Why People Can Change
YOUTH: First, let’s plan the points of discussion. You say people can change.
Then you take it a step further, saying that everyone can nd happiness.
PHILOSOPHER: Yes, everyone, without exception.
YOUTH: Let’s save the discussion about happiness for later and address change rst. Everyone wishes they could change. I know I do, and I’m sure anyone you might stop and ask on the street would agree. But why does everyone feel they want to change? There’s only one answer: because they cannot change. If it were easy for people to change, they wouldn’t spend so much time wishing they could. No matter how much they wish it, people cannot change. And that’s why there are always so many people getting taken in by new religions and dubious self-help seminars and any preaching on how everyone can change. Am I wrong?
PHILOSOPHER: Well, in response, I’d ask why you are so adamant that people can’t change.
YOUTH: Here’s why. I have a friend, a guy, who has shut himself in his room for several years. He wishes he could go out and even thinks he’d like to have a job, if possible. So he wants to change the way he is. I say this as his friend, but I assure you he is a very serious person who could be of great use to society. Except that he’s afraid to leave his room. If he takes even a single step outside, he suers palpitations, and his arms and legs shake. It’s a kind of neurosis or panic, I suppose. He wants to change, but he can’t.
PHILOSOPHER: What do you think the reason is that he can’t go out?
YOUTH: I’m not really sure. It could be because of his relationship with his parents, or because he was bullied at school or work. He might have experienced a kind of trauma from something like that. But then, it could be the opposite— maybe he was too pampered as a child and can’t face reality. I just don’t know, and I can’t pry into his past or his family situation.
PHILOSOPHER: So you are saying there were incidents in your friend’s past that became the cause of trauma, or something similar, and as a result he can’t go out anymore?
YOUTH: Of course. Before an eect, there’s a cause. There is nothing mysterious about that.
PHILOSOPHER: Then perhaps the cause of his not being able to go out anymore lies in the home environment during his childhood. He was abused by his parents and reached adulthood without ever feeling love. That’s why he’s afraid of interacting with people and why he can’t go out. It’s feasible, isn’t it?
YOUTH: Yes, it’s entirely feasible. I’d imagine that would be really challenging.
PHILOSOPHER: And then you say, “Before an eect, there’s a cause.” Or, in other words, who I am now (the eect) is determined by occurrences in the past (the causes). Do I understand correctly?
YOUTH: You do.
PHILOSOPHER: So if the here and now of everyone in the world is due to their past incidents, according to you, wouldn’t things turn out very strangely? Don’t you see? Everyone who has grown up abused by his or her parents would have to suer the same eects as your friend and become a recluse, or the whole idea just doesn’t hold water. That is, if the past actually determines the present, and the causes control the eects.
YOUTH: What, exactly, are you getting at?
PHILOSOPHER: If we focus only on past causes and try to explain things solely through cause and eect, we end up with “determinism.” Because what this says is that our present and our future have already been decided by past occurrences, and are unalterable. Am I wrong?
YOUTH: So you’re saying that the past doesn’t matter?
PHILOSOPHER: Yes, that is the standpoint of Adlerian psychology.
YOUTH: I see. The points of conict seem a bit clearer. But look, if we go by your version, wouldn’t that ultimately mean that there’s no reason my friend can’t go out anymore? Because you’re saying that past incidents don’t matter. I’m sorry, but that’s completely out of the question. There has to be some reason behind his seclusion. There has to be, or there’d be no explanation!
PHILOSOPHER: Indeed, there would be no explanation. So in Adlerian psychology, we do not think about past “causes” but rather about present “goals.”
YOUTH: Present goals?
PHILOSOPHER: Your friend is insecure, so he can’t go out. Think about it the other way around. He doesn’t want to go out, so he’s creating a state of anxiety.
YOUTH: Huh?
PHILOSOPHER: Think about it this way. Your friend had the goal of not going out beforehand, and he’s been manufacturing a state of anxiety and fear as a means to achieve that goal. In Adlerian psychology, this is called “teleology.”
YOUTH: You’re joking! My friend has imagined his anxiety and fear? So would you go so far as saying that my friend is just pretending to be sick?
PHILOSOPHER: He is not pretending to be sick. The anxiety and fear your friend is feeling are real. On occasion, he might also suer from migraines and violent
stomach cramps. However, these too are symptoms that he has created in order to achieve the goal of not going out.
YOUTH: That’s not true! No way! That’s too depressing!
PHILOSOPHER: No. This is the dierence between etiology (the study of causation) and teleology (the study of the purpose of a given phenomenon, rather than its cause). Everything you have been telling me is based in etiology.
As long as we stay in etiology, we will not take a single step forward.
