In this area we will consider respect and acceptance, as well as comparing ourselves with others, which is implicated in symmetrical and asymmetrical ways of relating to others.

Respect

Respect simply means treating people as subjects, not objects. This implies respecting their existence as well as their agency (freedom to make choices). We sometimes treat people as objects in order to fulfil our desires or gain a sense of control. This, however, leads to disconnectedness that induces a sense of isolation, even when with others. As already discussed in relation to self-respect, respect doesn’t need to be earned as it is derived from our intrinsic value of being human. So, there is no excuse to treat anybody disrespectfully (even prisoners are supposed to be treated with some respect). Besides, we are more likely to be treated with respect if we treat others with respect.

Acceptance

Acceptance and tolerance are sometimes used interchangeably, but they are not the same. Tolerance implies putting up with others, suggesting that they are an inconvenience to be endured. True acceptance is more than that: it primarily means accepting that people can be different. It also involves an attempt to understand others, rather than honing in on their perceived faults. Even if they have some shortcomings you don’t have to be troubled by them. This is not to say that we should put up with everything. Bringing up what bothers you is easier though if the other is first accepted as a person; in fact, accepting others as they are and trying to understand their motives can be the first step in eliciting a positive change. In addition, acceptance can be enriching as it involves opening up to something different, and it makes being accepted more likely (while rejection, of course, has the opposite effect).

In this area we will first consider when protection is really needed. In our complex interactions this is not always clear, so protection is sometimes misused (to justify aggression) or abandoned (to avoid appearing aggressive). After that we will focus on social resilience, responses to adverse behaviour, and assertiveness.

When protection is needed

Unfortunately not all people always have good motives; they sometimes act out of malice, spite, envy, desire to manipulate, etc. It is easier to become a victim if this is not recognised. Giving in to abuse is not a sign of love. Always blaming oneself and finding excuses for others is as unhealthy as always blaming others and finding excuses for oneself. To be a good person you don’t need to tolerate abuse or be submissive. A good person is good towards oneself too, which includes being able to protect oneself; without that, love and benevolence can be taken advantage of. It is also worth remembering that tolerating malevolence may encourage such behaviour not only towards ourselves but towards others too – which, in effect, makes it grow and spread. Some people don’t even have bad intentions but opportunistically go as far as one allows them, so it is important to be able to set limits. On the other hand, overprotection can shut you down and limit your experience.

Furthermore, protecting your weaknesses or character flaws can inhibit your growth (e.g. defending yourself from constructive criticism may stop you from improving). We need to protect our freedom, integrity and dignity, but we do not need to protect our egos, mistakes and flaws. This is why it is important to know when protection is needed and what you are protecting. To check if you really need protection you can, for example, ask yourself, ‘What I am trying to protect here? Am I really being attacked? Is this person being deliberately malicious?’ Very often the latter turns out not to the case, but let’s see what we can do if it is.

Moral sense refers to our innate propensity to evaluate actions in terms of right and wrong, but should not be confused with moral norms and principles. Although moral sense often coincides with socially accepted morality, these two differ and may even conflict; the former is an inner incentive, the latter comes, as it were, from the outside. As one psychologist puts it, ‘moral sense… is not a law or a definition but… the internal directive that establishes meaning and value’(1). Both bio-neurology and psychology provide support for its existence.(2) Experiments with infants and even some animals indicate that we are born with moral sense. A sense of fairness and justice, as well as regret and guilt, can occur spontaneously in children (unlike shame, which is by and large socially induced). In this area we will focus on why moral sense matters, as well as on how to develop and manage it.

Why listening to moral sense matters

Acting in accord with your own moral sense feels good, and behaving contrary to it does not, although these feelings can be overridden by other states of mind (e.g. prejudices. fears, desires, pleasures). Disregarding moral sense is sometimes attractive because it may allow immediate gratification, but it alienates you from other people and a part of yourself. This causes an inner conflict indicated by disturbed conscience and feelings of regret or guilt (which is why justifications are so common – nobody wants to see himself as bad). Conscience is absent only if the social aspect of a person is cut off. However, ‘we cannot suppress or eliminate essential parts of ourselves without becoming estranged from ourselves.’(3) This means that, unlike pleasure, real happiness (defined as inner harmony, see p.78) is not morally indifferent. Personal integration cannot be attained if your social aspect (which includes your moral sense) is in conflict or disregarded.

Belonging (to a group) is quite ubiquitous, so whether you have a strong sense of belonging, or it doesn’t matter to you, or you feel isolated and excluded, it is well worth taking a closer look. We will consider the pros and cons of groups, group requirements, and what helps to be accepted by a group, but let’s start with categories that a sense of belonging is usually associated with.

The categories of belonging

Although we are separate individuals to some extent, we all also belong to some groups. Groups can consist of only a few people (as in the case of a family or a team) or be very large (e.g. a nation). You don’t need to know each member of the group you are part of and, obviously, the members do not need to be in physical proximity (especially if we have in mind virtual groups). The sense of belonging can be defined by several categories:

• Physical (e.g. race, nation, gender, lineage, age): you do not choose these groups but were, so to speak, born into them.
• Social (religion, family, country, culture): membership of these groups is induced by your surroundings, usually in childhood.
• Self-determined (e.g. partners, friends, professional groups, clubs, social networks): groups are chosen on the basis of personal preferences, shared interests and mutual acceptance.
• Transcendent: being a part of humanity, a sense of connection with the whole world and even beyond (often experienced in nature, but it is not confined to nature).

In reality there is not a clear distinction between these categories. For example, belonging to a club or even one’ s partner may be socially determined, or belonging to a religion may be a personal choice. Still, it is worth considering which category matters to you most and if groups that are important to you are mainly from that category. Would you like to change anything in this respect?