Wednesday, 19 July 2017 18:20

To be human is to be aware of human insignificance and seek significance

Written by 


Human beings have pondered and written tons of literature on human nature; many of these cogitations are good reading and if one has not read some of them one ought to do so. Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibnitz, Hobbes, Locke, Hume, Berkeley, Kant, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, James, Bergson, Sartre, Jasper, Heidegger, Freud, Adler, Jung, Buddha, Shankara, Ramanujan and others are a good way to appreciate serious thinkers' perspectives on human nature.

In this piece, I will, building on my personal experience and observation of people, add my perception of what it means to be a human being.

I have observed myself in every possible way a human being can observe himself and since the only person one knows best is me, I will root most of this writing on self-observation.

I have also observed other human beings, black, white, oriental, men and women and children, and I have done so in many corners of the world.

No one really can get into the heads of other people to know what they are thinking so one cannot really say for sure what people's motivations are; even when one asks them to tall one why they do what they do one finds out that many people do not pay attention to trying to understand who they are and why they do what they do; many people merely proffer spurious answers and or answers calculated to present them in a positive light; thus, what they tell one is why they do what they do may not be true.

As noted, the human being I can speak for is me; therefore, I will largely draw from my self-perception in this paper; how I see me is how I see other human beings; if you believe that my generalization is wrong the onus lies with you to provide us with a corrective perception of human beings.

And while we are at it, let it be observed that all perception is wrong; we do not know what the ultimate truth is. Despite the grandstanding of arrogant psychologists and scientists the fact is that we really do not know what the truth is; certainly, we do not know who human beings are although we must conjecture.

The ultimate truth of who we are remains unknown to us, certainly to me; all I can do and all that you can do is speculate on our nature; the day we pretend to know who we are, while still on earth, is the day we become psychotic.

I am tempted to clog this paper with references to scholarly articles but have decided to not do so; the thesis of the paper represents my thinking, thinking obviously contributed to by a lot of people. Make the thesis of the paper what you like. Following the conclusion, I will add a list further reading.


In my perception, what is driving human beings are mostly three fold: first, is a deep rooted awareness that as animal creatures they are born and will die, decay and seem to disappear into nothingness; this gives people a sense of worthlessness. Second, is the desire to seem to have worth? Third, is the desire to understand and adapt to their world.

I personally feel worthless and think that you, too, do; however, the feeling of worthlessness may be unconscious in some persons.

The feeling of existential worthlessness is intolerable to me and to the human psyche; therefore, it is rejected, denied and the pursuit of worth is posited and pursued.

Everywhere in the world, people, be they black or white or oriental, pursue worth, significance, and importance; those pursuits translate to pursuit of power for power is used to give one's self a sense of worth.

The pursuit of worth is so deep rooted in people that they often use it to completely drive out of their consciousness the feeling of worthlessness that is in them.

Consider the pharaohs of ancient Egypt building pyramids. Why did they do it? I do not know why they did it and you do not know why they did it and they themselves may not even know why they did it.

A reasonable conjecture as to why they built those magnificent structures, not to live in them but to preserve their dead bodies, is to make them last forever and ever; they did not want their bodies decayed; they used all kinds of chemicals to mummify their bodies so that they would not decay before placing them in the pyramids. Their intention is to defy death and live forever in body.

This behavior eradicates, magically, at least, their consciousness that as bodies that would die and decay that they are nothing; they used the magical belief that now that their bodies are preserved in temples that supposedly would last infinitely that they are deathless; they would no longer decay.

Alas, the pyramids were built with rocks, that is, sand and at best lasts several thousand years before returning to sand.

The earth is composed of sand (for now forget about elaborate chemistry and physics) and every structure on it eventually returns to sand.

Mummified bodies may last a few thousand years but, ultimately, will return to sand and to the implication of that reality, human nothingness.

Human beings are animals that are acutely aware that they have no intrinsic worth and are nothing and they compulsively seek worth.


If you are a shrewd observer of people you already know that deep down they feel worthless but desire worth.

If you want to manipulate people then tell them what they want to hear; tell them that they have worth and are important (you could use other synonyms like beautiful, handsome, rich, powerful, and athletic and superior to their neighbors). If you tell people that they have worth and are very important persons, VIPs they are more likely to listen to you and do what you asked them to do than if you told them that they have no worth and are nothing.  Try it, praise those around you and see if they would not like you and do as you asked them to do.

What do you think that Adolf Hitler did?  The man was a shrewd observer of people. In his book, Mein Kampf (1925), he noted that Germans, as a result of losing the first world war and present dire economic and other issues, felt inadequate vis a vis the victors, the French and English. He said that if he told them, Germans, that the war was lost not because of their fault but because Jews caused it and, more importantly, that if he told them that they are a superior people, certainly superior to their Slavic eastern neighbors (for it was kind of difficult to tell them that they are superior to the English and French since those, too, are Germans), that they would feel good about themselves and as a result accept and follow him as their leader.

Thus, the man deliberately told his people several lies: that Jews cost them the First World War and that they are superior to other people, especially superior to Slavic and African peoples. As expected, his people accepted his lies and accepted him as their leader.

However, like all governing based on lies the Third Reich had to collapse thus twelve years later the Third Reich collapsed.

By the same token, the American political system which was built on the lie of white superiority to black folks is, before our eyes, collapsing; the monstrosity called the USA will be replaced by a rational human polity that accepted the truth of human sameness and equality.

The USA is going to be the last world empire based on lies; I am here to state the truth, as much as is possible, so that future empires are based on the truth of human equality.

In basing empires on the truth of human equality future empires would last longer than the few hundred years empires based on lies last (Rome lasted 500 years and so were many other lie based empires).

Can the USA last five hundred years before declining, falling and disappearing into the midst of history? It cannot if its present insistence on being amoral and unjust persists.


Human beings pursuit of what we call civilization is predicated on their pursuit of worth.  The basis of human civilization is the desire for individual, social and existential worth.

If people stopped seeking worth they would no longer have the type of civilization we currently know them to have.


Human beings pursuit of religions and religions' gods are predicated on their pursuit of worth. Even when people die they want to have worth in their supposed hereafter life.

Religion and philosophy is largely motivated by desire to find after death life that defies the apparent empirical observation that life in body seems to end in our physical death.  When human beings die they continue seeking worth (through those still alive on earth).

If in doubt go to a cemetery and see the money lavished on building tombs over the buried bodies under them. The bodies have long ego decayed and or eaten by worms but their  living relatives somehow imagine that they are still living in the structures they built to house them.

I have already talked about pyramids as monuments to human vanity.  What people do, build mausoleums over their dead, seem stupid but we must remember that it is the drive for worth that kept them alive and without it they would not be alive doing what they do to make their social accomplishments possible.

Without the desire for worth people would be depressed by the conditions of living: future death, and perhaps give up and commit suicide and get it over with. It is the possible attainment of worth that keep people struggling along to attain it, even though it seems a chimera, a fantasy!


People want to make sure that their selves have worth in this life and in the world that supposedly exists after their physical bodies are dead.

Everywhere you find people they presume to have selves. But what exactly is the self that people think that they have?

To the best of my knowledge we do not have a sense self-prior to our birth on earth; at least, I do not recall having a sense of self before I was born on earth.

Most children learn their sense of self. To avoid making unverifiable statements I will rely on my own experience.

I had no sense of self before I was born; whatever sense of self I have must have been learned on earth. Indeed, I do not recall having a sense of self until about age five (kindergarten year).

At age six, the year I began elementary schooling, I became aware of whom I think that I am. That sense of self is clearly the product of my bodily and social experience. The sense of self that I have is a byproduct of my living on earth; it did not come to earth with me.


What I know for certain is that at age six I became aware of having a self.   I developed a sense of self, a sense of me, a self-concept and a human personality.

Empirical observation shows me that my self-concept, personality, ego or whatever we want to call it is rooted in my inherited body and how that body interacted with its physical and social environment.  The result of that interaction is what I call myself, my personality and behavior pattern.

Right now, I am not in a speculative mood. I am in the mood for pure empiricism, pure observation of phenomena as I see it knowing that observation alone does not necessarily yield the truth to me. I still do not know what the truth is; neither do you or any other person know what the truth is.

I am, therefore, going to assert that the self that I know about is the product of my inherited body and how that body experienced itself in this world of matter, space and time and society.  Ultimately, what the human self is I really do not know.

Some say that our real self is spirit but that raises the question of what spirit is. Spirit is supposed to be that which is outside the human body and lives forever and ever. I can conceptualize spirit but do I have evidence for its existence?  I do not; so let us move on with what we can currently verify.


Here is the etiology of my personality, as I understand it.  I was born with a very problematic body. I inherited a serious mitochondria disorder, cytochrome c oxidase deficiency; I also inherited spondylolysis of the fifth lumber vertebra and mitral valve prolapse in the heart.

