The Worm at the Core (Solomon, Greenberg, Pyszczynski)

OVERVIEW

The Worm at the Core was written by Sheldon Solomon, Jeff Greenberg, and Tom Pyszczynski, researchers interested in death anxiety and testing Ernest Becker’s theories experimentally (see summary of The Denial of Death). They also founded terror management theory, which posits that death anxiety is what drives humans to search for meaning and value in themselves (self-esteem) and in the world (cultural/religious worldviews).

The thinking goes thus: we humans*, like every other animal, evolved to be specially concerned with self-preservation and to engage in death-avoidance behaviours just about all the time. Then our brains evolved self-consciousness, an awareness of our separate selves existing in time and space. Except now Homo sapiens, finely attuned to avoid death, can fully perceive that there is no avoiding death. Haha, uh oh. To avoid a persistent state of existential fear, the human organism must defend itself from this knowledge. We have to (and our ancestors had to) find some way to re-establish security. One simply cannot operate successfully in the world with an all-pervading sense of precariousness or with ongoing existential crises. So, we hid death under the psychological bushes. The two pillars of terror management theory state we do this by constantly searching for reinforcement in 1) our own self-worth and 2) the rightness and safety of our cultural belief systems. In this way, self-esteem is all about buttressing the illusion of personal significance and control, and culture/religion is all about buttressing the illusion that life is manageable, meaningful, and secure (or, to steal the authors’ words, to help us “impose order and permanence on something chaotic and fleeting”).

These self-esteem/worldview defenses that happen below the level of conscious awareness are called “distal defenses,” and they explain many of the experimental outcomes in Worm at the Core. After brief death reminders, for example, Americans reacted more negatively to political candidates with anti-American sentiments, while those who based their self-worth on the cultural standard of thinness ate fewer calories at their next meal. Nudge us into thinking about death and we react instinctively by doubling down on our belief systems and the sources of our self-esteem.

When these unconscious defenses can’t keep death at bay, or if the reminder of death is potent, death thoughts bubble up into our conscious awareness. Then, the authors say, we employ “proximal defenses.” Enter rationalization and distraction. We tell ourselves “I’m healthy and young, I don’t have to worry about that” or “it’s fine, just one isn’t going to kill me.” Alternatively, we distract ourselves. Netflix binges, shopping, drinking, anything to distract or numb, what Kierkegaard called ‘tranquilizing ourselves with the trivial.’

To recap, Homo sapiens is a species highly adapted to survive but also (ironically) in possession of a cerebral cortex that perceives the ultimate futility in this endeavour. *Nihilism intensifies.* In order to keep from being paralyzed by insanity our species developed self-esteem and cultural/religious belief systems to fortify us against mortal terror.

What do the authors suggest we do with this information? In short: come to terms with death, seek out enduring significance, and use this knowledge to be more self-determined and compassionate.

 

WHAT NOW? (actions for mortal atheists)

I feel an obligation to you, dear reader, to flesh out the “what now.” I’m affably aggrieved with Solomon, Greenberg, and Pyszczynski for not offering more in the way of advice after utterly annihilating any pretense of comfort. Our species worked hard for that pretense, guys! So rude.

To their credit, the authors point us in the direction of two books. One is Robert Jay Lifton’s “The Broken Connection: On Death and the Continuity of Life,” which presents us with 5 core modes of death transcendence (that I suspect we can intentionally manufacture or enhance for ourselves to alleviate some death anxiety). The second is Irvin Yalom’s textbook “Existential Psychotherapy,” which I’ve already added to my Amazon shopping cart (can someone DIY existential therapy? We’re gonna find out). Here’s what else I’ve got:

 

Contemplate death

Am I beginning to sound like a broken record with this advice? Totally, but this time it’s a fun permutation! The authors were able to show that the more you fear death, the lower your self-esteem. They also showed that boosting your self-esteem buffers against anxiety – feeling a deep sense of worth actually blocks the physiological effects of stress. To me this suggests that coming to terms with death may increase our feelings of self-worth and also lower anxiety.

In addition, I think it stands to reason that if your unconscious reactions to death push you toward in-group/out-group, good/evil, and right/wrong thinking, lessening your degree of aversion may make you a better steward of humanity. I obviously can’t assert that being less reactive to death will make you a more hospitable and understanding person, but I think it warrants the suspicion. Tangential to this, be aware that subtle death reminders may heighten us vs. them thinking and use this knowledge to be more conscious of your actions/reactions.

 

Base your self-esteem on intrinsic and enduring factors

I’m crossing over with Ernest Becker’s advice that the more robust the thing(s) we derive meaning and value from, the more robust our self-esteem. This is still a half-formed idea, but here’s my best effort. Your culture provides you with endless things on which to base your self-worth or to derive value from. If you live in the West, it might be the Western ideals of fitness/beauty, being seen as self-sufficient/independent, having lots of money, or getting a prestigious job. The first problem with these is that they are relative – you can only be rich if someone is poor, you can only achieve prestige if someone else exists in insignificance. The second problem is that, to some degree, these ideals are extrinsic, meaning other people contribute to confirming/denying your success. The last problem is that they are transient and vulnerable, they are out of your control. You could have an accident tomorrow that takes away your fitness, your independence, your money, and your job. There are any number of other cultural values that fit into one or more of the categories: providing for your family, having a successful marriage, raising nice kids, being well travelled, etc. The crux of my advice then is to pick values that don’t rely on the failure/sub-standardness of others, that are intrinsically measured, and that can be achieved no matter your circumstances. Values that are enduring and self-contained. A few that come to mind: acting in a way that dignifies and respects others, having compassion, living with appreciation and gratitude, or even cultivating patience (qualities of character vs. external achievements). To bring this back around to death, these are also all things you can achieve when confined to a bed and dying (not so for climbing the corporate ladder or being self-sufficient). Aligning with values that are more permanent and less constricting will serve us well in life and death.

 

*Stop using the phrase “humans”

Friends, I am the first to admit that I often refer to us as humans, human beings, Homo sapiens, etc. Not until The Worm at the Core did I realize the vast disservice I was doing to the English language. MUCH BETTER phrases exist. Might I suggest the authors’ description of “naked, pulsating pieces of fornicating finite species meat?” Or perhaps “transient ambulatory gene repositories.” We must all use these phrases henceforth.

 

IN SUM:

Is this book entirely secular? Yes, but no, but yes. Religion and supernatural belief are explored, but almost entirely in a “this is the best we could do at the time to quell our fear of death” sort of way.

If you had to describe the book in one sentence? Three plucky researchers reminded people they were going to die someday and then watched what happened next.

Who should read this book? Anyone who is serious about understanding the consequences of mortality coupled with self-consciousness, and how human behaviour is shaped by the anxiety of death (but in a more accessible fashion than Becker’s The Denial of Death… and with more science!)