In the last article, we talked about the psychology of recurring mistakes, why we keep returning to the same patterns. Awareness emerged, we took small steps, we began to see the cycle.
But last week I noticed something: While we were trying to change, our environment wasn't changing.
Our family still treated us as if we were the "old us." Our friends still expected the jokes we used to make. Our colleagues still asked questions based on our old role.
While we picked up the phone to call, the person on the other end acted as if "you won't call anyway."
Looking at it from this perspective, I realized: We're not just trying to change. We're also struggling with others' expectations about us.
As Sartre said: "Hell is other people." (L'enfer, c'est les autres) (1*) But perhaps hell is living in other people's fixed ideas about us.
Because while we're trying to change, they're trying to keep us in our old place. They may not do this intentionally. But the system wants to maintain balance. And most people unconsciously push us back to our old selves so that balance isn't disturbed.
This article is about examining the anatomy of this invisible whirlpool.
Philosophical and Scientific Background
Philosophical Perspective
Sartre: The Gaze of Others (Le Regard d'Autrui)
In Being and Nothingness, Sartre says something as true as it is disturbing: The gaze of others objectifies us.
What does this mean?
When others look at us, they see us as a "thing." An unchanging, fixed thing. A category, a label, a definition.
When they say "you are this kind of person," they imprison us in that identity. And this gaze restricts our freedom. Because now it's not us who defines that identity, it's them. (1*)
For example, if you've been identified as the "procrastinating child" in the family, this is not just an observation. It's also an expectation. And every day, you carry the weight of this expectation.
For me, what Sartre reminds us here is this: Being an image in others' eyes means becoming stone. And as long as we are stone, we cannot move.
Changing means opposing the gaze of others. And this is much harder than we think.
Heidegger: "Das Man" - The Dictatorship of the "They"
In Being and Time, Heidegger uses a concept called "das Man." It can be translated as "the they" or "everyone," but there's no exact equivalent.
"Das Man" is no one, but controls everyone.
"Everyone does this." "Everyone thinks this way." "This isn't normal, everyone would be surprised."
This "everyone" is actually the voice of social expectations. And it's very powerful. (2*)
Our environment represents this "everyone." It tells us: "You've always been like this, why are you acting different now?"
This question seems innocent. But it's actually a warning: "Be normal. Go back to your old self."
According to Heidegger, being authentic means separating from "everyone." But this is very difficult. Because being "everyone" is comfortable and safe. Being yourself is lonely and dangerous.
I think what Heidegger reminds us is this: Our environment reminds us of what's "normal." And being "normal" often means being the old self.
Buber: I-Thou vs I-It Relationship
Martin Buber divides relationships into two types:
I-Thou relationship: Seeing the other as a changeable, free, open being. They are who they are now and can be someone else tomorrow.
I-It relationship: Seeing the other as a fixed object, a category. They are defined and not expected to change. (3*)
Our environment often sees us as "It."
"You are a procrastinator." "You've always been like this." "You'll never change."
These sentences place us in the "It" category. Fixed, unchangeable, defined.
But for change, we need to be seen as "Thou." That is, as an open potential. "You are like this now, but you could be different tomorrow."
Buber asks us: Do people see you as "Thou" or as "It"? One can change, the other cannot.
Foucault: Normalization and Social Control
When explaining how society works, Foucault uses the concept of "normalization."
Society defines what's "normal." Everything outside this is considered "abnormal." And people are controlled through this normalization pressure. (4*)
Our environment works the same way.
When we try to change, our environment says: "You're not normal anymore. You used to be like this, why are you different now?"
This appears to be a question. But it's actually a warning: "Return to normal."
What Foucault reminds us is this: Changing sometimes means accepting being "abnormal." And social pressure tries to pull us back to normal.
But perhaps the real question is: Whose definition of normal?
Scientific Perspective
Social Role Theory: Expected Behaviors
Social psychology's "role theory" says: Each of us has certain roles in society, family, and workplace.
In the family: "Procrastinating child," "responsible older sibling," "cheerful younger sister." At work: "The late one," "does everything," "the quiet one."
These roles are not just definitions. They are also expectations. People expect us to behave according to that role. (5*)
And what's interesting: These roles become automatic over time. We both act according to that role, and our environment pushes us into that role.
When we try to change the role, we're not just changing our own behavior, we're also trying to change the dynamics of the entire system. And the system resists.
Because if I change, others need to adapt too. And most people don't want to change.
