As Walt Whitman penned in Songs of Myself:
Do I contradict myself? /
Very well then I contradict myself, /
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)
We are, perhaps, self-contradictory by nature. However, we are also taught to be consistent as a matter of moral integrity. From a psychological point of view, a coherent sense of self, or consistency of self, is associated, on average, with better function. In extremis, fragmentation can be pathological — for instance, if we are so fragmented and internally disconnected (“dissociated”) that it causes serious problems in living. But relational psychoanalysis and trauma theory suggest that we do experience different “self-states” (e.g., the work of Philip Bromberg).
In Coherent Narratives
Narrative coherence—how well a story hangs together—is one example of how psychologists regard our autobiographical sense of self. Psychologist Peter Ornstein and colleagues (2011), for example, identified three dimensions of autobiographical narrative coherence: chronology, context, and theme.
So often, we forget about time and change. We tend to consider static snapshots of any given situation because considering multilayered processes over time takes a lot of work, and the “lazy brain” tries to minimize cognitive load.
The meme-ing of life is heightened within our digital environment, which rewards swiping through small bites of information and imagery. Memes are as efficient as they are misleading. Because they can be so appealing, they make us believe that a simplistic point of view is the truth. They are without chronology, low in context, and highlight themes that hook us before we have a moment to think.
The Culture Keeps the Score
Culture tends to tell us that being singular is the norm, especially in individualistic societies, which, in contrast with communal societies, elevate individualism as a moral good—almost to the extent of worship. Rugged individualism as a Western ideal demands the individual be ruggedly independent, entrepreneurial, and radically self-sufficient in achieving unheralded success. Being self-contradictory offends our sensibilities, sowing confusion.
Erring on the side of complexity, though, within the context of an overarching authentic sense of self, helps resolve a number of problematic issues. It’s a more accurate and precise model. Conversely, if we presume singularity, we don blinders that prevent us from being open-minded and restrict our capacity to perceive alternatives that may be there.
Flowing Balance
The degree of singularity versus multiplicity varies on a person-to-person basis, though this isn’t typically thought of as a personality trait. Some people are naturally fluid in how they can present themselves. With more possible internal states, they may gravitate toward professions such as acting, where (unless one is type-cast) being able to authentically assume different personalities is highly prized.
Others tend to be more consistent, the same regardless of the situation they are in. They are more likely to experience themselves as subjectively the same, rather than having different “sides” of their personality come out.
Healthy Variability
Moderate variability is healthy. Too much rigidity is no good. Too much chaos… doesn’t work either. If we strike a balance between consistency and variability, we enjoy the benefits from the point of view of vibrancy, creativity, and expressiveness. We’re more adaptable. Being so may also foster greater openness to experience—a key personality trait associated with giftedness.
The Benefits of Embracing Multitudes
1. Reframing self-contradiction. There’s an emotional validity to any authentic perspective, even if we don’t agree with it or determine it is a good fit for how we understand and view the world. It may be hard to hang it together into a coherent framework, but it doesn’t have to fit neatly right away.
2. Not too simple. Having a more accurate understanding of oneself and others actually works better, which shouldn’t be surprising. To the extent that we are multifaceted individuals, presuming simplicity of self will inevitably create distortions.
3. Not too complicated. At the same time, while it may seem self-contradictory, it’s key to develop a working model without getting too granular. It’s better to have a functional “good enough” model, and continuously update it, for the sake of efficiency and time.
Psychoanalysis Essential Reads
4. A better understanding of unconscious processes. The Object Relations school of psychoanalysis posits that we internalize our family relationships or constellations of relationships. The structure of personality is based not only on internalized important individuals but also on how we internalize the relationships among them. We want to see both good and bad in ourselves and others. If ego strength is lower, we may “split,” seeing ourselves as all good (or bad) and others as all bad (or good).
5. Relationships work better. Teamwork flows from understanding group processes and key relationships among teammates. Likewise, to best understand ourselves, we need to use some of that team thinking to see not only how we operate in relation to others, but critically, in terms of how our internal teamwork operates.
6. Works on the fly for re-framing conflict. Much of the time, conflict is difficult to resolve, even to wrap one’s head around, when the situation is polarized. Parties take up opposing positions and galvanize one another. It helps to loosen up dualistic thinking.
7. Better strategic thinking. By seeing the parts and the whole, and regulating emotions and cognition well enough to contain multitudes without succumbing to making things overly complex (over-complexification), we see the playing field like a coach and we can see the different positions on the field and how they are moving along, from the perspective of different players.
Afterword
Some people are more consistent from one setting to the next, while others may accommodate themselves in different situations more starkly; but it may be the case that there is a normal range within which people can morph without being inauthentic or losing sight of the overarching sense of who they are.
We play roles, and this doesn’t necessarily mean we are faking. Rather, it may be the leading edge of growth and development as we explore unfamiliar terrain. Freeing ourselves from knee-jerk outrage in the face of perceived hypocrisy, we can evaluate the situation with less emotional distortion to achieve better outcomes. The fundamental mind shift is to assume that multiplicity, having different self-states or facets of one’s personality—or plurality, possessing different identities that may shift depending on one’s state of mind or context—is the default setting.
