How Can I Know If What I'm Doing With My Life Is Good?

Question: When Adolf Hitler looked at his country, he saw a nation where his fellow non-jewish germans were being dominated by the jews. When Dr Martin Luther King Jr. looked at his country, he saw a nation where his fellow black americans were being dominated by the whites. Both these men took action to liberate their people. When I say it like that they sound quite similar. Yet now, with no less than 50 years of hindsight, Dr King is remembered as a hero, and Hitler a villain.

I want to be a good person. I want to make a difference. I want to help make this world a better place. But how can I know if what I'm doing with my life is good? Even if it feels right. How can I trust my heart when I am inherently imperfect, and how can I trust others when they also are imperfect beings?

Answer (1) The only answer I know to this dilemma is the one I heard from a spiritual master, Osho, who said that we need to become more conscious, develop our awareness through meditation and other awareness practices. Make this our priority and in the meantime, as far as I understand it, be true to ourselves -- imperfect as we are.

Answer provided by Fiona Halse, Psychotherapist

Answer (2) Taking on the world may be a rather big bite and too much responsibility for any mortal, I think. We can spend a lot of time neglecting the smaller successes we could have, and take those around us a little for granted when we commit to some higher cause. I believe that changing the world starts with me and my little plot while joining with others on bigger causes. It is important to consider our own happiness and devote our efforts to that as well as the world around us. It is a finite world, we are imperfect beings as you say. It is not trite, but a grasp on humility, to say that all we can do is our best: for ourselves, those around us, and the world at large. The intensity of your writing is not lost on me and it may benefit you to find people with whom you can explore your philosophy. Stay happy. For I think it achieves nothing if we spend our lives on causes without finding our own personal, inner content. With such self-knowledge, we are better able to contribute to the wider community.

Answer provided by John Hunter, Counsellor

Answer (3) I would like to share my impressions and feelings on reading your question - perhaps without offering an 'answer' to the dilemma. Firstly, the very human tendency to seek answers to ethical and emotional problems by intellectualising can sometimes be an obstacle to ... not necessarily solving the problems themselves, but to re-framing them in ways that fit better with our individual possibilities for making a difference. Secondly, we're all locked into our historical context and I'm sure that at least some of the people we question and condemn from our C21 standpoint were progressive thinkers, humanitarians, doing the best possible things they could envisage in their circumstances and social contexts. So perhaps the future will condemn us, and perhaps it won't. Thirdly - to address your questions about personal capacities and responsibilities and how/when/whom to trust, I think that these are issues that you could explore with a counsellor or therapist, or spiritual guide if that is your preference.

Answer provided by Jan Cregan, Psychologist

Answer (4) Your struggle I feel is the existential angst of how to be personally relevant and effective in a chaotic and flawed world. I do not pretend to know your answers to this quandary but as your questions mirror to some extent my own struggles, I can at least suggest a few things that did help me. The first is the Buddhist ideal of at least temporary emotional detachment from the world. This is not to suggest indifference or some sort of half baked, cosmic transcendence. Rather a place wherein you can withdraw, relax and contemplate things, unclouded by warring emotions, personal agendas and the demands of others. A retreat in meditation. This calms the mind and can give access to the unsullied crux of a matter. You are then in a far better position to make any decisions, or to decide no decision is necessary. I feel you are so overwhelmed by the swirling morass of what surrounds us all, you cannot see the individual trees for the forest.

Secondly, develop your sense of humour. Not taking yourself or things too seriously is a vital part of relaxing. Become more aware of irony, hypocrisy and delusional thinking, yours as well as others'. If you can accomplish this, I think your life may be altogether a more relaxed and productive affair.

Answer provided by David White, Psychotherapist

Answer (5) I find the fact that you ask this question very reassuring. I agree with you that people like Hitler believed themselves to be right, but I know of no destructive persons who asked themselves, and others, this question. How different our world could be if more of our leaders and politicians had the courage to do this.

I would like to point out that there are two fundamentally different schools of thought about the nature of human beings.

The view held by some psychologists, and the one that appears to be largely predominant in our culture, is that some of our basic "core" impulses are destructive, and that therefore they have to be restrained, disciplined, sublimated.

The other rather less commonly-held view is that destructive impulses or drives are not inherent in human nature but that they are, in fact, brought about by the thwarting of our natural impulses which are healthy and constructive. This is the view held by Wilhelm Reich and the European and American schools of somatic psychotherapy that grew out of his many years of research.

This school of thought believes that life isn't evil, that the unconscious isn't a devil, and that all individual and social evils are man-made, made by interference with the life process. Also that children, when allowed to be themselves, are peaceful, social and kindly.

The fundamental difference between these points of view is that the first one assumes that human beings are, at least in part, inherently evil and destructive, whereas the second one, which is the one I believe to be true, is that human beings are inherently constructive and cooperative and that destructive behaviour is a result of misunderstanding and the consequent attempts to control rather than support our natural impulses.

According to this point of view, it is the mistaken belief in the inherent destructiveness of human nature, and the actions that result from this belief, that cause destructive and violent behaviours which then make compulsive moralism and destructive laws necessary. In other words, our very attempts to control and destroy what we believe to be harmful are actually causing the behaviours that we are trying to avoid!

I hope this makes some sense to you and will help you in your search for your truth.

Answer provided by Donald Marmara, Somatic Psychotherapist