Such a concrete idea of things

 In Adlerian psychology, there are aspects that are antithetical to normal social thinking. It denies etiology, denies trauma, and adopts teleology. It treats people's problems as interpersonal relationship problems. The youth was devastated by the separation of tasks that the philosopher had begun describing. When one thought of all one's problems as being in one's interpersonal relationships, the separation of tasks was effective. Just by having this viewpoint, the world would become quite simple. But there was no flesh and blood in it. It gave off no sense of one's warmth as a person. Could anyone accept such a philosophy? The youth rose from his chair and pleaded loudly. Look, I have been dissatisfied for ages. The adults of the world tell the young people, Do something you like to do. And they say it with smiles on their faces as if they might actually be understanding people, as if they were on the side of the young. But it's all lip service, which comes out only because those young people are complete strangers to them, and the relationship is one that is completely without any kind of responsibility. It's actually that they are trying to fulfill their responsibilities. It's precisely because we are closely connected to them and they are seriously concerned about our future that they can't say irresponsible things like, Do something you like.

 I'm sure you'd put on that understanding face too, and say to me, Please do something you like. But I won't believe such a comment from another person! It's an extremely irresponsible comment, as if one were just brushing a caterpillar off one's shoulder. And if the world crushed that caterpillar, you would say, It's not my task, and walk away nonchalantly. What separation of tasks, you monster! Oh, goodness, you're getting all bent out of shape. So what you are saying, in other words, is that you want someone to intervene to some extent? That you want another person to decide your path? It's not so difficult to judge what others expect of one, or what kind of role is being demanded of one. Living as one likes, on the other hand, is extremely difficult. What does one want to become, and what kind of life does one want to lead? One doesn't always get such a concrete idea of things. Don't you know that? 

Maybe it is easier to live in such a way as to satisfy other people's expectations. Because one is entrusting one's own life to them. For example, one runs along the tracks that one's parents have laid out. Even if there are a lot of things one might object to, one will not lose one's way as long as one stays on those rails. But if one is deciding one's path oneself, it's only natural that one will get lost at times. That is why I am looking for recognition from others. But that era ended a long time ago. And, in that case, one has no choice but to discipline oneself on the basis that other people are watching. To aspire to be recognized by others and live an honest life. 

Other people's eyes are my guide. Does one choose recognition from others, or does one choose a path of freedom without recognition? To live one's life trying to gauge other people's feelings and being worried about how they look at you. To live in such a way that others' wishes are granted. There may indeed be signposts to guide you this way, but it is a very unfree way to live. Now, why are you choosing such an unfree way to live? You are using the term desire for recognition, but what you are really saying is that you don't want to be disliked by anyone. There's no one anywhere who'd go so far as to actually want to be disliked. It is true that there is no person who wishes to be disliked. What should one do to not be disliked by anyone? It is to constantly gauge other people's feelings while swearing loyalty to all of them. If there are ten people, one must swear loyalty to all ten. When one does that, for the time being one will have succeeded in not being disliked by anyone.