That of the impostor is the so-called syndrome from which those who think they do not deserve what they have, the goals and successes achieved, the job gratification or even just the compliments of others suffer.
Convinced that they will always be able to ‘deceive’ everyone, however, unlike psychopaths who build their identity on cheating others without ever being discovered, they blame themselves for it, fearing being exposed at the first opportunity which will naturally always be the next!
In practice ‘the impostor’ lives constantly under pressure, forced as he is to adhere to his mask, because in addition to continually feeling obliged to prove something (generally, the opposite of what he thinks of himself) he also knows that he is the only one capable of knowing who he really is, which is a bit like saying:
(a) the others are all better, and they all expect something of me;
(b) I cannot disappoint them;
(c) no one understands about me;
It is enough to read them in succession to understand how, rather than simply discordant, the first and third points are actually opposite sides of the same coin, because if you think about it it would be a bit’ as if to say ”I’m not worth much / I’m unique in the world” that doesn’t really seem like the most linear example of genuine humility..
By doing a short search on the web it is possible to find out about the characteristics that compose it, and most of the time those who think they are ‘affected’ by it are invited to contact a specialist to take the necessary actions, and I write actions and not remedies (or not to mention, cure) because not everyone agrees in defining it.
In fact, it ranges from disorder to syndrome, moving from an emotional situation to condition, up to conviction, a term used in a completely improper way, because it would indicate something much more serious from a psychopathological point of view..
It’s one thing to fear not deserving things, perhaps even often feeling inadequate for that role or task, but it’s quite another to know, especially because most of the time it’s not true at all, and the boy or girl doesn’t really have ‘nothing to envy’ anyone.
Yet in some cases we can arrive at such a crystallization of thought as to make it rigid and therefore non-deformable, a real certainty without any relationship with reality which unfortunately can lead to serious and often tragic epilogues, especially if not intercepted in time.
The major psychotherapy sites and platforms then provide conflicting indications both on the nature or causes and on the treatment, even if everyone agrees in stating that at the basis of the phenomenon there is a ‘low self-esteem’ of the subject, which is counterbalanced by an excessive ‘idealization’ of others.
But what is this opinion based on (judgment?) wrong about yourself and others?
Certainly not on the CV nor on the grades nor on the salary..
What if it was a question of image?
Not the one we see in the mirror when we are awake (obviously!) but the one that ‘we know’ we have inside, which is much less conscious, or rather is truly non-conscious, that is, unconscious.
As if to say, consciousness reflects like a mirror, while the unconscious deforms.
Here too, it is not that deformation should always be understood in a negative way, because if there is a beautiful fantasy the images can ‘speak’ rather of intuitions, even brilliant ones, and we can even dream of our ‘more beautiful’ girl of how she appears to us in the morning, even if we then have to be careful never to tell her, even under torture..
‘Then you don’t find me beautiful enough!!’ and from there goodbye to plans for a nice day..
Things change radically if it is instead denial that distorts reality, so I can dream of it ‘ugly’ when in fact it is beautiful, because denial is a lie without conscience..
The discussion would be much longer and more complex, because it is not enough to dream something uglier than it is to talk about denial, because on the contrary it could be an intuition of the profound reality of the other, as can happen when we dream, making it ugly, of a person who instead seemed to have been nice to us..
This is why dreams are told and interpreted in psychotherapy and not at breakfast, because it is the sound of words and the therapeutic relationship with those who at that given moment are telling the images that allow the psychotherapist to interpret them.
In short, at least for my brief online research, the solutions that are proposed never go beyond ‘coaching’ or cognitive techniques, which may even have their effectiveness, but they remind me a lot of a clip from the film Inside out 2 when the character of Ansia, terribly worried that things are going badly, is reassured with a thoughtful person ‘come on, don’t think about it’ to which she can only respond ironically ‘Thank you Joy, I hadn’t thought about it..’
It almost makes me want to agree with… point ‘c’!
Even if the encouragement pleases anyone and in some cases can contribute to ‘distract’ conscious thought and make people feel even better, in fact, at the same time they risk increasing the state of ‘confusion’, because they leave unchanged the profound idea that the other has of himself and others, with techniques learned during psychotherapy interviews becoming the closest thing to a leap of faith precisely because you no longer trust.. what you feel!
And when do you end up no longer trusting what you see?
This may be the case with Capgras Syndrome (or lookalike illusion) where you are deliriously convinced that the impostor is.. the other!
Those who suffer from it live in the belief that family members or some of the people who live with them have been replaced by lookalikes or replicants, and obviously no demonstration to the contrary manages to change their minds, as if they had lost the ability to recognize the internal image of the other, having completely lost their own.
In other words, I know it’s Giovanni, but in reality I know it’s not him!
Something similar happens in the film Invasion of the Body Snatchers where, however, people ‘know’ that others, replicants who are physically identical to their loved ones, are actually ‘different’, even if they are unable to explain why.
In short, there must be something in human beings that makes them capable of immediately recognizing themselves in the mirror and among themselves, a kind of ‘natural evidence’ linked to the certainty of being that if it doesn’t go into crisis (or worse lost) it prevents us from spending our lives asking ourselves why we have two eyes and not three, able to catch when the other is missing ‘something’ that is difficult to define in words precisely because it is linked to the period of life in which we do not speak and therefore.. we do not doubt!
That Hamlet couldn’t decide between life and death precisely because he confused them with each other?
Could.. be!
Ultimately, doubt is the reasonable and impossible choice between two certainties..
Marco Randisi
Leave a Reply