21. To have or to be, to compete or to care?

In this chapter, I will introduce further concepts regarding adaptive-defensive mechanisms. Specifically, these are two pairs of concepts:

• “to have” or “to be”, which relate to Extraversion and Introversion.
• “to compete” or “to care”, which relate to Perceiving and Judging.

To have or to be?

Erich Fromm inspired me to use the concepts “to have” and “to be” with his book “To Have or To Be?”.

The concepts of “to have” and “to be” became popular after the publication Erich Fromm’s book in 1976. Personally, I remember that these concepts were widely used for many years.

“To have” and “to be” were about distinguishing between two ways of existence of human. They are called by Fromm:

• mode of having, and
• mode of being.

So, Fromm used the old logical and philosophical term—mode, and:

• “to have” mode—is based on possession, in turn
• “to be” mode—is oriented to being.

“To Be” and “To Have” came back to my mind during my reflections (or just free-thinking) about adaptive-defensive mechanisms. And I realized that after all the “to be” and “to have” modes, we can associate with Introversion and Extraversion. It means:

• “to have” is closely related to Extraversion, because Extraversion is object-oriented, that is, to possession.
• “to be” is closely related to Introversion, because Introversion is subject-oriented, that is, to the being.

In that case, I will add to the definitions of Introversion and Extraversion the terms “to be” and “to have”, so that the links between them and other terms will be more visible.

Now, if we look at the table above, the word “object” we can find in the definition of Extraversion. In turn, the definition of Introversion includes the word “subject”. Therefore:
— “object” is closely related to—“being”, and
— “subject” is closely related to—“having.

Erich Fromm wrote a lot about the relationship between the object (possession or having) and the subject (being). Below there are three quotes from Erich Fromm’s book “To Be or To Have?” as a sample of his extraordinary considerations.

The quotes below are quite extensive, but I put them to show why Erich Fromm’s reflections fascinated a lot of people. I think Erich Fromm’s considerations are still valid, they are actually timeless, and it is worth reminding them.

As we can see in the above quotes, Erich Fromm’s considerations are fascinating and deep. So, I think we can rely on them and use them in the Mandala of Characters.

What has been written above, I think we can summarize as follows.

Carl Gustav Jung in his “Psychological Types”:
— “subject” associated with Introversion,
— “object” associated with Extraversion.

In turn, the above considerations by Erich Fromm show that:
— “subject” is associated with “to be” mode,
— “object” is associated with “to have” mode.

In that case, it follows that:
— “to have” mode we can add to the definition of Extraversion,
— “to be” mode we can add to the definition of Introversion.

So, in conclusion, let me remind how the definitions of Introversion and Extraversion look like now.

I will also put “to have” and “to be” in the diagram.

To compete or to care?

I came across to the terms “to compete” and “to care” thanks to the work of Professor Paul Gilbert. I have already mentioned about Professor Gilbert in one of the previous chapters. It means, in chapter—“16. Main emotions and specific action tendencies”.

This time, Paul Gilbert inspired me to use the two terms above. I was particularly fascinated by the diagram that we can find in his works. Professor Gilbert also presents this diagram in lectures we can find on the YouTube channel.

This illustration shows two social mentalities. These two social mentalities are:

• Competitive Social Mentality—that is a mentality, which is competing, rivalry, struggling, attempting, trying, etc.
• Caring Social Mentality—that is a mentality, which is caring, supporting, guarding, supervising, controlling, etc.

I drew attention to this distinction because I thought it might be useful for the Mandala of Characters. It means it can complement my definitions of Perceiving and Judging.

Why do I think so?

In the diagram above, we can see that the same factors can influence both Caring and Competitive Social Mentality. These factors are:

• Attention
• Thinking, Reasoning,
• Behavior,
• Emotions,
• Motive,
• Imagery, Fantasy.

So, according to Paul Gilbert, two opposing social mentalities can be triggered by the same factors. This principle that the same factors can trigger two opposite mentalities corresponds with the Mandala of Characters, where we have opposite basic psychological functions and adaptive-defensive mechanisms.

It means the opposite pairs of basic psychological functions are:

• Thinking and Feeling,
• Intuition and Sensation,

and opposite pairs of adaptive-defensive mechanisms (or general attitudes or modes of psychic reactions), are:

• Extraversion and Introversion,
• Perceiving and Judging.

