Personality and fragmentation — the Worldwide Pandemic
I read a news story recently where a bunch of school kids severely beat up another school student because he used to ‘answer all the questions in class perfectly’. And this incident got me thinking about something interesting: something called fragmentation.
But what is fragmentation?
Most people grow up with ‘fractured or fragmented selves’. What does that mean? In simple terms, while growing up and interacting with others/socializing, the ‘totality of our self’ splits into multiple parts: the part that we/our parents/society approve of, and the suppressed/disowned part, which we can call the shadow self.
As an example, suppose one was lazy at some time during childhood and the parents or authoritative figures in their lives berated their laziness and told them to work hard. The individual then receives the programming that they won’t be loved unless they are a hardworking person, so their consciousness ‘splits’, with the aspect of their persona that was “lazy” being disowned/suppressed.
But why does this split occur in the first place? We can understand this by examining homogeneous and heterogeneous societies.
Suppose there existed a society where everyone wore the same clothes, looked the same, behaved the same and had similar likes/inclinations/hobbies. We can call this an example of a homogeneous society. In such a society, fragmentation would not occur, because everyone’s concept of self would be nearly the same. Group consciousness would take precedence over individual consciousness. That is, everyone would fit into society by default and not have to change/mold/modify their essence to socialize.
Now let’s look at societies on Earth. They are complex and de facto heterogeneous societies. An individual who doesn’t carry the traits found in his/her society/culture will feel left out and either disengage from society (becoming a misanthrope) or form a sub-group of individuals with similar inclination/natures, or would have to maladapt to form a personality which suits his environment.
As an example, suppose someone music, but is also a scientist. Suppose they are born in a society/family which is passionate about music, cooking and artistry yet not scientifically inclined nor interested in pursuing science. Such a society would support only one aspect of the self, namely the musical one, while disregarding/ignoring the others. What would happen if the individual wanted to fit into society? The individual would have to disown their scientific inclinations and project the skills acceptable in that society, namely music. Thus, the being would fragment into an aspect of self that is loved by society and an aspect that is kept buried.
In another example, suppose someone is domineering, loves to dominate and loves being authoritative, but is shamed/berated/scolded during early childhood for such behavior. This individual then ‘receives’ the subconscious programming that being authoritarian and domineering implies that they won’t be loved, so they maladapt to become a “polite person”. That is, it is their maladaptation to their environment that determines their personality, rather than their true intrinsic nature. And the reaction to the suppression of their true self can be immense self-hatred.
In essence, all individuals in heterogeneous environments are forced to adapt to the environment through fragmentation, where one aspect is advertised, and the other aspect, suppressed. This fragmentation, into a personality and a shadow self, becomes their programming, and it is this programming that becomes their “persona”. And since the persona is an adaptation/programming, it, in fact, has no existence of its own.
Briefly put, all our personalities are in fact, false, nothing but programming/priming by the environment.
But why and how does the priming occur? It occurs due to a single fact: the false belief that I won’t be loved unless I build an image or persona.
That is, people program or adapt just to feel unconditionally loved for who they are.
Take the case of the news story I quoted at the beginning of the article. One could hypothesize that those children hated studying, yet were forced to study by their circumstances. Suppose they were mischievous and scolded for not studying. They then receive the programming that they “won’t be loved unless they study”. And since they want love and hate studies, this might have caused immense pain and self-hatred, which was unconsciously projected onto the studious individual.
The point to note, however, is that they didn’t beat him because they were envious of his talents; they were just envious that he might receive more love than.
Thus, it is the need for love and affection rather than hate or envy that was the driving factor in these cases.
For a more thorough explanation, watch these videos:
