be able to more effectively speak the language of the first tier paradigms. 

Obviously my description is based on arbitrary symbols, but it's still a handy way of looking at what's going on in the psyche. 

Mal 

[Huz]

@Mal

Interesting. I am familiar with spiral dynamics but nice to see how Altruism can be applied to it.  

Out of curiosity what are your actions that would take yourself from orange through to green through to yellow. How would/did you transcend these stages and what was the most effective for you. If you choose to model your psyche in this manner. This is quite a broad question but I am a beginner in Personal Development and interested on your journey.

Also, I think that Leo should make a video on Skepticism, I see people taking a lot of his principles on blind faith on the forum.

Edited June 20, 2016 by Huz88

[Mal]

@Huz88

Well yes, healthy skepticism comes online at orange, in my view.  I'll draw broad generalisations here for the sake of discussing ego development, but blue just wants somebody else to give it answers, doesn't it? Organised religion is very blue. The problem here is Actualised.org is a Youtube channel first and foremost, so it attracts a lot of us looking for quick fixes, tips and techniques to get some kind of control back, or to feel better, shift a philosophy around to make one feel a little better. Nothing wrong with that and many people stop there. 

We don't really know what causes development through the stages. Integral suggest a cross training system, like I mentioned to you before I have a cognitive practice, a spirit practice and a shadow practice. Add physical practice's to that and we have a better chance of developing faster and more efficiently. 

Although practice's are helpful I believe that the crux of it all is just good old fashioned life experience.  What's not working for us? And a desire to grow. It all starts with trying to find quick techniques, but dont you find that reality has this nasty habit of chipping away at us by reminding us we don't really know anything and that we have to start again with a new strategy?

There's a great description for the Turquoise stage and how it views its life purpose: "Peace in an incomprehensible world"

Seems to suggest that Turquoise is done with fighting the good fight and has just learned the hard way to co-operate with inner and outer reality as it is. 

There's a lot more to it than this, but my advice is just to stick with what you are doing and follow your heart. Go with what resonates until you're done with it. Transcendance happens in those moments where our old ways of coping and evaluation reveal themselves as obsolete and tired. 

P.S. Never let anybody tell you what to do, as in the lifestyle minimalism for example, never let a coach decide for us how to live our lives. If we prefer the rat race then do that until were done. Not that you would, but this is advice for anybody who thinks that Leo or any coach has all the answers.

 

 

 

 

Edited June 20, 2016 by Mal