THE IMPORTANCE OF A MISUNDERSTOOD AND MISAPPROPRIATED CONCEPT

The hypothesized link between the self-concept and various social problems has commanded a long-standing place in social and psychological theory as well as public discourse. Nowhere is this notion more strongly held than in the presumed relationship between self-esteem and various social and emotional difficulties, especially – though certainly not exclusively – with regard to youth problems (Smelser, 1989). It is not uncommon to hear parents, educators, politicians, and religious leaders blame school failure, delinquency, risky sexual behavior, impudence, drug and alcohol abuse, and more on children's diminished self-esteems (California Task Force to Promote Self-Esteem and Personal and Social Responsibility, 1990; Mecca, Smelser, & Vasconcellos, 1989). Indeed, shortly after President Clinton's reelection, USA Today reported Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala as saying that, if she remained in the president's cabinet, she would work to raise the self-esteem of the nation's children.

The typical discourse on the relationship between self-esteem and various social and emotional problems is twofold. Self-esteem, it is argued, safeguards people against the ill effects stemming from many of life's problems. This premise assumes that people with high self-esteem, in contrast to those with low self-esteem, will behave in more socially acceptable and responsible ways, will somehow be more resilient to life's vicissitudes, will generally display higher achievement in conventional pursuits, and will ultimately possess greater socioemotional well-being (Burns, 1979; Covington, 1992). This rationalist view of high self-esteem is deeply embedded in Western culture, but especially American.