These medical disorders made my body feel unable to adapt to the exigencies of the physical world we live in.

My body felt traumatized and overstressed by the activities of daily living; if I described for you my bodily experiences you would not understand what I am talking about; indeed, it may seem fictional to you.

For example, suppose I tell you that I could be sitting down and out of the blues my entire body would start feeling burning sensation, as if it is literally being roasted on fire, can you grasp that? Let us not go there for the average human being, not even medical doctors know a thing about human beings with unique bodies. The good of it is that some such persons have IQ levels that are out of this world.

My medical issues robbed me of all sense of worth and importance. By age six I felt totally worthless and insignificant.

In Alfred Adler's psychological terms (1965), I felt totally inferior because I was unable to do what other kids do to adapt to their world. I was no good at sports; merely running around our school's soccer field exhausted me and made me paint like my heart is about to fall out of its chest cavity. I was unable to do any kind of physical activity. Indeed, upon eating food I was in such stomach discomfort and agony that I had to go lie down for a couple of hours to recuperate some physical energy.

Naturally, given who human beings are, I did not sit around feeling pity for me. I reacted with Adler's conception of neurotic superiority.

In Adlerian psychological categories I became a neurotic child. Diagnostically, at age six any clinical psychologist would say that I had a combination of dependent, avoidant, obsessive-compulsive and passive aggressive personality disorders; those are the definition of neurosis. In lay man's terms I was a shy kid with fear, anxiety and anger issues.

In this paper, however, I am not talking Adlerian psychology or psychiatry; those are child level approaches to human nature; I am trying to say something that spurious Western psychologists ignore while annoying folks like me with their almost silly rendition of human nature.

Psychology is nothing but philosophy studying human nature.

My medical issues robbed me of all sense of worth. I reacted with pursuit of worth. All through my life I have been seeking worth and significance.

In childhood I posited what Karen Horney (1950) would call ideal self and pursued it. The ideal self is a wished for self, not one's real self; in my case, my real physical self is crummy so I pursued becoming an imaginary mentally constructed physically healthy self; in Adlerian terms, a self that is powerful and famous.

Having posited the desire for worth and significance I became acutely aware of how other people treated me.

At elementary school I was aware of how other children treated me. Naturally, if they liked and respected me I got along with them but if they seemed to not like me or treated me without respect I felt annoyed at them. Generally, I did what shy children do.

The anxious, shy child is aware of his deficiencies; he feels that as he is he is not good enough and believes that if other children/people come close to him that they would see that he is not good enough and reject him.

As Carl Rogers (1947) pointed out, normal society tends to accept children conditionally; people accept you if you are deemed well enough by their standards otherwise they ignore or reject you.

The shy kid does not want to be rejected. Around people he feels anxious from the fear of potential social rejection. To avoid social rejection the shy kid withdraws from other children/ people and keeps to his self while wishing for other kids to take the initiative and come relate to him, play with him. Generally, other kids do not come to him so he ends up with one or a few friends, those who would not reject him.

I was a shy, anxious kid. People often took my seeming passivity as docility until they did something that made me mad.  As a child the worst mistake you would make is to treat me as if I had no worth. Even though I am generally shy and avoided people to avoid them rejecting me but if in actual fact you treated me with disregard the aggressive part of me came out. I would, right there, ask you who the hell you believed yourself to be to treat me without respect; I would ask you who gave you the right to treat me as a worthless being.  If you did not desist from doing whatever you were doing that I believed was demeaning I would physically attack you and do so to kill you.

Your death would not bother me, not even a little bit. I want you to literally die and disappear from existence rather than for you to treat me as having no worth.

Your treating me as if I have no worth takes me back to my existential sense of worthlessness; that feeling is always in my unconscious mind (I do not like the term unconscious and certainly do not use the term as Sigmund Freud, that great myth maker used it to mean the repository of irrational ID sexual wishes, see the completed words of Sigmund Freud).

You have not seen an angry boy until you saw me at age nine reacting to a person I believed treated me without respect.

At age nine, a teacher at my school tried to flog me and I told him to not even think about it; my parents did not use capital punishment to train us; I do not recall even once seeing my father and mother touch any of their children abusively; I grew up knowing that no one has a right to abuse a child; anyway, I told the teacher that no human being is allowed to touch my body without my permission. He persisted and I hit him with the intention of killing him; he actually reeled and fell down and got angry at me.  He got several boys to try holding me as he tried to flog me.  I went after the entire school building destroying everything in sight. The entire school building must be destroyed was my goal rather than permit a human being to abuse me.

The school authorities had to go get my grandmother, the only woman on planet earth who understood the correlation of my pained body and my behavior and loved me in an unconditionally positive manner; I thank the gods that I was blessed with such a wise woman around me.

All that my grandmother had to do is say, Tom, don't do that and I immediately obeyed her; children listen to whoever first loves them but if you do not first love them and try to tell them what to do the oppositional defiance in them comes to the fore. Well, grandmother took me home and eventually worked to get the teacher reassigned from my class.

The point here is that the exigencies of my body made me feel totally worthless.  I believe that this is what all human beings are like. Existence makes us feel worthless and we seek imaginary worth. Human existence and civilization is pursuit of imaginary worth. Imaginary or not that is what it means to be human beings.

In my teenage years I was furious at what folks call God. Here is why. My physical issues made me feel like there is no god out there taking good care of me. I did not feel that there is a loving god-father looking after my interests.

I felt that I and other people are abandoned in the universe; we are here taking care of ourselves and no external force was interested in helping us.

I used to feel so angry at any one who dared to even mention the word God around me. Before you would be done saying God I would say: fuck you and your goddamned God. Where is that freaking god of yours when I am in pain? If there is god he ought to reduce my pain; in the first place, he should not have created me with free floating pain.


I felt totally like an orphan abandoned by an uncaring universe.  My sense of being an orphan was compounded by my father's decision to send me to go live with his own parents (so as to learn their Igbo language).  I felt that even my parents have abandoned me and until they died I did not reconcile with them.  I used to say to my father: you abandoned me and therefore is not my real father. Get the hell out of my face. I had little or no respect for the man!

In retrospect, however, I learned that it was not my father that abandoned me; it was nature itself that abandoned me, although father contributed to my sense of abandonment by sending me to go live with his parents for three years.

As I reflect on it, since father inherited my tortured body, he, too, felt abandoned by existence, by the uncaring universe we live in.

Empirical observation shows that what was done to us we tend to do to our children. The universe abandoned my father and he emotionally abandoned me. I did the same to my own children when upon divorce I was so angry at their mother that I disappeared from their lives.

The woman tried to use the American racist judicial system to control me. I simply cannot accept a racist judge telling me what to do, so I decided to disregard what the pompous white judge said and walked out of the court room and out of the lives of my three children.  In effect, I left them to emotionally fend for themselves.

What I did is tantamount to abandoning them and making them feel like orphans in this universe. This is unfair to them. I shouldn't have done that to them but the fact is that I did and I am sorry. The only rationalization I had was my disgust at their mother taking me to a white judge to preside over their fate.

How dare she take me to a white judge, a criminal that exists to send black people to jails and prisons, who gave the ape pretending to be a judge the right to make pronouncements about my children; since when has white folks showed concern over black folks?

I simply refused to allow a criminal in a so-called judicial position, a white man, to tell me what to do. No white man, judge or not, given racism has the right to say a word, good or bad, over the fate of black children; his racism has automatically disqualified him from interfering in black families.

If black children are at issue only those who care for black folks, black judges, should preside over such matters; as far as I am concerned, a white judge, given what white judges in America represent, those who make sure that the racist system operate, those who use their sociopathic laws to enslave black folks and control them to the present, well, in my book, no white man, judge or not, has the right to say anything about my children.

Thus, seeing the bloated and self-admiring narcissistic coxcomb called a white judge in the court supposedly to decide my children's fate, I walked away. I have never really forgiven my ex-wife for exposing me to the devil that white judges represent for black folks.

I made a mistake; I should have found a way to be involved with my children and overlooked the insult that white judges represent for black men.

The white political system exists to destroy black families; they make the children grow up fatherless hence undisciplined and engage in petty crimes and get arrested and jailed.

In fact, if I had known what I now know I do not think that I would bring a child into this amoral world. This world does not deserve even one child to come to it to suffer the sense of abandonment that is reposed in people's psyches.

The universe ought to not have people in it, the pessimistic German idealistic philosopher, Arthur Schopenhauer, said, and I agree with him.

At age fourteen I rejected God, for to me if there is God he ought to have mercy on us, his supposed creation; but he does not have mercy on us and leaves us to suffer; he ignores us and therefore must not exist.

As I saw it, god was a make belief thing; God was made up by our ancestors; they imagined that he existed to take care of them in an uncaring universe.