So, I think Paul Gilbert’s social mentalities we can associate with Perceiving and Judging in the following way:

• Competitive Social Mentality—we can associate with the mechanism of—Perceiving, and
• Caring Social Mentality— we can associate with mechanism of—Judging.

Instead of:
— the phrase “Competitive Social Mentality” I decided to use just the infinitive—to compete, and
— the phrase “Caring Social Mentality” I decided to use the infinitive—to care.

I did it mainly because earlier in this chapter, I added the terms “to have” and “to be” that I borrowed from Erich Fromm. “To have” and “to be” are infinitives, so here I will also use infinitives.

So, if we add:
— “to care” to the Judging definition, and
— “to compete” to the Perceiving definition, then these definitions will look like this.

So, concerning the above definition of Judging, we can say that “planning and organizing” need our “care”. We should also give appropriate “care” to what we do.

Our “care” also requires some “process”, which we are in, or from which we depend on.

Great “care” requires some “act”. For example:
— the act of creation;
—an act, which is a performance or ceremony;
— with due care, we should prepare an act in the form of a document or application;
— particular care we should give to a legal act;
— etc.

With proper care, we should also judge others to judge others fairly. Because if we judge someone carelessly, then we can hurt someone. Often through unfair judging, we can also bring on ourselves someone’s anger or other severe consequences.

I also like the “caring mentality” because it is ambiguous.
— On the one hand, it means caring, which can be: support, nurture, attend, look after, etc., for someone or something, or for a matter or problem.
— On the other hand, caring means a feeling of anxiety caused by some difficult situations or some difficult challenges that we have to go through.

“Caring” also means that through caring, we can impose or force something on someone. For example, by thinking that:
— we are doing it for someone’s good;
— if our working methods and practices are good for us, then they should also be good for others;
— if any principles, laws, regulations are right, in our opinion, others should also consider them right;
— etc.

On the one hand, such “care” may be good for others. But on the other hand, it may impose on other people rules, methods, regulations, mentalities, etc., which do not suit them at all. Or they may even make others unhappy and seriously harm them.

Therefore, the "caring" mentality has two sides. It can be both help and harm. "Caring" can be necessary for helping others, or it can limit their freedom. So, this "caring mentality" is therefore very vital, and it is serious aspect of life.

In life, the outcome or consequences of what we do for others or what others do for us can be pleasant or unpleasant. We may like or dislike the results of our care towards others, or others care toward us. The outcome of our caring can give someone happiness, or it can, so to speak, "make someone happy by force" (and this can be very unpleasant).

Serious help is often a serious intervention in someone’s life. Therefore, we need to provide serious help very carefully.

So, “caring”, (based on, “Caring Social Mentality”) is a very complex and interesting concept. Therefore, I think “caring” will be very helpful in analyzing the types of characters.

In turn, “to compete” (based on “Competitive Social Mentality”), I include in the definition of Perceiving.

I think the “to compete” harmonizes and complements the other concepts that we can find in this definition of Perceiving. That is, the concepts: “action, movement—find and deal”.

Therefore, “competing” we can often associate with some “action”. It is because we may believe that we must be better than others during some action. That we need to do something to be more cunning, smart, intelligent, cute, etc.

“Competing” may be associated with “movement”. Because “movement” may relate to:
— the “move” that must be made in a game or sports competition;
— the “movement” that is created for a purpose, area, or field, for example, a revolutionary movement or artistic, cultural, resistance … movement;
— etc.

“Competing” is also associated with “finding and dealing”, because we may believe that we need to be more vigilant to find and deal with something before anyone else. For example, find suddenly appearing opportunities and deal with them quickly.

The term “Perceiving”, in itself, we can also associate with the competition. Because it can involve competition. For example, who first perceives something, or who first something discovers, find out, see, understand, invent, improve, etc.

Similarly, like in the case of “Caring Social Mentality”, the Social Mentality focused on “Competing” can have its good and bad sides.

Generally speaking, if the competition is healthy and fair than it is positive and beneficial for us and for others. So, if the competition is not healthy and fair, it will have an adverse effect, and it will be painful for us or for others.

Surely, an example of a field of life where we deal with competition a lot is a sport. Sport has many advantages. For instance, sport can shape many positive habits in us. Thanks to this, it will be easier for s to deal with various problems in everyday life. For example, sport:
— helps in developing physical fitness;
— develops teamwork skills;
— help to initiate and develop new contacts between people;
— positively affects our mood and in general mental health;
— helps overcome our weaknesses;
— helps to control emotions and it strengthens physical resistance;
— thanks to it we can spend nice time with others;
— etc.

