Confidence, Arrogance, and Delusions of Grandeur
Confidence is defined as “the state of feeling certain about the truth of something.”
Arrogance is defined as “having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities.”
Delusions of grandeur are characterized by, “fantastical beliefs that one is famous, omnipotent, wealthy, or otherwise very powerful.”
We tell our children that they can be anything they desire. We tell people to believe in themselves. We tell people to ignore criticism. We tell people to not care what others think of them. We tell people to “just go for it.” We tell people that they are stronger and smarter than they know, and more capable than they think. We encourage people to take risks, to go big, to dream big, and to never give up.
Then, as soon as someone crosses that razor thin line between confidence and arrogance and delusion, we point the finger at them, label them, and sometimes even slap a mental illness brand on them. Huh?
How can we try so hard to build people up, to make them believe that they can accomplish anything, and yet when they truly start to believe that they can accomplish anything, we criticize them and whack them back down. It seems utterly hypocritical. Where are these invisible lines between confidence, arrogance, and delusion? Who decides when they’re crossed?
If Jesus, or Buddha, or Mohammed were alive today they’d surely be labeled delusional and/or arrogant. You’re the son of god? Uh-huh, come this way, everything’s going to be okay. You’re gonna take these pills and calm down for a while. We wouldn’t accept that sort of behavior these days, because we’ve pathologized people who have certainty, or supreme confidence, or who believe in themselves so strongly that no matter what anyone else says, they will persist. This type of dogged determination, devotion, faith, belief, and confidence is attractive to most people, and is honestly the basis for most major religions, at least initially. Yet these traits are considered either anti-social or pathologic now.
Most geniuses who accomplished great things were once called crazy. Einstein’s theory of relativity was not accepted for decades, and he received numerous criticisms from many scientists for much of his life. Newton also had to defend his treatises and scientific findings throughout much of his life as well. I’m sure that people called both of these geniuses arrogant and delusional. But why? Because the people who were labeling them couldn’t envision how their beliefs could be true? Because the people calling them delusional couldn’t immediately see the reality that Einstein and Newton would help to create?
Crazy people are only crazy until what they’re saying happens...then they’re prophets, or geniuses, or at the very least good predictors of the future. Crazy is in the eye of the beholder, and isn’t very useful anyway. Are religious leaders apt to be delusional occasionally? Absolutely. But does that mean that we should slap a mental illness label on them and medicate them? This idea that there is a narrow range of human behavior that’s considered normal, and anyone that strays too far outside this range needs to be reigned back in, is nonsense. We need a broader range of acceptable human behavior. We need to foster the dreamers, the delusional ones, and let them dream and have delusions, as long as they’re not hurting themselves or others.
Believing the idea that one day we’d walk on the moon, would seem delusional and arrogant to anyone living in the 19th century. Yet, 100 years later, we did it. So were we delusional? Or just confident? The answer changes depending on the outcome. What I’m saying is that delusion, confidence, and arrogance is fluid, ever-changing, and not really a helpful labeling system. Instead, is the person actively harming himself or others, and if not, then let him dream, let him be delusional, and let him think that he can change the world. Perhaps, just perhaps, he might.