You and your god must not be in my space, was my attitude during my adolescent years. Just get the hell out of here and don't ever let me hear you talk about God.

And don't ask me to read the bible, either, for, as a precocious kid, I read the bible several times, from cover to cover, all sixty six books of it and they did not make sense to me.

If God existed he would have made us special but the fact is that we are not special at all. We are like other biological organisms. Nature destroys us at will.

Earthquakes, volcanoes, hurricanes, tsunamis, tornadoes, floods, draughts, diseases caused by bacteria, virus and fungi destroy us as they destroy animals and plants.

We are not special; we are nothing; we do not have worth and are futilely seeking it, imagining that we have it when we do not have it.


All I have done with my life is seek worth and importance. I want the people around me to treat me as if I have worth and importance.

For example, when I was a kid and was told to go stay on the line to be served by whoever is serving us and I was kept waiting on the line for an extended period of time before been served I became angry.  In my head I would be saying things like this: who the hell is that fellow keeping me waiting on the line for this long; he or she ought to hurry up and do for me what am there to have done for me.

I do not care who it is that kept me waiting. You could be the president of the USA or the world and it would not make any difference to me; what mattered is that you have kept me waiting for too long.

At the rational level, of course, I understand the need to be treated in an orderly manner hence the que, but that is not the issue in me; the issue for me is that to be kept waiting and not served immediately makes me feel unimportant and worthless and I reacted to that sense of unimportance with anger, with wish to assert power that I do not have.

Anything that made me feel belittled, degraded, humiliated and degraded made me angry. You simply do not want to degrade me for if you do your death would be the lesser punishment I would like to inflict on you.

I am using my situation to make the point that human beings feel worthless and compensate with desire for worth and tend to like it when you treat them as if they have worth and if you treat them as if they do not have worth they feel angry at you.


I believe that the greatest sin of racism is treating black folks as if they have no worth. This sin may not be fully appreciated but if history is any guide black people will destroy Western civilization because of that sin.

Black folks feel humiliation by the white man. At present white folks are impressed with what they think are their scientific and technological power and imagine that they can get away with continued abuse of black folks. But we do study history and know that empires rise and fall; empires are like soldiers, they come and go.

The rule of the white man can hardly last another two hundred years before other groups take over the lead of world civilization.

Already, Asians, especially the Chinese seem poised to take over the lead of the world.  The real issue here, however, is that black folk's desire for worth was attacked and denied by white folks.

White folks, in their own pursuit of imaginary worth, found it necessary to stress the worthlessness of black folks! This is an existential sin. It is a sin that cannot be easily forgiven.

In the language of the Catholic Church, it is a mortal sin; a sin against the Holy Spirt, for it cuts so deep that folks do not ever forgive it.

People already feel worthless and seek chimeric worth and you compound it by telling them that they are worthless just so you shore up your own imaginary worth.

What is white flesh but human flesh that is going to die and smell worse than feces; what makes that putrid flesh better than black flesh? Imaginary self-conferred worth; that is what!

All human beings feel worthless and seek imaginary worth; if you deny them worth something in them wants you dead.

I am building on my own experience. I know that I feel like I have no worth and would like to have worth.  I know that the desired worth is imaginary and not real but that is my life.

If in relating to you, you treat me as if I have worth I generally get along with you but if you treat me as if I have no worth I want you dead, literally, not figuratively.

When I first encountered racism and realized that white folks see Africans as inferior I immediately resolved that all white folks must die! The death of all white folks was required to assuage my diminished sense of worth from racism.

Naturally, I am aware that in the contemporary world, white folks possess most of the power in the world so I had to reconcile myself to waiting for their future death. But die they must. Their disappearance from existence is required to make my pride and vanity feel assuaged.

Many White racists assume that just because they are in power that black folks see them as the gods they would like to be seen as. That belief could not be further from the truth.

The moment you treat a human being as if he has no worth you have ceased having worth in his eyes! At best, he can fear you.

Clearly, white sociopaths have power and control the extant world and many black folks fear their power but fear is not love and respect.

No black person respects white racists. In fact, to black people racists are less than human beings. I know that to me a white racist, be he the current racist clown in the White House called Donald Trump or the racist stiff on the job that fancies his race superior to black folks, has worth in my eyes.

However, the rational part of me no longer wishes racists dead but wants to re-socialize them and transform them from Neanderthals to real human beings hence my writings; my writing is aimed at correcting the wrong philosophy given to the world by the white man; my goal is to change the world's philosophies, for the ones given to it by Europeans are simply wrong and generate social conflict.

I am using my personal experience to articulate larger human issues. I am saying that given human desire for worth that it serves you best to treat all people as if they have worth even if you know that that worth is a chimera than to treat them as if they have no worth.


White racists are generally anti-social personality disordered folks, sociopaths and psychopaths. They are sadistic persons who derive pleasure from inflicting pain on people; they enjoy degrading people.

The psychopath is aware that deep down he feels worthless and that he wants to have worth; he also knows that other people are like him but instead of trying to treat peoples as if they have worth he sets out to degrade them. He wrongly believes that in degrading people he makes himself feel upgraded.

He verbally tells people that they are worthless and treats them as such.  The people he subjects to this degrading treatment feel angry at him. Generally, people band together and arrest, try and jail or kill the sociopath.

All over the world society builds prisons for criminals, that is, for antisocial personalities who do not respect other human beings desire for imaginary worth.

The fate of the psychopath in society is death.  Treat people as if they have no worth and they will kill you. Treat people as if they have worth, even though they don't, you reinforce their aspiration to have worth and they would like and get along with you.

As noted, when I was in elementary school if you treated me as if I had no worth I would literally try to kill you and not feel guilt from doing so! How dare you treat me as if I have no worth when I am already feeling worthless and would like to have worth?

I understand that every trait found in human beings is exaggerated in some. The desire for worth is not even conscious in many people.

Many of those we call normal folks are seldom consciously aware that they are seeking worth.  I am conscious of the fact that I am seeking worth.

I am aware that all people are doing what I am doing, feel worthless and seek worth. Thus, I treat people with total respect; I treat every man, woman and child, black or white I come across as if he or she has total worth; I give every person respect because I want him to give me respect.

I know that what I am doing is make- belief, for I also know that people have no worth. How so? If you want to, at any moment, you can kill me; all you need to do is go buy a gun and pump a few bullets into my head and I would be dead. I can also do the same to you.

If I or you had worth we would not be able to destroy each other's life. Because we can destroy each other's life, therefore, it is self-evident that we have no existential worth. Worth is a social construct, not an existential reality.

Be that as it may, we wish worth so in my rational frame of mind I treat you as if you have worth. If, perchance, I made the mistake of not treating you as if you have worth generally I apologize for it.

For example, when I was a young man and finally tried sex and recognized that it is much ado about nothing, that it is a ridiculous animal activity that I would rather not engage in, I would rather go read philosophy than have sex, well, upon trying sex with women I concluded that sex is a filthy act and associated that filthy act with women. I lost respect for women (please before you delude yourself remember that what I am talking about here is generally what happens to men upon having sex with women; men do not have respect for women for they see the filthiness of sex as arising from women's filthy vaginas).

Upon seeing, a woman I would say: she is a filthy cunt; get the hell out of my site; women were a distraction that I could not afford; what interested me was the world of ideas; just give me Plato, Aristotle, Zeno, Horace, Ovid, Seneca, Epictetus, Descartes, Spinoza, Pascal, Leibnitz Locke, Hobbes, Locke, Hume, Berkeley, Kant, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Feuerbach, James, Bergson etc. and I am happy.

I had no respect for women (I used to ask: can a woman be a philosopher?). However, in time I corrected that behavior for if women have no worth men have no worth; the only way a human being can have respect is if all of us have it.

Even if there is no existential worth that I can see with my eyes, I choose to see all people as having worth.

I am aware that some persons, such as dictators, choose to see people as worthless and from that stand point kill them.

Adolf Hitler chose to see people as worthless and thus killing people made no difference to him; he did not lose sleep from gassing millions of Jews and Slavic persons to death. That was what made him a sociopath and psychopath.

I choose to see all people as having worth even though I understand that worth and dignity are social constructs rather than an existential fact.

What is hidden in the many is conscious in folks like me; the many do not know that they are always seeking worth but their lives are consumed by it.


All mental disorders emanate from positing an idea of who you and people ought to become and trying to make you and people become that idea, trying to fit your and other peoples realities to your presupposition of who you and people ought to be.

You and people are not who you ought to be but who you are and who you are you do not know so let who you are unfold in your life without telling it how it ought to be.

The mistake of the Christian Church and other religious ideologies is positing manmade pictures of how people ought to behave and trying to browbeat people into becoming those imaginary pictures of humanity.

We do not know who people are so let them just unfold who they are without a preconception of who they are and ought to be.

Building on Quantum physics, we know that the observer affects what he observes; you as the observer make a choice as to what you want reality, including you and people, to be and try to get reality to become that wished for view of it and your wishes do color the reality you see, which is not the actual reality.  There is a deeper reality that is beyond what the observer wants it to be and what that reality is we do not know.

Keep your mind open without presuppositions as to who you are, who other people are and how you and people ought to be and behave and how the world ought to be and simply accept things as they unfold.


When I was in school the prospect of not making a perfect grade made me so anxious that I often skipped school on examination days. I simply did not like not doing well at school. I wanted to be the top boy at my class. However, I was never the top student at any of my classes at school.

At my elementary school there were usually about thirty pupils in a class. At the end of every quarter all the pupils would be examined, graded and plotted from first to the 30thand the positions would be posted on the door of the classroom so that we all knew the position each kid had in the examination.

The best position I made was second out of thirty.  Being second to someone else was unacceptable to me. I felt diminished in size by not being the top kid.

Learning is affected by desire for worth. A kid could be very smart, even have superior intelligence (any IQ over 132) and still not do well at school. One of the reasons could be because he fears making mistakes; the prospect of failing arouses so much anxiety in him that he prefers to reduce that anxiety by avoiding learning. He may drop out of school to avoid failing, and or for not been the top student.

It is useful to have good Intelligence but what really matters most is the student's sense of worth. If you give the student a sense of worth he relaxes and learns at his optimal level but if you treat him as worthless he becomes oppositional and may drop out of school.

American schools treat black students as if they have no worth and the kids react by either dropping out of school or not caring for schooling. Thus, there came to be the absurd belief that black students are less intelligent than white students. This is nonsense and, as such, is not even worth a response to.

All students are the same and coequal. Of course, some students are smarter than others but the fact is that the average student is the average student regardless of his race.

Learning is affected by the pursuit of worth so if we want students to learn we must make them feel worthwhile.

We can help those students who feel inordinate sense of worthlessness and seek unrealistic worth to accept the reality of being a human being, lack of intrinsic worth; each of us must accept a certain level of worthlessness, for in the final analysis human beings have no existential worth; worth is a social construct not a self-evident reality.


In the adult world not having money makes people feel worthless; that certainly is my case; if I do not have money I feel small.  I do not like to be poor and certainly do not like to beg other people for money.

The idea of asking folks for financial help makes me feel like I am garbage; I avoid that feeling by even starving rather than asking for help. I would rather maintain the fiction that I have worth than beg for other folks to help me.

When in graduate school I contemplated academic career I shuddered at doing what professors do: write for grants, that is, beg those who have money to give them money with which they do their research. A professor would boast about how much money he obtained to do his research; if he got millions he felt on top of the world.

The act of asking another person or organization to give me money to do research with was unacceptable to me. I would rather give myself that money (but how?)!


Human beings everywhere seek worth. If in doubt go to Nigeria and see the desire for worth at its craziest level.

A Nigerian with any kind of education wants you to know it. If he is an engineer or architect or whatever he wants you to call him by his professional status: Engineer Okonkwo,  Architect Okorocha, Mathematician  Chike Obi,  Lawyer Njoku and so on. You dare not call his name without affixing his professional title.

If he is a professor you must refer to him as professor or else he feels diminished by you. If he has no academic titles he goes to his village and gives the rustic villagers' money and they give him the title of chief. Thereafter, he masquerades around as chief Big Stuff.

Some Nigerians go to the ridiculous length of having you call them "Chief, Professor Dr. Vice Chancellor" (of a Mickey Mouse University).

In the West, folks do the same thing but in a more subtle manner? Come to the universities and see the professors struggling to come up with novel discoveries in science so as to win the Nobel Prize in physics, chemistry, biology etc. It is all pursuit of worth done differently.  People are always seeking worth.

Much of human behavior is rooted in the pursuit of worth; this pursuit of worth is rooted in human beings  perception that their lives in body is worthless and their compensatory desire to overcome that sense of worthlessness by doing what seems to give them worth.


In addition to their obsessive-compulsive seeking of worth (with which to mask their worthlessness), human beings are motivated to understand their world.

Clearly, there is intelligence in people; at their best people use the intelligence in them to study their physical, social and psychological worlds.

People are motivated to understand themselves and their universe and do so in an objective manner.

The pursuit of science is inherent in human nature. The pursuit of technology, doing what enables people to adapt to their world, is also inherent in human nature.

Man is at his best when he is pursuing knowledge. When I am trying to understand an aspect of nature, man including, I can do so for hours and in doing so lose my sense of self.

When I lose my sense of self while doing something I am in the only heaven that I know of. To me, heaven is when I do not have a sense of ego separated self; heaven is when an undifferentiated life force that manifests through me is trying to understand the world it lives in.

Bliss, that is, peace and happiness, I believe, lies in trying to understand something as objectively as is humanly possible without taking credit for what one understands.

I struggle to know the truth and then give my finding a way to folks (I am sure that many a bright graduate student has used ideas he borrowed from me to write his masters and or doctoral dissertations without even acknowledging where he got them. And that is fine with me; he and I are part of one life force so each of us is giving to the other and taking from the other).

My perception shows me that people pursue worth and use their minds to understand their world. You cannot prevent them from doing these two things.

You cannot stop people from seeking worth and power for if they did not do so they would have no motivation to strive for what human beings call success and would soon die.


I have observed myself very closely; what I see is that I have one problem. My one problem is my belief that I have a self and my desire for that self to have worth. At about age six I became aware that I have a self and I wanted that self to be powerful.

I did not sit  down and consciously come up with that self; all I know is that gradually, presumably from the moment I was born, a self-concept  developed inside me and by age six it became concretized as who I think that I am.

My rational analysis of the origin of that self tells me that it is rooted in my body and social experience.

In George Kelly's (1958) categories, something in me took the interaction of my body and society to construct a self-concept for me.

My self-concept is the product of my body and society; it is a result of my behaviors and learning beginning from when I was born and did not develop over night or in one day.

My problematic body interacted with its physical and social environments and was at pain most of the time; it observed how other people related to it and came to the conclusion of who it thinks that I am.

My self-concept, my personality and my ego (the term ego is the same as self-concept and personality) is a byproduct of my experiences on earth; I did not come to this world with it.

The self-concept is epiphenomenal; that is, it is a response to the individual's experience in his body and society.

Because the self-concept is a throw up from the individual's experiences in the here and now world, it is not real; it is a smoke produced by the fire of the individual's body and society. As a byproduct of body and society the ego is a secondary phenomenon.

That leaves to be answered the question: what is the individual's primary self, his real-self? I do not know who my real self is; do you know who your real self is?

The term personality is derived from Latin, persona, masks. It is said that ancient Greek actors' wore masks to hide their faces as they, on a stage, enacted recreations of people's characters, some of whom may be in the audience, and may feel embarrassed seeing themselves portrayed by the actors. Thus, actors hid their faces as they portrayed other people's characters.

The term persona or personality means that each of us has a different self which he hides or does not know about but puts on a different self, a social self, a mask that he presents to other people to relate to and accept as who he is.

Personality is not the real self. But who is the real self beneath the mask of personality? I do not know who my real self is; however, I do suspect that we have real selves apart from our personalities.

What I do know is that by age six I had a persona, a personality in place. I presented that persona, that social self, that false self, that mask over my real self to other people to relate to and they, too, presented their own personas to me to relate to.

What is going on is that all of us wear masks of who we want to be seen as in society and present them to each other to relate to.

We relate to these masks, and collude with each other trying to believe that the masks are who we are. This is the dance we enact in society, or as Eric Berne (1964) called it, the Games People Play. Thomas Harris (1967) in "I'M Ok YOU'RE Ok" called what we are doing transactional analysis where we play the roles of parents, children and adults to each other depending on which role we feel is appropriate at any point in time.

From when I became conscious that I have a self I have played the role of a certain type of self, a big self. My wished for social self is a powerful self.

Please note what I said here: I am playing a role of the person I want to be or think that I am but not my real self. What my real self is I do not know.

Do you know who your real self is or have you played the role of a certain persona for too long that you no longer know who your real self is?

I know that I have a problematic body. My problematic body made me feel totally inadequate and powerless. It made me experience life as too painful. Because of the problems it caused me I did not like my body. I rejected my body and my body based actual self.

I resolved to become a different self, a better self, an ideal, powerful and superior self. I do not remember sitting down and making that decision but it happened that way.

All I know is that by age six I found myself denying my actual self and wanting to become an imaginary, ideal powerful self; the imaginary ideal self is everything that my actual self is not; it is tall and handsome; it is athletic and healthy; it is intelligent and wins at whatever it tries in this world. Ultimately, that imaginary ideal-self lives forever and ever.

I present my wished for ideal, powerful self to other people to relate to and they, too, apparently, present their imaginary, ideal selves to me to relate to.  In this manner, people and I play roles for each other, presenting false selves to the each other to relate to; we relate from false self to false self!

In this dance, if other people approve what my false ideal-self did I feel happy around you. If you do not collude with me and tell me in words and or deeds that I am the imaginary ideal self I want to be I feel unhappy around you. I may also feel angry at you.   Generally, I avoid those who do not approve my wished for ideal self.

I use what psychoanalysts call ego defense mechanisms to defend my wished for ideal self. The ego defense mechanisms are repression, suppression, denial, projection, dissociation, displacement, rationalization, sublimation, reaction-formation, fantasy, avoidance, minimizing, fear, anger, guilt, pride, shame etc.

Ego defense mechanisms are employed by each of us to protect his wished for self, his imaginary false self.

Ego defense mechanisms are not used to protect the real self; for one thing, we do not even know who our real self is. Moreover, the real self does not need to be protected or defended for the real needs no defense to be real.

It is the false self that knows that it is false that must be defended to make it seem real. Defense makes the defensed false self-seem real in one's eyes.

As noted, if other people collude with me and tell me that I am my wished for ideal, powerful self I like  them and get along with them but if they did not validate my wished for ideal self I do not like them.

I feel anxious around those who would not confirm my wished for self. I am afraid of people not affirming my wished for ideal self.

Please note that whereas all these ego dynamics are conscious in me that they, in you, are, perhaps, unconscious? The difference between you and I is that I know what I am doing whereas you may be doing the same thing in an unconscious manner. Therefore, in describing me I am really describing you! I am really trying to teach you about you! As Harry Stack Sullivan Observed people are more alike than unalike.

I have a wish for a big, powerful, ideal self. My actual self feels weak and insecure so the big, powerful self is compensatory and not who I am, in fact.

My one problem, as I see it, is my wish to have a big, powerful self.  This problem makes it difficult for me to relate well to other people, for it is always on the lookout to see how other people treat it. If they validate it, it feels fine with them but if they do not it feels bad and perhaps reacts with anger towards them or avoids them.

Part 11


In anger I am saying to the person that I am angry at: how dare you not treat me as the all-powerful person that I want to be?

Anger  is a maneuver used by the angry person to try browbeating other people into accepting its ideal, powerful self; anger is a mechanism used to get the entire world to treat one as one thinks that one ought to be treated, a powerful, special self, who one is not in reality.

Whereas some anger is inevitable because anger is response to frustration and there will always be obstacles on our paths that frustrate our goal attainment, but excessive anger is found in those who pursue false big selves. If you understand this reality then you shrink your ego to humble proportions and other people treating you as worthless may no longer bother you.

If you accept yourself as worthless, as I do, other people seeing you as worthless would not bother you. If you treat me as worthless, well, I already see you as worthless so what difference does it make if one worthless person treated another worthless person as if he is worthless?

You're seeing me as worthless does not bother me one bit. However, if you act on it and try to harm me I will not hesitate in killing you and not feel any qualms for doing so; killing you is killing a worthless person. For example, killing a white racist amounts to removing a piece of garbage from society and I do not lose sleep from that act.


As long as I defend my wished for but imaginary, big self I am prone to fear, anxiety and anger. Indeed, what folks call mental disorders, such as depression, mania, delusion, schizophrenia etc. are different manifestations of the wished for powerful self.

In depression the individual failed in attaining his wished for powerful self and lost social face and feels small; he loses interests in the activities of daily living, such as going to school, work, playing with other people in sports, self-grooming and relating to people in general;  he wants to be left alone to vegetate or even to die.

In mania the individual pretends to be the imaginary powerful self he wants to become; in the manic phase the individual forcefully wants to seem powerful and uses his mind to stimulate his biological processes to work fast so as to cloud his brain to enable him see himself as the god he wants to be, as famous etc. He uses his mind to force his body to become excited and act as if he is the wished for ideal, powerful self; he tells you that he is the richest man on earth and wants you to believe in that lie; he is euphoric in mood, laughing as if he has no care in the world.

In delusion disorder the individual pretends to be whom he is not, usually a very powerful self and wants you to see him or her as such.  Delusion disorder, aka paranoia is actually ancient Greeks definition of mental disorder. To ancient Greeks the mad man denies his real self and pretends to be a different self, a powerful self and wants you to treat him as his wished for powerful self or else he feels angry at you or withdraws from society and go live by himself pretending that he is the big self he wants to become (in schizophrenia, disorganized or paranoid types, you see the schizophrenic pretending to be a big self).

In psychoses, the individual acts "as if" he is the all-powerful god his ego wishes to be.  He manages to get his idealized self to talk to another part of his self, the conscious ego self, hence he  now appears to have a split self, one self-talking to another self (this is not dissociative disorder, aka multiple personality disorder; that one is too complicated to be talked about here).

Mental disorders are rooted in folks wish for a big, powerful self to cover their underlying small, powerless selves.

Clearly, biology plays a role in all mental disorders (in other writings I talked about the role of dopamine in schizophrenia, neuropiniphrine in mania, serotonin in depression, GABA in anxiety disorder etc.); nevertheless, it is the mind of the individual that in response to the exigencies of his body and society wishes to be powerful and important.

Mental disorders are exactly that, mental; even though they are rooted in bodily and societal disorders we can heal them at the mind level.

Change your mind about who you think that you are and act in accordance with your new self-concept and you heal your mental disorder.


Each of us has a self-concept; the self-concept is a bunch of ideas and concepts of who the individual thinks that he is; the self-concept is mostly false ideas about one's self. Therefore if you change your self- concept and replace it with more correct ideas of whom you are and you heal your mind.

I have one problem; my problem is that I have a separated big, self-concept. If my problem, and your problem, is that I have a big, powerful self and you also have it what is its solution?

The solution is simple! I have to give up wishing to have a big, powerful self. I have to stop defending my wished for ideal self.

Ultimately, I have to give up the very idea of having a separated self. All selves, humble (normal persons) or grandiose (personality disordered persons and or psychotic persons) are false.

Any self that I can think of as who I am is not my true self. I do not know who my real self is.  It is when I accept that all my self-concepts, whatever idea of self that I have, is false and stop having any kind of idea of a self in me that my one and only problem is solved.

The solution to the problem of self is to have no conceptual self. If I do not have a self that I conceptualized then who am I? I do not know.

I think that there is an undifferentiated life that manifests in all of us. What that self is, I do not have the faintest idea of.

Let me repeat: my one and only problem is that I have a self, big or small; my one and only solution to it is to let go of having a self and henceforth have no self of my conception.

All self-concepts are perceptual; they are based on what one sees in the separated world; perception is always not the total truth; truth must be beyond perception.

By the way, I have just restated Hinduism, Buddhism and Taoism and Zen here. Oriental religions work to get people to give up their conceptual selves and have no self. In having no ego- self people are said to be natural and healthy; in having a self, normal or neurotic or psychotic self, people are said to be unhealthy!


If I have no wish for a self and have no self to defend I would relax and smell the roses and coffee.  I would just be in existence without wishes for this or that imaginary self to be true. I would be part of one life manifesting in all human beings, animals and trees (and in inorganic matter).

If I have no self-concept that I am defending I would feel liberated from the prison of the imaginary ideal self. I would be peaceful and happy, for it is the belief that one has a self that causes one loads of emotional problems.

With no self-concept I would live a simple life, smiling most of the time and not taking anything seriously.

If I have no self to defend I would be part of one life. I would only do what I like doing and leave it at that.

What I like doing, for now, is to understand the self that I am pretending to be but that I am not.  Since the imaginary self I am trying to become is not real I am really not trying to become any self although I give myself tons of anxiety, anger, depression and paranoia trying to become that which does not exist, a separated self.

If I let go of the desire for the imaginary self I would live like the windblown dust that in fact I am, landing wherever it lands and not worrying about it.

As long as each human being has a self-concept that he thinks that he is and defends it he must have conflicts within his self and with other people.

As long as people have selves they will have wars.  Wars are fought by false selves; false selves fight and kill each other.

Since they are not real selves, actually, at wars no real self is killing other real selves; egos killing each other are nothing, for egos are make belief selves and do not, in fact, exists.

Wars are arenas where the false are destroyed!

Returning to me, here is the sum of my life: my biological and social existence treated me as an orphan; I was not given a pain free body. Thus, I felt angry at the universe for not treating me nicely.

My father did not treat me nicely, either. He was always critical of me, always comparing me to his neurotic ideal self and its ideal standards of behaviors.

My father and mom lavished attention on their first son and treated their second son, me, as a second class person. The first son was given whatever he asked for whereas the second son had to beg for whatever is left over.

The fact that I had to beg to be given something infuriated me. I was angry at my parents for treating me so shabbily.

I resented been treated as if I am not special and do not matter. In my relationship with other people I project the issues that I had with my parents to them. I want people to treat me as if I am special and important. In a passive manner I tend to please people so as to get them to like me. However, if they then treat me badly the aggressive part of me comes to the fore as I verbally attack them for treating me poorly.

Simply put,  I project my issues with my parents and existence to other people; if they treat me shabbily, as nature treated me, I feel angry at them, as I felt angry at the universe/ god and my parents for treating me shabbily.


When, finally, you realize that the ego is not your real self and you want to let it go it begins the struggle to have you keep it; it tells you that it is the self you formed to enable you adapt to the exigencies of this world. That is true except that it no longer enables you to adapt to the realities of this world.

For example, if one has a big self-concept, a big self that in childhood one conceptualized with the false notion that it can enable one to cope with the big problems of life, that big ego now negatively affects ones relationships with other people.

If you insist on been seen as mister big-self, other people will not like to relate to you as such; the big self-disturbs your social relationship.

At school the big ego slows down your learning, for you are too busy defending the big self and fearing making mistakes.

On the job, you are too invested in been seen as a very important person and play that role and therefore do not have all the time to do your job optimally.

The big ego is a false self and has nothing to recommend it. Yet, it asks you to retain it. If you decide to let it go it begs you to please retain a small part of it. If you listen to it all you will get is give yourself pain, actually, a lot of pain for the ego gives one pain.

The ego gives one fear, anxiety, depression, paranoia, mania and schizophrenia. I do not see anything good in the ego and therefore do not see why any aspect of it ought to be retained.

But having said this, in childhood the exigencies of the child's world forced him to develop the ego personality he has.

For example, given my medical issues and conditional social acceptance I had to develop the ego I had. My ego was not an accident; it responded to the realities of my childhood life.

Each individual's ego, personality and behavior pattern is not an accident; it is who he had to be given the totality of his existence.

However, given the psychological pains that the ego gives us each of us we must at some point reevaluate it and decide that it is more trouble than it is worth, and give it up.

You cannot retain a bit of your ego for if you retain some of it you have retained all of it, for the ego is an all or nothing proposition; you cannot choose to keep some of it and let go of others; it is either you let go of all of it or you keep all of it.

Transformation of character is not done partially; it is an all or nothing phenomenon; you either give up all your old self-concept  you keep all of it; you must decide to give up the self you know you had, your old ego self, your personality, your self-concept and formulate a new one. You cannot mix old wine and new wine and expect them to taste good. You must put new wine in a new wine bottle for you to obtain the best taste from it.


I approach everything in the world with fear, anxiety and anger. I anticipate what could go wrong and try to plan on how I am going to deal with it. I am always in an anxious, fearful mode.

This constant state of fear tenses and stresses my body; it actually ages my body. Therefore, it is not good for me to keep doing so.

One must decide to trust the present and future and not see it as going to cause one harm and simply let what is going to happen to one to do so. One crosses each bridge of life as one gets to it rather than spending most of one's time worrying about how one is going to cross the many bridges of life.


I live in the USA. Like most black persons living in America, white folks assumed that I am inferior and treated me as such. I was discriminated against on the job.

The white man treated me shabbily. Because he did so he is not my mentor and certainly not my friend. A friend helps his friends, not place obstacle on their paths as the white man places on black folk's paths.

Because he did not look after my interest I have no business seeking permission from him before I do anything.

It is a sin for a black man to seek approval from a white man; to seek approval from a white person is tantamount to seeking approval from ones enemy before one does what one wants to do.

The white man is mostly sociopathic and narcissistic in nature; he only uses people and discard them when they are no longer useful to him.

Therefore, I have no business seeking approval from the white man for anything I want to do with my life. I do not need to get his permission to articulate a world view that makes sense to me. I could care less for his opinion on my views.

Actually, one of my existential goals is to attack and decapitate the white man's world views, to send them to the burial ground and replace them with more loving ideas on how to live life.

I have absolutely no regard for any idea that comes from the white man's mouth and so it has it be.  The white man owes me nothing and I owe him nothing; we could be cordial to each other but I must not accept that he is out for my good; to do so is to live in delusion, for the white man may choose to use you at any time and do so.


In capitalist economies the assumption is that people are selfish and in pursuit of their self-interests sell and buy things; people buy things from those who have what they want to buy.

For example, human beings do become sick and therefore need medical treatment. They look for those who sell medical services. Medical doctors sell to those who are sick what they want to buy. Thus, medical doctors make a lot of money in capitalist economies, for the people will always get sick and need medical treatment.

The relation between medical doctors and their patients is entirely rational relationship and has nothing to do with caring or love for any one.  People want to live and medical doctors sell to them what they need to live, medical services. Beyond that the people involved in this relationship do not care for one another.

If you do not have the money to pay for his medical services the American medical doctor would not treat you and could care less whether you lived or died. By the same token patients would not care for the existence of medical doctors if it were not the case that they live in bodies that get sick.

If illness is eradicated from the human body people would desist from overvaluing medical doctors.

Farmers produce food that those who want to live and must eat food to live buy and thus farmers obtain money and with that money they buy what they need to have to live on.

If you do not have the goods and or services people desire to live on they would not buy from you and you are left out.

Thus, in a capitalist economy the individual asks his self: what service and or good do people need that I can produce and sell it to them?  In what areas am I able to serve peoples interests?

You figure out what you have aptitude in and train for it and have the skills to produce what people need to survive on and give it to them and do so as exactly as they want it, not as you think that they should have it.

This is called realistic relationship with people; there is no sentimentalism involved; people do not care for you and you do not care for them; both of you are selfish creatures meeting each other's needs and that is all there is to you and peoples relationships.


While they are relating to each other from this rational, enlightened self-interested perspective, people nevertheless talk about what they call love. Apparently, people's minds like to see them as loving persons.

You would be a fool if you believed that people are loving persons; love is for mere talk not practice. For one thing, what is love? Most people do not know what love is. So, how can they love if they do not know what love is?

You would be idealistic to believe that people would like you and would give you anything just because you want to live. No, people do not care whether you lived or died.

Idealism that says that people should care for each other the capitalist says is not realistic and is sentimental for it does not acknowledge peoples real nature, which is selfish.

Capitalist biologists such as Richard Dawkins and Edward Wilson say that people are driven by selfish genes.

In my opinion those so-called biologists do not understand that what they call selfish human nature is merely a reflection of the capitalist ideology they are living in.

What human nature is these folks do not know! It is my task to teach them that there is no such thing as human nature but that we can choose whatever nature we want to be; we can choose to be loving and altruistic (see Erich Fromm's 1956 book, the Art of love).


People have a need to understand their minds and bodies; psychologists tell them about how their minds supposedly work and medical doctors tell them about their bodies' disorders; in effect, psychologists sell ideas on the mind and medical doctors sell ideas on the body; both are doing what people want to know and are willing to pay for.

If you cannot sell the type of ideas people want to buy on the mind or body they would not come to you but would go to those who have such ideas.

In the USA, given that most white Americans are their narcissistic or sociopathic in nature they listen to mental health professionals who gratify their narcissistic needs.

Narcissist and sociopaths do not give a damn about other people's welfare but instead seek attention and admiration from other people; they want to be admired by other people; they use you to get their needs met and when you are no longer useful to them they discard you like you are a piece of rag doll and could care less for your existence; they have no emotional attachment to people but just want people to tell them how beautiful they are and how accomplished they are.

Currently, Americans have a sick narcissistic boy-man in the White House; he is called Donald Trump; I call him the American chief narcissist.

In one of my Facebook circles is a white woman who talks about love to the point that it is nauseating. But the moment you have a need you find out that she could care less for you; she would not meet your need. All that she wants to do is talk about how she is such a loving person and folks who have not related to white Americans and know that almost all of them are narcissists gravitate to her and listen to her razzmatazz until they are in need and she flees from them. Thereafter they learn what most black folks know about white folks: they are narcissistic or psychopathic in nature.

The black psychologist, Bobby Wright, wrote about the white personality as the psychopathic racial personality.

If you are a smart mental health professional and want to market your ideas you tell people what they want to hear, that they are great. If you tell them what they do not want to hear, such as tell them that narcissism is a sick mental state, they would ignore you; they want somebody to tell them that they have beautiful bodies and minds.

As we speak, white folks want people who tell them that they should be sticking their penises into other men's anuses and call it sexual activity, I am talking about homosexuality. If you dared say that such behavior is not appropriate for human beings, not even for animals, their political correctness would shout you down, or even destroy you.

From my standpoint, I know that people seek to be important and want existential worth. You then tell them that they are important and have existential worth if you want them to buy what you are selling. But if you insist on the truth you must add that people do not have intrinsic existential worth and that worth is a social construct.