Family Systems Theory: Homeostasis
Murray Bowen's family systems theory says something very illuminating: The family is a system. And every system tries to maintain balance.
This balance is called "homeostasis." (6*)
When the system is balanced, everyone knows their role, things proceed predictably. But when one member starts to change, the system is shaken.
And what does the system do? It tries to restore balance.
How?
Sometimes openly: "Why are you acting like this? You weren't like this before." Sometimes covertly: By creating situations that trigger old behaviors.
This is often not intentional sabotage. The system works this way. Change disturbs the system. And the system tries to eliminate the disturbance.
Salvador Minuchin says something similar: In family therapy, trying to change one person is not enough. Because the family will pull them back to their old state. You need to work with the entire system. (7*)
For me, this means: Saying "you've always been like this" actually means "please go back to your old self, because I know how to live with your old self."
Social Identity Theory: In-Group Expectations
Henri Tajfel's social identity theory says: Part of our identity comes from the groups we belong to.
Family, friend group, workplace... These are not just environment, they are part of our identity.
And the group expects certain behaviors from its members. Behaving differently from the group brings the risk of being excluded. (8*)
The fear of "you're not one of us anymore" is one of the most powerful factors preventing change.
Because humans want to belong. And the price of belonging is sometimes conforming to group norms.
This is where a very difficult choice emerges: Either I'll be myself or I'll belong to the group. Can I do both?
Social Support vs Social Sabotage
Research shows that social support is critical during the change process. A supportive environment facilitates change.
But look at the paradox: our closest people can sometimes be the biggest saboteurs.
Why?
Because our change may force them to change too. And most people don't want to change.
In psychology, this is called "social undermining." It's a subtle, unconscious sabotage. (9*)
Examples: "You won't be able to do it anyway." "You've always been like this." "Oh, so you've changed now?"
These sentences seem innocent. But they're actually needles. And each needle weakens the motivation to change a little more.
The most painful part: Those who do this are often not even aware. They do it unconsciously. But the effects are very real.
The Real Problem and Solution Proposals
The Real Problem
If the Environment Doesn't Change, Can I Change?
Here's the problem: I gained awareness, formed intention, started taking small steps. But everyone around me still knows me by my old self.
And this is a much more difficult obstacle than it seems.
Because several things happen:
1. Expectation pressure Every day, every hour, people expect the old me from us. And this expectation is like a heavy burden on our shoulders. The "you won't call anyway" look prevents us from calling.
2. The role lock won't open We have a role in the family system, at work, in the friend group. While trying to change that role, the system is trying to pull us back to our old place. As if an invisible hand is pushing us back to our old place.
3. Identity mirror As Buber said, people hold up a mirror to us. We see ourselves in their gaze. If they see the old us, we start to see the old us too. If the mirror is broken, we can't see our own face.
4. Social sabotage Sometimes our environment sabotages us without even realizing it. Sentences like "you won't be able to do it anyway" stick like small needles. And each needle causes us to withdraw a bit more.
5. Fear of loneliness If we change, maybe we'll be excluded from the group. "You're not one of us anymore." And this fear is a very powerful factor stopping change. Because humans fear being alone.
Here's the hardest question: We want to change but our environment doesn't want us to change. What should we do?
Solution Proposals
How Do We Manage the Relationship with Environment?
Again, I want to share these practices I prepared for myself with you:
Making an "Identity Announcement"
Change cannot be silent. We need to communicate it to our environment somehow.
But this doesn't mean "I've changed, deal with it." It's something much gentler but clearer:
"I've realized that I'm trying to change some of my behaviors. I need your support in this process."
This is open communication. Informing people in advance reduces their surprise and resistance.
For example, I recently told my spouse: "I've realized that I procrastinate a lot. I'm trying to change this. If you continue to treat me according to my old self, it will be difficult for me."
This sentence is both honest and vulnerable. And people usually respond to vulnerability with compassion.
Setting Boundaries
Sometimes people try to reload our old role onto us.
"You've always been like this, why are you different now?"
Then we need to set boundaries gently but clearly:
"I understand, you know me that way. But I don't act like that anymore."
Setting boundaries is not ending the relationship. It's defining a new form of the relationship.
Let's say we used to always be late and decided to change this. We can tell our friends:
"I know, I used to always be late. But I'm trying to be on time now. Your jokes like 'you'll be late anyway' make it harder for me."
Our friends might be surprised at first, but then they understand us and reduce their jokes. If they don't reduce them, we prove our new self by being on time.
Requesting an "I-Thou" Dialogue
As Buber reminds us: We want to be seen as "Thou," not as "It."
