Do Not Rebuke or Praise
YOUTH: Well, all right. But don’t you see? You haven’t touched on the essential point, that is, the course of progression from the separation of tasks to community feeling. So rst, I separate the tasks. I think of my tasks as being up to this point, and everything beyond that is other people’s tasks. I don’t intervene in other people’s tasks, and I draw a line so that other people won’t intervene in mine. But how can one build interpersonal relations with this separation of tasks and arrive in the end at the community feeling that “it’s okay to be here”? How does Adlerian psychology advise us to overcome the life tasks of work, friendship, and love? It seems like you’re just trying to confuse me with abstract words, without going into any concrete explanation.
PHILOSOPHER: Yes, you’ve hit on the important point. How does carrying out the separating of tasks connect with good relations? That is to say, how does it connect with building the kind of relations in which we cooperate and act in harmony with each other? Which brings us to the concept of “horizontal relationship.”
YOUTH: Horizontal relationship?
PHILOSOPHER: Let’s start with an easily understood example, that of the parent- child relationship. Whether the circumstances are, for example, those of child- rearing, or of training junior sta in the workplace, generally speaking there are two approaches that are considered: one is the method of raising by rebuke, and the other is the method of raising by praise.
YOUTH: Ah. That is a hotly debated issue.
PHILOSOPHER: Which one do you think is the better choice? To rebuke or to praise?
YOUTH: It’s better to raise by praising, of course.
PHILOSOPHER: Why?
YOUTH: Take animal training, for example. When teaching animals to do tricks, you can make them obey with a whip. This is the typical “raising by rebuke” way. On the other hand, it’s also possible to get animals to learn tricks by holding up rewards of food or saying kind words. This is “raising by praise.”
Both ways can lead to the same results—they learn new tricks. But the motivation for moving toward the objective is completely dierent if the animal is doing it because it will be rebuked or doing it because it wants to be praised. In the latter instance, it will come with a feeling of joy. Rebuke only makes the animal wither. But raising with praise naturally allows it to grow strong and healthy. This seems like an obvious conclusion.
PHILOSOPHER: Animal training is an interesting example. Now let’s look at this from the standpoint of Adlerian psychology. In Adlerian psychology, we take the stance that in child-rearing, and in all other forms of communication with other people, one must not praise.
YOUTH: One must not praise?
PHILOSOPHER: Physical punishment is out of the question, of course, and rebuking is not accepted, either. One must not praise, and one must not rebuke.
That is the standpoint of Adlerian psychology.
YOUTH: But how is that even possible?
PHILOSOPHER: Consider the reality of the act of praise. For example, suppose I praised a statement you made by saying, “Good job!” Wouldn’t hearing those
words seem strange somehow?
YOUTH: Yes, I guess it would put me in an unpleasant mood.
PHILOSOPHER: Can you explain why it would feel unpleasant?
YOUTH: What’s unpleasant is the feeling that from the words “Good job!” one is being talked down to.
PHILOSOPHER: Exactly. In the act of praise, there is the aspect of it being “the passing of judgment by a person of ability on a person of no ability.” A mother praises her child who has helped her prepare dinner, saying, “You’re such a good helper!” But when her husband does the same things, you can be sure she won’t be telling him, “You’re such a good helper!”
YOUTH: Ha-ha, you are right about that.
PHILOSOPHER: In other words, the mother who praises the child by saying things like “You’re such a good helper!” or “Good job!” or “Well, aren’t you something!” is unconsciously creating a hierarchical relationship and seeing the child as beneath her. The example of animal training that you just gave is also emblematic of the hierarchical relationship—the vertical relationship—that is behind the praising. When one person praises another, the goal is “to manipulate someone who has less ability than you.” It is not done out of gratitude or respect.
YOUTH: So you’re saying that one praises in order to manipulate?
PHILOSOPHER: That’s right. Whether we praise or rebuke others, the only dierence is one of the carrot or the stick, and the background goal is manipulation. The reason Adlerian psychology is highly critical of reward-and- punishment education is that its intention is to manipulate children.
YOUTH: No way, you’re wrong there. Because think of it from the standpoint of the child. For children, isn’t being praised by their parents the greatest joy of all?
It’s because they want praise that they do their studies. It’s because they want praise that they learn to behave properly. That’s how it was for me when I was a child. How I craved praise from my parents! And even after becoming an adult, it’s been the same way. When your boss praises you, it feels good. That’s how it is for everyone. This has nothing to do with reason—it’s just instinctual emotion!
PHILOSOPHER: One wishes to be praised by someone. Or conversely, one decides to give praise to someone. This is proof that one is seeing all interpersonal relationships as “vertical relationships.” This holds true for you, too: It is because you are living in vertical relationships that you want to be praised. Adlerian psychology refutes all manner of vertical relationships and proposes that all interpersonal relationships be horizontal relationships. In a sense, this point may be regarded as the fundamental principle of Adlerian psychology.
YOUTH: Is this something that is conveyed by the words “equal but not the same”?
PHILOSOPHER: Yes. Equal, that is to say, horizontal. For example, there are men who verbally abuse their wives, who do all the housework, with such remarks as “You’re not bringing in any money, so I don’t want to hear it” or “It’s thanks to me that there’s food on the table.” And I’m sure you’ve heard this one before: “You have everything you need, so what are you complaining about?” It’s perfectly shameful. Such statements of economic superiority or the like have no connection whatsoever to human worth. A company employee and a full-time housewife simply have dierent workplaces and roles, and are truly “equal but not the same.”
YOUTH: I agree entirely.
PHILOSOPHER: They are probably afraid that women will grow wise to their situation and start earning more than men do, and that women will start asserting themselves. They see all interpersonal relations as vertical relationships, and they are afraid of being seen by women as beneath them. That is to say, they have intense, hidden feelings of inferiority.
YOUTH: So in a sense, they are getting into a superiority complex in which they are trying to make a show of their abilities?
PHILOSOPHER: So it seems. In the rst place, the feeling of inferiority is an awareness that arises within vertical relationships. If one can build horizontal relationships that are “equal but not the same” for all people, there will no longer be any room for inferiority complexes to emerge.
YOUTH: Hmm. Maybe I do have an awareness of manipulation somewhere in my psyche when I go about praising other people. Laying on the attery to get in good favor with my boss—that’s denitely manipulation, isn’t it? And it’s the other way around, too. I’ve been manipulated by being praised by others. Funny, I guess that’s just the sort of person I am!
PHILOSOPHER: Yes, in the sense that you have not been able to break out of vertical relationships, it would seem so.
YOUTH: This is getting interesting! Please go on!
