I’ve finished one pass-through of Wanting, by Luke Burgis. The book is an attempt to spread and build on the ideas of Rene Girard. I liked the sections of the book that I thought I grasped. Other sections did not reach me, but perhaps I will get more out of a second reading.
The Burgis-Girard view is that we all have models, meaning people to whom we compare ourselves. What Girard calls mimetic desire is the tendency to want what our models want. That can make us jealous of our models, especially if they inhabit our intimate world rather than our remote world.
Here was one interesting aphorism:
think seriously about the people you least want to succeed
Some remarks:
1. I think of my friend from high school who, a few months before the 2020 election, said that he would never take a vaccine “developed by Trump and his cronies.” Clearly, he (along with many other Americans) really wanted President Trump to fail. That probably means that Mr. Trump was a model for my friend, in that my friend was comparing himself, consciously or not, with Mr. Trump. Incidentally, my friend was voted President of our student body our senior year.
2. I think of a situation from almost 30 years ago at Freddie Mac. I wanted to be in charge of a project, and when someone else was put in charge, I really wanted him to fail.
3. If I resent the success of Olivier Blanchard, Paul Krugman, or Ezra Klein, then that probably means that I treat them as models. Because I have met them, I cannot emotionally dismiss them as being part of the remote world.
4. I think that social media have crunched together the intimate world and the remote world. Burgis agrees that social media creates amped-up rivalry. He says that we are all like new college freshmen–feeling insecure and competing to stand out in a crowd of people who seem similar.
5. Think of someone who has had a nasty divorce. How would they feel if their ex were to be happy in a new relationship?
Really now, this is just basic human psychology and poor ego development and feelings of lack of self worth stemming largely from one’s upbringing.
To want someone to fail who gets to work on a project you did not says volumes about one’s self more than anything else.
Basic psychology also suggests that when our idealized version of ourselves is not in synch with what is happening in the real world ( our success/lack thereof) that human emotions of jealousy, envy, etc. and perhaps some mental illness may arise.
So a mental model might be not be anything more than how i view myself vs. how i really am and any disappointment that comes there from
Mimicry in matters where it is costly to obtain information and skill seems to make some sense. In matters where there are risks mimicry can save us from costly mistakes.
Unequivocally, sometimes behaviour should be copied but why would we want what others want? The fact that a model derived enjoyment from a behaviour does not mean that I will if I try the same. If I model my behaviour after that of another person, I still have to experience it. That does not mean that I am going to like it. “Mimetic desire” as an idea that I would interpret literally. Interpreted literally, it seems Girard’s idea is implausible.
While mimetic desire may be one aspect of human nature, I don’t think it is a complete picture. If someone views their models as fixed, then they might very well derive self-worth from outperforming their models, as Burgis-Girard describe. However, some might view themselves as having a choice over their models, i.e., a choice about whom they wish to mimic. In that case, we might expect the opposite psychology: they might view their models’ successes as positive reinforcement that they have made the right choice of models. For example, many people might be happy when they see fellow alumni or professional peers succeed as it makes themselves more confident that they too will succeed. (Of course, some might have the opposite Burgis-Girard reaction too.) There is also a subtle distinction between forward-looking potential (“My models’ success makes me optimistic about my potential future success”) vs. hindsight evaluation of past outcomes (“My models’ success makes me re-evaluate my own achieved success.”)
A colleague promoted over oneself or a divorce are examples of fixed models. In the short-term context, one had a fixed set of colleagues vying for the immediately past outcome of getting the promotion. The ex-spouse is fixed, and the spouse’s success in finding a new relationship is not necessarily a good omen that one will find a happy new relationship oneself.
The Trump-Blanchard-Krugman-Klein examples might actually be examples of alternative models that one *didn’t* choose. One might view their success as a sign that one didn’t choose the right models to emulate and that might make one less hopeful about one’s future.
With Krugman, Klein, etc. it is more that I would prefer to live in a world where people who employ such strategies as they do are not successful. I imagine this is true for Trump-haters as well.
When my ex- remarried I cringed in sorrow…for the groom.
…for the groom
LOL
Seems we compare ourselves mostly to neighbors and colleagues, with a bimodal overlay. On one hand, it is good to hang out with, and be around, successful people. On the other hand, their failure can reflect to our success. I’m thinking of our paleolithic roots: I want to be part of a successful hunt, but if my hunting buddy misses the big kill while I make the big kill…