We can tell our close ones:
"You still see me the way you knew me before. But I'm trying to change. Can you see me as the person I am now?"
This request asks for something deep: See me not as a fixed category, but as an open potential.
This is not an easy request. But it's a necessary request.
Because as long as we're seen as "It," we can't change. Only when we're seen as "Thou" does change become possible.
Environmental Rotation - New People, New Places
Sometimes it's very hard to change in the old environment. Because everyone knows us by our old self.
Then we need to create new environments:
- New hobbies, new groups
- Spending time with people who don't know our old role
- Being in different settings
This is not abandoning the old environment. But it's making room for a new environment.
Because the new environment knows us as the "new me." For them, we are like an undefined page. And this is liberating.
We can join a new hobby group, for example. No one knows us there. We don't have the "procrastinator" label. And there, we can easily be someone different. Such an experience can strengthen the behavior pattern we're trying to change.
"Family System Awareness"
If we're trying to change in the family, we should know this: The system will try to maintain balance.
Some members of the family will resist. They'll say "why are you acting different?" Sometimes openly, sometimes covertly.
This is normal. And this isn't personal. The system works this way.
Being aware is the first step. Then being gentle but determined.
As Bowen said: If one person in the family changes, either the system pulls them back, or the system reshapes itself. The second option requires patience and determination.
"Gradual Change" Strategy
Sudden change shocks the environment and increases resistance.
But gradual change allows the environment to adapt.
Example: A small change each week. The environment notices but gradually gets used to it.
This is not negotiation. It's strategy.
Because change must occur not only in us but also in relationships. And relationships need time.
I did this with procrastinating on calls: First week I just sent a message. Second week I made a short call. Third week I talked longer. My environment was able to keep up with this gradual change. If it had been a sudden change, they might have been surprised and resisted.
Fear of Loneliness and Freedom
But there's something very important here: The fear of loneliness while changing is real.
Being excluded with "you're not one of us anymore" is one of our deepest fears. Because humans are social beings. We want to belong. We want to be accepted.
But the question Heidegger asks is: Whom do we want to belong to? "Everyone" or ourselves?
Sometimes changing means putting distance between us and some people. And this is painful. Because every relationship carries a history. Every separation is a loss.
But perhaps the real question is: Is our relationship with people who don't see us as we are, who insist on only seeing our old self, a real relationship?
As Sartre said: Living in the gaze of others is petrification. But living with our own choices is freedom.
And freedom sometimes brings loneliness. But is this loneliness worse than a petrified togetherness?
Perhaps maturity is this: Mourning the relationships we might lose while changing, but still changing. Both crying and walking.
Because some relationships can only exist with our old self. And if I change, those relationships must also change or end.
This is painful. But perhaps it's necessary.
Conclusion and Message to the Reader
As I reach the end of this article, I realize: Change is not just an individual journey. It's also a social reconstruction.
Because we're not alone. We're inside a network of relationships. And that network both carries us and holds us.
When we want to change, we're struggling not only with ourselves but also with others' ideas about us.
But perhaps the problem is: Does this have to be a struggle?
Maybe change is not a war with the environment, but a dialogue. As I change, my relationships change too. And this change must be discussed. Not silently, but openly.
As Buber reminds us: Being seen as "Thou" is the deepest human need. And perhaps the most beautiful thing about change is being surrounded by those who truly see us as "Thou."
With those who don't cling to our old self. Who look at the person we are now. Who wonder who we might become tomorrow.
Perhaps the deepest question is: Does my environment see me as "It" or as "Thou"?
But a new question emerges here: What if we lose ourselves while changing? What if, while trying to completely erase the "old me," we also erase our own essence? Where is the balance between change and continuity? How much of what we call "me" should change, and how much should remain?
In the next article, we'll look at the tension between change and continuity; how much of what we call "me" should change and how much should remain.
Until then, stay with love and make room for your environment while changing. They are also part of this journey.
Bibliography and Inspirational Texts
- Sartre, J.P. - Being and Nothingness
- Heidegger, M. - Being and Time
- Buber, M. - I and Thou
- Foucault, M. - Discipline and Punish
- Biddle, B.J. (1986) - Recent Developments in Role Theory
- Bowen, M. (1978) - Family Therapy in Clinical Practice
- Minuchin, S. (1974) - Families and Family Therapy
- Tajfel, H. & Turner, J.C. (1979) - An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict
- Duffy, M.K. et al. (2002) - Social undermining in the workplace