Why is worth a social construct and not a natural phenomenon? Consider that if people had worth nature would respect them and not easily destroy them. In reality, anyone who desires it can destroy people's lives.

Any American president can decide and go to war and use millions of American adolescents to fight that war.

Donald Trump, the narcissist in chief, desiring to make a name for his self, can decide to go to war with North Korea and use millions of American kids to fight that war (and North Koreans will defeat Americans unless Americans resort to nuclear weapons).

In the meantime, the sociopathic Donald fights to prevent offering American kids publicly paid health insurance yet when the kids grow up he wants them to go fight and die for his ego gratification; what idiots human beings are!

In my opinion, no American kid should go fight and die for their callous and mean spirited leaders who did not give them and their parents publicly paid health insurance and publicly paid education at all levels, including university and technical schools.

Anyway, if people had intrinsic worth nature and society wouldn't treat them as they currently do, as nothing of importance.

Moreover, in pursuit of worth and significance people give themselves fear (of death of their egos and bodies), anxiety, anger, depression, delusion, paranoia and schizophrenia. Therefore, if they do not want mental disorders they must give up their desire for body and ego based worth, and accepts their intrinsic worthlessness and lives with that reality.


If you are realistic you must accept that your body lacks worth and tell people that their bodies have no worth. This information would enable them to relax and stop enslaving themselves to working twelve hour days to earn a living for their worthless bodies.

Obviously, given that there are no free lunches in life, some work is necessary to make a living but to be a slave to work, for what, for body that would die?

Our bodies are composed of sixty four elements (especially carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen); each of those elements is composed of electrons, protons and neutrons; those particles are composed of quarks and quarks were made from photons of light.

Analysis shows that the human body is ultimately made from light. Light came out of nowhere and everywhere during the big bang, 13.8 billion years ago; from that light particles, atoms, stars, planets, animals, people and trees were formed.

We know that the universe is expanding; as it expands it loses heat. Trillions of years from now the universe would so lose heat that all the stars and planets would die.

Indeed, our star, the sun will in about five billion years die. In two billion years when it begins to die, has less hydrogen to fuse into helium, the sun will begin fusing other elements and become hotter than it currently is. It would be so hot that it would dry the water on planet earth.

Without water the earth cannot support biological life. Thus, in about two billion years animals, human beings included, and plants would die out on planet earth.  The earth would look like today's Mercury, Venus and Mars.

May be people would develop the technology with which to migrate to exoplanets and that way keep migrating from one star system to others;  as each star dies they go to other stars and their planets, from one galaxy to others until the entire  stars and universe  dies.

If there are multiple universe, as some speculate that there are, and some of those universes are habitable, human beings might be able to tunnel their ways to them; some say that there are wormholes through which people can tunnel to other universes.

Whatever is the truth about the existence of many universes, what is currently known is that our physical universe would die a chilly death (not fiery big crunch). We can then proceed on the grounds that we will die a cold death.

All elements would decay; protons would be the last to decay and the universe would be made of cold radiation and cannot support life as we know it.

Because, sooner or later, we shall die, life in body is transitory and ephemeral; it is not permanent and eternal. That which is not permanent is nothing.

Thus, we can say that our lives in bodies are really nothing; they seem to have temporary existence.  Where we currently see people in bodies there will be no people in bodies in the future.

The world is like a movie; you see the people in bodies in the movies and they seem real but like movies they are actually not there; there are no people where you see the movies playing on the screen of the world.

The question is who shot the movie. Who invented this world and made it so real that we take it as real?

It seems that some non-material intelligence invented our world and projected seeming life into people; this is kind of like the movie Matrix, where projected in actors think that they are real when in fact they are computer animations!

So, are there intelligent forces outside our physical universe that invented our physical universe? Nineteenth century infant science denied that possibility and embraced materialism, the philosophy that the permutation of matter produced mind; that our thinking is epiphenomenal, the byproduct of our bodies and brains. Materialism does not accept that there is life outside our bodies; when we die we die out. Materialism is atheistic.

Science is too young, it is only five hundred years old, and from Nicolas Copernicus (1543) to the present is not even five hundred years, to make finalistic claims about the origin of our universe and us.

Whereas religion posits unprovable gods as responsible for the origin of this world, I would not be surprised if this universe was invented by some intelligent agent.

This does not mean that we have to fear the intelligence agent and worship it. If a non-material intelligence exists, it is in us!

Sooner or later, science probably would be able to completely understand the universe and we begin inventing our own universes and people!

In this paper I am not going to speculate on the nature of the intelligence that putatively invented this universe; I have done so elsewhere.

For now, a realistic person accepts that his body and ego mind are transitory and ephemeral and doesn't over value them.

When I die my body would be cremated and since most of my body and your body are composed of 70% water, the water would evaporate and the other elements are reduced to about three pounds of ashes. Those three pounds of ashes have no monetary value. My body is not worth a penny!

Because it has no value, I do not take my body and ego seriously. To me my body and ego is nothing and I treat it as nothing.

But while I am on earth, I use my body and ego to relate to other bodies and egos as smoothly as is possible without deluding myself into thinking that I have worth.

The objective fact is that I have no existential worth and you have no existential worth; be that as it may, we can pretend to have worth, for that pretense seems necessary to make living on earth tolerable to our egos.


If I put on my thinking cap the only inevitable conclusion is that my parents and people in general did not do much to harm me and therefore I have no business being angry at them.

It was nature that gave me my crummy body, a body that causes me no end of pain that wronged me. It was nature that made me feel like an orphan in this world. Therefore, if I need to feel angry at any one at all it is at nature.

A mature adult does not blame other people for his situation but merely does whatever he can to deal with his issues; blaming nature or other people is a waste of time and is not going to correct the situation.

My father inherited my body; thus, nature caused him the same type of problems it caused me and therefore he too was a victim of nature. He too did posit an idealized superior self that he was pursuing and used its imaginary perfect standards to judge his self and other people and criticized us.

He should not have judged me with ideal, perfect standards and found me not good enough just because I did not live like an imaginary perfect self.

I am a human being in flesh and blood and therefore cannot become as perfect as the imaginary mental construct called ideal self. He made a mistake in comparing me to an ideal self; he should not have done that for that caused me unnecessary psychological pain.  His mistake is neurotic and understandable and is to be corrected without unduly blaming him.

In Alfred Adler's terms, it can be said that I am like the pampered, spoilt child who expects his parents and other people and the world to take care of his needs and when they do not do so he feels angry at them and easily gives up and accept defeat rather than figure out a way to make a living by his self.

I project my anger at nature to those around me and blame them for not meeting my needs. If they did not immediately do what serves my needs I felt angry at them. It is as if I am a prince or king whose needs must be met or else he feels abandoned by people and cries to make them feel guilty and from guilt take care of his needs.

Well, in the adult world no other person is supposed to take care of my needs; I am supposed to take care of my needs and not feel angry at other people for not doing for me what I ought to be doing for me. I get it; all I need to do is correct my projecting my anger at nature and god to people by ceasing doing so and simply do whatever I can for me and leave it at that.

No one else owes me anything and I do not owe other people anything.  We are all alone and if we meet we smile at each other but beyond that we do not live to take care of each other people.

As Fred Pearl's used to say in his Gestalt therapy, it does not matter whether other people approve us or not; all we need to do is approve ourselves.

Albert Ellis, in his Rational Emotional Therapy used to encourage people not to give a damn about what other people think or say about them. It is not what other people say or do that makes you happy or sad or angry but how you interpret what they say or do. If you think that you need others approval if they do not approve you, you would feel bad but if you do not need other people's approval, they not approving you would be water off your skin.

For example, I do not seek approval from any white person and their not approving me makes no difference to me. I do not need approval from evil persons.

Aaron Beck continues Ellis Epictetus based cognitive behavior therapy.

I must then apologize to all those in my life that I had been angry at when they did not immediately do what I asked them to do for me. They do not have to meet my needs and I do not have to meet their needs.

The fact that I do not like to be kept waiting, not having my needs immediately met, is an issue for me to correct.


Love by other people does not mean that they should jump and do whatever I asked them to do for me. Indeed, many of my significant others tried to meet my needs but fell short in doing so not because they are unloving but because they simply could not.

For example, when I was a college student my father's brothers did not reach out and helped me with money and I felt angry at them for not helping me. Well, they had their own children to train and did not have the resources to extend to me. But I was so angry at them that I cut off from them and had nothing else to do with them until they died. I can bear grudges and grievances and seek vengeance; this is immaturity and has to go.

And that brings us to love. What exactly is love? I think that love is the state of union; in love we are unified with each other and the universe. In the state of union with all existence we feel peaceful and happy. The topic of love is too extensive to be dealt with here; I have done so elsewhere.


I have had what religious folks call visions; however, I believe that my mind produced them. But having said so, the question is: what part of my mind produced them? Certainly, it is not the part of my mind that I am conscious of, for in my day consciousness I could not even imagine how to come up with those visions.

I believe that there is a part of the human mind that is not within our conscious control but has in it all our past learning and human history and uses those to produce our nightly dreams as well as our so-called religious visions.

Helen Schucman, for example, probably wrote her book, A course in miracles, from the deeper part of her mind that contains her psychoanalytic learning and the history of mankind, what Carl Jung called our collective unconscious.

How what Carl Jung called our collective mind works I do not understand but it seems to me to be the repository of all human experience, scientific and spiritual; in it are past religious figures such as Jesus Christ; it is our collective mind, what we may call our higher mind, or in Christian categories, the Holy Spirit, or Christ mind.

I call it our shared unified mind, what religious folks call God's mind.


To live in bodies that will die people must feel worthless and powerless and seek worth, power and knowledge. This is the human condition.

However, like every good thing there is a negative aspect to it; in some people the desire and pursuit of worth, power and knowledge can take over the individual's entire life that he feels totally worthless and is obsessive-compulsively seeking power. I am talking about folks that psychoanalysis used to call neurotics and todays psychiatry call persons with personality disorders.

The trick is to seek worth while recognizing that it is a chimera; for as long as people live in body they have no existential worth.

Look at your body, the body that you are laboring twelve hour days trying to make a living for. Within 120 years your body dies, decays and smells like feces. Your body is going to be eaten by worms and bacteria.

If you like science, then see it this way:  your body is composed of sixty four elements, mostly carbon, hydrogen, oxygen and nitrogen with traces of small amounts of potassium, phosphor, sulfur, magnesium, iron, zinc, calcium, chlorine, sodium and so on; composed elements are held together by chemical bonds.

Upon death the bonds that hold your body together break up and the various elements that composed your body leave your body.

The elements in time decay to their constituent parts of electrons, proton sand neutrons; those particles would in time decay to quarks and those to photons and those to the nothingness from whence light came during the Big bang 13. 8 billion years ago.

If you cremated your 170 pounds body (which is over 70% water, just as water makes up 70% of the earth's surface) it would become about three pounds of ashes; those ashes have no monetary value, they are not even worth a penny!

Your body is not worth a penny, my dear friend! Yet, you enslave yourself to working for its up keep. What does that make you, a wise man or a fool?

And for telling you this much truth what does it make me, a pessimist or optimist? Would you rather you are not told the truth so that you keep on deluding yourself with the illusion that your body and ego has worth?

The philosopher's function is to tell you the truth, to disabuse people of their illusions and delusions of their worth. I am merely performing my philosophical function by telling you the truth.

The truth, even if it seems depressing, will give you proper perspective and help you live more peacefully and happily with the transitory and ephemeral things of this world.

Things, you included, are here today and are gone tomorrow. The immortal bard, William Shakespeare, remember him, in his immortal play, Macbeth, said that we are like poor actors on a stage; we are like the story told by a fool full of sound and fury but signifying nothing; in the present we clown around as misters big stuff but in time we are heard from no more; we disappear into the mist of oblivion from when we came!

If you like Hamlet, what are we, gods or animals? You decide and take the consequences of your decision.

Simply put, our bodies and the sense of self are nothing seeking to become something important but cannot attain it.  Such is the human tragedy.

Some say that worth inheres in spirit, in God and that we obtain it when we return to God. Okay. But the question is; where is God and spirit? Where can we find him?

He is nowhere to be found. You ask folks to merely belief in the unseen God?  In this piece I am not interested in belief and faith but in what I can verify through the scientific method.

I do not know that God or spirit exists, for, as Karl Popper noted, God and his heaven cannot be falsified, or even verified, so they are not proper subjects for scientific inquiry. However, they are proper subject for metaphysical, non -scientific cogitations. I have done that elsewhere.


In this paper I pointed out that the reality of living in bodies that would die and disappear from existence makes us feel like we have no worth.  I said that we appear to need a sense of worth to be able to live productive lives in this world. Thus, even though we do not have worth we seek to have worth.

Some people come to believe that they have the worth most of us pursue but know that we do not have it.

When we take the imaginary as real we have mental health issues. Mental illness inheres in believing that one has worth when one does not have it.

Mental health lies in seeking worth but accepting that worth is a social construct and not deluding one's self into believing that one actually has worth.


Adler, Alfred. (1964). The Individual Psychology of Alfred Adler. H. L. Ansbacher and R. R. Ansbacher (Eds.). New York: Harper Torchbooks.

Adler, Alfred. (1979). Superiority and Social Interest: A Collection of Later Writings. H. L. Ansbacher and R. R. Ansbacher (Eds.). New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

American Psychiatric Association (2013), Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition, Washington DC. American Psychiatric Press.

Beck, A.T., Freeman, A., & Davis, D.D. (2003). Cognitive therapy of personality disorders. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Berne, Eric (1964). Games People Play – The Basic Hand Book of Transactional Analysis. New York: Ballantine Books.

Ellis, Albert (1977). Handbook of Rational-Emotive Therapy, with Russell Greiger & contributors. NY: Springer Publishing.

Erikson, Erik (1950). Childhood and Society. Norton.

Erikson, Erik (1958).Young Man Luther. A Study in Psychoanalysis and History. Norton.

Erikson, Erik (1968). Identity: Youth and Crisis. Norton.

Erikson, Erik (1969). Gandhi's Truth: On the Origin of Militant Nonviolence.

Erikson, Erik (1926). The Language and Thought of the Child (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Freud, Freud (1974). The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud. Trans. from the German under the general editorship of James Strachey, in collaboration with Anna Freud, assisted by Alix Strachey, Alan Tyson, and Angela Richards. 24 volumes, London: Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psycho-Analysis.

Fromm, Erich (1941). Escape from Freedom (U.S.), The Fear of Freedom.

Fromm, Erich (1947). Man for himself, an inquiry into the psychology of ethics.

Fromm, Erich (1950). Psychoanalysis and Religion.

Fromm, Erich (1955).The Sane Society.

Fromm, Erich (1956). The Art of love.

Fromm, Erich (1959). Sigmund Freud's mission; an analysis of his personality and influence.

Fromm, Erich (1960). Zen Buddhism and Psychoanalysis.

Glasser, William (1965). Reality therapy. A new approach to psychiatry. New York: Harper & Row.

Harris, Thomas (1967). A'M OK-You're OK New York: Avon Books.

Horney, Karen (1950). Neurosis and Human Growth, Norton, New York, 1950.

Horney, Karen (1946). Are You Considering Psychoanalysis? Norton.

Horney, Karen (1945). Our Inner Conflicts. Norton.

Horney, Karen (1942). Self-analysis, Norton.

Horney, Karen (1939. New Ways in Psychoanalysis. Norton.

Carl Gustav Jung, Analytical Psychology: Its Theory and Practice (The Tavistock Lectures) (Ark Paperbacks), 1990.

Kelly, George (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. Vol. I, II. Norton, New York. (2nd printing: 1991, Routledge, London, New York.

Kelly, George (1963).  A theory of personality. The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton.

Laing, R.D. (1960). The Divided Self: An Existential Study in Sanity and Madness. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Laing, R.D. (1961). The Self and Others. London: Tavistock Publications.

Perls, Fred. (1969). Gestalt Therapy Verbatim .

Piaget, Jean (1928). The Child's Conception of the World (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Piaget, Jean (1932). The Moral Judgment of the Child (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner and Co.

Piaget, Jean (1952). The Origins of Intelligence in Children. New York: International University Press.

Rogers, Carl. (1951). Client-Centered Therapy: Its Current Practice, Implications and Theory. London: Constable.

Skinner, B.F. (1971). Beyond Freedom and Dignity, New York: Basic Books.

Skinner, B.F (1974). About Behaviorism. New York: Basic Books.

Sullivan, Harry Stack (1996). Evans III, F. Barton: Harry Stack Sullivan - Interpersonal theory and psychotherapy. London/New York . Routledge.

Ozodi Thomas Osuji

July 20, 2017

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

(907) 310-8176

Read 1302 times
Ozodi Osuji Ph.D

Ozodi Thomas Osuji is from Imo State, Nigeria. He obtained his PhD from UCLA. He taught at a couple of Universities and decided to go back to school and study psychology. Thereafter, he worked in the mental health field and was the Executive Director of two mental health agencies. He subsequently left the mental health environment with the goal of being less influenced by others perspectives, so as to be able to think for himself and synthesize Western, Asian and African perspectives on phenomena. Dr Osuji’s goal is to provide us with a unique perspective, one that is not strictly Western or African but a synthesis of both. Dr Osuji teaches, writes and consults on leadership, management, politics, psychology and religions. Dr Osuji is married and has three children; he lives at Anchorage, Alaska, USA.

He can be reached at: (907) 310-8176