Similarly, a lot of advantages can have all kinds of games. For example, games like a board, card, arcade, strategic, computer, etc. Such games can develop our agility, hand-eye coordination, adopting and implementing some action strategies, logical thinking, etc. Generally speaking, games help us develop various skills and acquire various types of knowledge. Games also can be a pleasant way of spending time with others if these games require two or more players.

The "Competitive Social Mentality" besides advantages has disadvantages too. For example, it can be a gaming addiction. Then we can devote too much time to playing. If, however, our addiction becomes gambling, where we can play for money or other valuable things, then the problem is much more severe. Gambling is probably one of the worst addictions that can devastate our entire life. It means, it can lead us not only to financial ruin but also it can ruin our relationships and our personal and family life.

In everyday life, the “Competitive Social Mentality” can shape our relationships with ourselves and with the people around us. Examples of competing in life are, for example:
— better achievements in work or at school;
— an advantage in conversation;
— a better and healthier lifestyle;
— prettier figure or better look;
— better physical or intellectual fitness;
— being cunning or resourceful;
— being smarter or more intelligent;
— having a more exciting group of friends;
better contacts and acquaintances;
— better cooking skills;
— better arguments to beat someone in the discussion;
— being a better driver of a car or other vehicle;
— etc.

We can also compete in the field of material things thanks to, for example;
— a more tasteful and fashionable way of dressing;
— a more prestigious and comfortable apartment;
— a unique home and garden;
— a distinctive type of car or vehicle;
— better kitchen and room equipment;
— an extraordinary collection of some valuable things or works of art;
— and many others.

Most of this competition is actually unnecessary for us, and we could live without it. On the other hand, competing can motivate and stimulate us a lot. Thanks to it:
— we can really have fun,
— we feel satisfied and fulfilled,
— we believe that we are great, amazing, cool, outstanding, exceptional …,
— etc.

Of course, the “Competitive Social Mentality” will be a source of satisfaction for us if we are better than others. Or at least we think that we are better than others. However, if others are better than us in an obvious and undeniable way, then “competing” will be a source of frustration for us. We may then feel not good enough, less valuable, and the worse.

But, if we somehow accept our failures, mistakes, and defeats. And somehow, after some time, we will pull ourselves together. Then failures can be valuable for us. So, "Competitive Social Mentality" can teach us how to lose. That is, teach us to accept our faults and motivate ourselves again and again. Thus, I think, here we can quote Friedrich Nietzsche — "What doesn't kill us makes us stronger".

Thus, the “Competitive Social Mentality” and failures, which usually come together with it, has two sides. On the one hand, it can motivate us and trigger our determination in our way of achieving our goals. But on the other hand, it can depress us, lead to stagnation, resignation, bitterness, etc. If a failure is severe or we have a series of different types of failures, then it can cause a mental breakdown in us.

So, I think, “Competitive and Caring Social Mentalities” will be a valuable complement to the definitions of Perceiving and Judging.

For me, personally significant is the fact that these mentalities can have both positive and negative sides. I will remind them briefly.

When it comes to the positive aspects of “Caring Social Mentality”, we can associate it with: compassion, mercy, gentleness, sympathy, tolerance, forgiveness, mutual understanding, leniency, etc.

On its negative side, excessive and inappropriate “care” can become, for example, autocracy, monopoly, imposing our view and values on others, excessive domination, etc. Besides, extreme “caring” can even lead to authoritarianism, despotism, tyranny, or other forms of humiliation and bullying.

In turn, the positive side of “Competitive Social Mentality” is the so-called healthy or fair competition. Such healthy competition can give us a lot of satisfaction and many tangible benefits.

On the other hand, excessive and unfair competition can become, for example, over-exploitation, injustice, disrespect for social principles, unlawfulness, intolerance, discrimination, etc.

The distinction between “competing” and “caring” introduced by Paul Gilbert is very revealing and simple. In its form and simplicity, it is similar to Erich Fromm’s distinction between “to be” and “to have”. (I wrote about the division between "to have" and "to be" in the first part of this chapter).

In summary, I will once again present the definitions of adaptive-defensive mechanisms.

The above definitions with new terms, that is, with:
— “to be” and “to have” modes, and
— “to care” and “to compete” mentalities

I will also put in the diagram of for auxiliary reference points of our psyche.

References: