What do you think?
Rate this book
On Kindness
Kindness is the foundation of the world’s great religions and most-enduring philosophies. Why, then, does being kind feel so dangerous? If we crave kindness with such intensity, why is it a pleasure we often deny ourselves? And why—despite our longing—are we often suspicious when we are on the receiving end of it?
In this brilliant book, the eminent psychoanalyst Adam Phillips and the historian Barbara Taylor examine the pleasures and perils of kindness. Modern people have been taught to perceive ourselves as fundamentally antagonistic to one another, our motives self-seeking. Drawing on intellectual history, literature, psychoanalysis, and contemporary social theory, this book explains how and why we have chosen loneliness over connection. On Kindness argues that a life lived in instinctive, sympathetic identification with others is the one we should allow ourselves to live.
Bursting with often shocking insight, this brief and essential book will return to its readers what Marcus Aurelius declared was mankind’s “greatest delight”: the intense satisfactions of generosity and compassion.
In this brilliant book, the eminent psychoanalyst Adam Phillips and the historian Barbara Taylor examine the pleasures and perils of kindness. Modern people have been taught to perceive ourselves as fundamentally antagonistic to one another, our motives self-seeking. Drawing on intellectual history, literature, psychoanalysis, and contemporary social theory, this book explains how and why we have chosen loneliness over connection. On Kindness argues that a life lived in instinctive, sympathetic identification with others is the one we should allow ourselves to live.
Bursting with often shocking insight, this brief and essential book will return to its readers what Marcus Aurelius declared was mankind’s “greatest delight”: the intense satisfactions of generosity and compassion.
128 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2009
About the author
Adam Phillips
124 books526 followersAdam Phillips is a British psychotherapist and essayist.
Since 2003 he has been the general editor of the new Penguin Modern Classics translations of Sigmund Freud. He is also a regular contributor to the London Review of Books.
Phillips was born in Cardiff, Wales in 1954, the child of second-generation Polish Jews. He grew up as part of an extended family of aunts, uncles and cousins and describes his parents as "very consciously Jewish but not believing". As a child, his first interest was the study of tropical birds and it was not until adolescence that he developed an interest in literature. He went on to study English at St John's College, Oxford, graduating with a third class degree. His defining influences are literary – he was inspired to become a psychoanalyst after reading Carl Jung's autobiography and he has always believed psychoanalysis to be closer to poetry than medicine.
Adapted from Wikipedia.
Phillips is a regular contributor to the London Review of Books. He has been described by The Times as "the Martin Amis of British psychoanalysis" for his "brilliantly amusing and often profoundly unsettling" work; and by John Banville as "one of the finest prose stylists in the language, an Emerson of our time."
Since 2003 he has been the general editor of the new Penguin Modern Classics translations of Sigmund Freud. He is also a regular contributor to the London Review of Books.
Phillips was born in Cardiff, Wales in 1954, the child of second-generation Polish Jews. He grew up as part of an extended family of aunts, uncles and cousins and describes his parents as "very consciously Jewish but not believing". As a child, his first interest was the study of tropical birds and it was not until adolescence that he developed an interest in literature. He went on to study English at St John's College, Oxford, graduating with a third class degree. His defining influences are literary – he was inspired to become a psychoanalyst after reading Carl Jung's autobiography and he has always believed psychoanalysis to be closer to poetry than medicine.
Adapted from Wikipedia.
Phillips is a regular contributor to the London Review of Books. He has been described by The Times as "the Martin Amis of British psychoanalysis" for his "brilliantly amusing and often profoundly unsettling" work; and by John Banville as "one of the finest prose stylists in the language, an Emerson of our time."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 86 reviews
July 13, 2009
This book was interesting, but not completely what I was hoping for. I liked that the authors discussed why kindness in our current society is difficult, overlooked, and underappreciated. However, they spent way too much time talking about the psychotherapy's take on kindness. This pretty much only proved my thoughts that Freud thought that everything is about sex. I don't agree, and I kind of felt like I was wasting my time reading about psychotherapy semantics. The authors did have the occasional good insight. I agree that kindness is often viewed as a weakness. That society laments the lack of kindness in society but few people are willing to make it a habit or make it a more respected value. I appreciate the value these author's place on kindness and I ended up with a couple of good quotes in spite of the fact that this book didn't thrill me.
February 11, 2021
"It is kind to be able to bear conflict, in oneself and others; it is kind, to oneself and others, to forgo magic and sentimentality for reality. It is kind to see individuals as they are, rather than how we might want them to be; it is kind to care for people just as we find them."
A go-back look at kind(ness) through the ages, where it evolved from and to, what it is undergirded by and its confusions like all things human split often enough in cointradictoriness in motives/urges, subterfuges of self, the same ol' much tred ground of humans as they do.
A go-back look at kind(ness) through the ages, where it evolved from and to, what it is undergirded by and its confusions like all things human split often enough in cointradictoriness in motives/urges, subterfuges of self, the same ol' much tred ground of humans as they do.
August 17, 2009
Truly a book for this moment. Brilliant prose. At the dark black heart of all the birthers and deathers out there is nice little knot of all-American selfishness. The belief that if we just all look out for ourselves it all works out just fine. Phillips, hearkening back to the Stoics, Rousseau, Freud, Humes, Smith, and other thinkers, reminds us that it is our connection to others that makes us human.
August 24, 2015
Dear Dominick,
I read this book because of you.
I'm not always as kind as I would like to be, sometimes because I think it's funny to be crusty, sometimes because a certain harshness is the protective candy coating that hides my vulnerability.
Anyway, you have many lovely qualities, but I have been especially touched by your kindness.
So I'm giving you this book not because I think you need its insights (although it is kind of insightful), but as a token of the change you have inspired in me - and, I'm sure, many others.
Sincerely, your friend,
Richard
(--- I also will say that I found this book a bit dry and obsessed w Freud, but if it had been more touchy-feely I probably would have resisted it more)
I read this book because of you.
I'm not always as kind as I would like to be, sometimes because I think it's funny to be crusty, sometimes because a certain harshness is the protective candy coating that hides my vulnerability.
Anyway, you have many lovely qualities, but I have been especially touched by your kindness.
So I'm giving you this book not because I think you need its insights (although it is kind of insightful), but as a token of the change you have inspired in me - and, I'm sure, many others.
Sincerely, your friend,
Richard
(--- I also will say that I found this book a bit dry and obsessed w Freud, but if it had been more touchy-feely I probably would have resisted it more)
January 12, 2013
I feel divided regarding this book.
The first three chapters are really interesting, but as soon Freud was mentioned I lost my interest in what I read. I began to pay attention again when I moved to the last chapter.
I think I was looking for something more inspiring. Also this book with its dry style didn't give me any particular insight on kindness and left me with a feeling that it lost its chance.
The first three chapters are really interesting, but as soon Freud was mentioned I lost my interest in what I read. I began to pay attention again when I moved to the last chapter.
I think I was looking for something more inspiring. Also this book with its dry style didn't give me any particular insight on kindness and left me with a feeling that it lost its chance.
August 29, 2009
I loved this book. Offers an account of kindness as not merely a virtue, but a pleasure. Brilliant account of how reductive and cynical psychoanalytic theory can distort our emotional lives. And, best of all, ties together the personal analysis into a political account of how unkindess is expressed in neoliberal policies.
August 3, 2016
Kindness is very important to me. I even have a friend named Kindness. In Phillips and Taylor's study of the meaning and roots of kindness, a dichotomy is defined: Kindness requires a level of vulnerability, an opening up of oneself, which we are not always willing to do. Yet, performing acts of kindness makes us feel good, about ourselves, about others. We expect to be treated kindly but are sometimes afraid (yes, that's the word) to open ourselves up. The authors trace kindness through biology, religion, philosophy, psychology, and contemporary mores. Those who expect a touchy-feely, ain't life grand approach will be in for a shock. This is a thought-provoking, honest assessment of a complex emotion. Some say kindness is innate (the same can be said for hostility), the religious say that it is imbued by god, the Freudians say that kindness is a form of blackmail we use to get what we want, and the contemporary rat-race says that kindness is a form of weakness. Phillips and Taylor do come down on the side of being kind, if for no other reason than it is better than the alternative, but the case is clear that kindness is sometimes a two-edged sword. This is a short book to be read slowly and savored. I will read another Phillips book soon.
August 20, 2011
The history of kindness was interesting and insightful. The rest relied far too heavily on psychoanalysis and Freudian theory, which is just a bunch of unsubstantiated explanations with little value outside of BSing a term paper. I would have rather seen a comprehensive review of literature and peer reviewed studies on kindness and how it manifests itself, how we justify it, and how we value it.
October 26, 2023
Freud'a gelene kadar güzeldi.
November 28, 2009
from KCPL, due 2009.1209 returned
This book is a bit too cerebral for my taste. Still plan to finish it, though.
It seems to me that kindness is very simple, arising from the insight that there is no separation or essential difference between this and that, that all arises in awareness as part of awareness. Kindness is an expression of the natural acceptance that awareness extends to itself, leading to the mutuality of the golden rule -- treating the apparent other as one would want to be treated, because the one and the other are not different, but of a kind.
Okay, I skipped a bit of the penultimate chapter when it bogged down in abstract musings over the sexuality of kindness, the aggressiveness of sexuality, and the kindness of aggression. The last chapter has more musing and psychoanalytic hand-wringing over the ambiguity of human motivation and the bleakness of evolutionary thought.
At the end of the book, I don't much care for the story Phillips and Taylor tell. I find it too complex yet ultimately unedifying. Here's a story I like better:
Kindness is a natural human impulse that springs from awareness' warm recognition of kinship with all that enters its range. For a variety of reasons, humans often choose to suppress this natural impulse, but they can also choose to nurture and cultivate it. When we do, we discover that little is as rewarding or satisfying as mutual regard shared with other sentient beings. Why is this? Who knows? Who cares? It's enough to recognize that this is in the nature of human life is and to gratefully accept the nourishment available to us in this way.
This book is a bit too cerebral for my taste. Still plan to finish it, though.
It seems to me that kindness is very simple, arising from the insight that there is no separation or essential difference between this and that, that all arises in awareness as part of awareness. Kindness is an expression of the natural acceptance that awareness extends to itself, leading to the mutuality of the golden rule -- treating the apparent other as one would want to be treated, because the one and the other are not different, but of a kind.
Okay, I skipped a bit of the penultimate chapter when it bogged down in abstract musings over the sexuality of kindness, the aggressiveness of sexuality, and the kindness of aggression. The last chapter has more musing and psychoanalytic hand-wringing over the ambiguity of human motivation and the bleakness of evolutionary thought.
At the end of the book, I don't much care for the story Phillips and Taylor tell. I find it too complex yet ultimately unedifying. Here's a story I like better:
Kindness is a natural human impulse that springs from awareness' warm recognition of kinship with all that enters its range. For a variety of reasons, humans often choose to suppress this natural impulse, but they can also choose to nurture and cultivate it. When we do, we discover that little is as rewarding or satisfying as mutual regard shared with other sentient beings. Why is this? Who knows? Who cares? It's enough to recognize that this is in the nature of human life is and to gratefully accept the nourishment available to us in this way.
October 5, 2016
For those who have been through analysis, On Kindness makes a good case for the salience of this word within the accounts we continue to make of ourselves. At least two chapters are intellectual history; at least two read Freud in relation to Winnicott, no great surprise to fans of Adam Phillips, who goes around and around at times to evade criticizing Freud, but for whose ideas there would be no need for this book. Freud doesn't talk about kindness, and it takes a therapist to wonder why, a historian (Taylor) to talk about why it might matter.
October 23, 2021
Those two stars are for the definition of kindness found in Chapter 1 as "the ability to bear the vulnerability of others, and therefore of oneself." (p. 6) This link between negativity and kindness is the book's greatest (and arguably only) insight.
The middle chapters are laced with complex psychoanalytic theory which requires more concentration than would be necessary if the book benefitted from any kind of structure, clear argument, referencing system or contextualized quotations. It moves between very different points of view without much indication and little evaluation.
For the sake of 117 pages, I would still perhaps recommend reading this book but only for its insights into the link between vulnerability and compassion.
The middle chapters are laced with complex psychoanalytic theory which requires more concentration than would be necessary if the book benefitted from any kind of structure, clear argument, referencing system or contextualized quotations. It moves between very different points of view without much indication and little evaluation.
For the sake of 117 pages, I would still perhaps recommend reading this book but only for its insights into the link between vulnerability and compassion.
June 30, 2022
Whew! Glad to be finished, what a slog & a lot of twaddle.
March 7, 2023
Meh... Read this if you like Freud and if you exclusively like white, male, western philosophy
January 8, 2016
Wonderful essays - attempts - to revive our awareness, desire, and need to be kind and to be treated kindly. This was a very thought-provoking read, co-authored by a historian and a psychoanalyst. Both argue that what humans long for is an "unromantic," or "unsentimental" kindness - one that accommodates hostility and aggression, a kindness that bears conflict, that in some sense allows room for hate. Phillips in particular draws on Freud and Donald Winnicott to argue that aggression itself can be a form of kindness, a necessary element to the robust experience of kindness. Most people look suspiciously upon kindness. Compassion, sympathy, tenderness are merely guises for selfishness, so many have argued. A symptom of our individualism is our overestimation of independence. Phillips and Taylor want to remind us of two things in particular: 1) that we are truly interdependent creatures who rely on others for our well-being and flourishing - that in a fundamental way, we need others; and 2) that kindness is pleasurable and breathes life unlike anything else. We do not need a God or gods, lawgivers or philosophers, religion or ethicists - or even Phillips and Taylor - to tell us to be kind. We already know the many benefits - psychologically, relationally, emotionally, mentally, holistically - of kindness. We already know them, instinctively. Go buy your friends a pitcher of beer and you'll know right away: this feels good, being kind to another human being, just for the hell of it, no strings attached.
Here is one of my favorite quotes: “Real kindness, real fellow feeling, entails hating and being hated - that is, really feeling available frustrations - and through this, coming to a more realistic relationship. This, one might say, is a more robust version of kindness, a kindness made possible through frustration and hatred rather than a kindness organized to repudiate (or to disown) such feelings. Kindness of this variety allows for ambivalence and conflict while false, or magical, kindness distorts our perceptions of other people, often by sentimentalizing them, to avoid conflict. Sentimentality is cruelty by other means... It is kind to be able to bear conflict, in oneself and others; it is kind, to oneself and others, to forgo magic and sentimentality for reality. It is kind to see individuals as they are, rather than how we might want them to be; it is kind to care for people just as we find them.”
Here is one of my favorite quotes: “Real kindness, real fellow feeling, entails hating and being hated - that is, really feeling available frustrations - and through this, coming to a more realistic relationship. This, one might say, is a more robust version of kindness, a kindness made possible through frustration and hatred rather than a kindness organized to repudiate (or to disown) such feelings. Kindness of this variety allows for ambivalence and conflict while false, or magical, kindness distorts our perceptions of other people, often by sentimentalizing them, to avoid conflict. Sentimentality is cruelty by other means... It is kind to be able to bear conflict, in oneself and others; it is kind, to oneself and others, to forgo magic and sentimentality for reality. It is kind to see individuals as they are, rather than how we might want them to be; it is kind to care for people just as we find them.”
June 12, 2018
“The self without sympathetic attachments is either a fiction or a lunatic.”
― Adam Phillips, On Kindness
I've been reading Adam Phillips for a while now. Phillips is incredibly careful with his choices of words. Through his writing we often see expressions like 'I want to suggest', 'I have proposition', 'if', 'it is as though', 'it is as if', and many more instances like these. Why I pointed this out? I want to say that Phillips doesn't simply say something with certainty.
In other words, when he says 'the self without sympathetic attachments is either a fiction or a lunatic' without using any words that implies uncertainty, he is 100% certain ― based on 40 years of clinical practices.
In this book, Phillips and Taylor, investigate the history and psychology of kindness. They conclude that kindness is an essential element of a healthy life. This book, also, is an attempt to revive the message of the prophet of the kindness, Jean-Jacques Rousseau. In our era of toxic rivalry, kindness is a map that leads us to a life worth living.
I finish with another quote from this book:
“Everybody is vulnerable at every stage of their lives; everybody is subject to illness, accident, personal tragedy, political and economic reality... This doesn't mean that people aren't resourceful. Bearing other people's vulnerability ―which means sharing in it imaginatively and practically without needing to get rid of it― entails being able to bear one's own.”
― Adam Phillips, On Kindness
― Adam Phillips, On Kindness
I've been reading Adam Phillips for a while now. Phillips is incredibly careful with his choices of words. Through his writing we often see expressions like 'I want to suggest', 'I have proposition', 'if', 'it is as though', 'it is as if', and many more instances like these. Why I pointed this out? I want to say that Phillips doesn't simply say something with certainty.
In other words, when he says 'the self without sympathetic attachments is either a fiction or a lunatic' without using any words that implies uncertainty, he is 100% certain ― based on 40 years of clinical practices.
In this book, Phillips and Taylor, investigate the history and psychology of kindness. They conclude that kindness is an essential element of a healthy life. This book, also, is an attempt to revive the message of the prophet of the kindness, Jean-Jacques Rousseau. In our era of toxic rivalry, kindness is a map that leads us to a life worth living.
I finish with another quote from this book:
“Everybody is vulnerable at every stage of their lives; everybody is subject to illness, accident, personal tragedy, political and economic reality... This doesn't mean that people aren't resourceful. Bearing other people's vulnerability ―which means sharing in it imaginatively and practically without needing to get rid of it― entails being able to bear one's own.”
― Adam Phillips, On Kindness
March 25, 2013
A brief but interesting book on the history of kindness, followed by a Freudian take on kindness itself. I thought that the history of kindness (in the western world, at least) was by far the best part of the book, though it started to fall apart when it came to the very Freudian take on kindness itself. I'm no expert on psychoanalysis and where it has gone since it was devised by Freud, (if it has stood the test of time/research) but I thought it was thought-provoking nonetheless.
March 27, 2022
Brief and thought-provoking. Would probably help in the middle to have a better grasp on Freud/psychoanalysis, but even without much knowledge of that it's interesting. I quite enjoyed the history of kindness, and their final conclusions on what to make of it.
May 10, 2011
Pure hope.
October 4, 2021
I'm going to give this 4 stars because it made me think about kindness in ways I hadn't before. In discussing kindness, the authors also spoke about how the self is formed and how it is formed not in opposition to others but rather in-relation-to others i.e. there is no self without others. The authors argue that kindness is what creates these relationships; not only that, kindness is a natural inclination in all humans, though we have come to regard all humans as naturally selfish and individualistic. They also discuss how true kindness is not "magical" and is not pure and free of anger or hatred; in fact, true kindness and love have an admixture of kindness and aggression. I found these passage particularly compelling. They go into depth from a Freudian/psychoanalytic perspective, which gets a little kooky with all that Freudian repressed psychosexual mother love! But, in any event, an interesting read.
August 29, 2017
"Kindness, one could say, complicates one's relations with others in peculiarly subtle and satisfying ways and for a very simple reason. Acts of kindness demonstrate, in the clearest possible way, that we are vulnerable and dependent animals, who have no better resource than each other. If kindness previously had to be legitimized by a God or by gods, or located in women and children, it is because it has had to be delegated - and sanctioned, and sacralized, and idealized, and sentimentalized - because it comes from the part of ourselves that we are most disturbed by; the part that knows how much assurance and (genuine) reassurance is required to sustain our sense of viability. Our resistance to kindness is our resistance to encountering what kindness meets in us, and what we meet in other people by being kind to them."
Read
October 18, 2019A western worldview history of kindness is presented including Hobbes , Rousseau , Christianity , and some contemporary thinking.
The book also delves deeply into Freudian psychology, through Adam Phillips portions of the text, which is written engagingly. He investigates the sexual drive and human connections.
And finally, tying these ideas together is a plea for kindness, and a warning about our competitive culture’s tendency towards tribal interests instead of wider human bonds:
“A competitive society, one that divides itself into winners and losers, breeds unkindness.” 105
The solution then is not “to renounce or ignore the aggressive aspects of ourselves, but to see kindness as being in solidarity with human need, and with the very paradoxical sense of powerlessness and power that human need induces.”
The book also delves deeply into Freudian psychology, through Adam Phillips portions of the text, which is written engagingly. He investigates the sexual drive and human connections.
And finally, tying these ideas together is a plea for kindness, and a warning about our competitive culture’s tendency towards tribal interests instead of wider human bonds:
“A competitive society, one that divides itself into winners and losers, breeds unkindness.” 105
The solution then is not “to renounce or ignore the aggressive aspects of ourselves, but to see kindness as being in solidarity with human need, and with the very paradoxical sense of powerlessness and power that human need induces.”
Read
September 25, 2021I can't really imagine a more apt, or stirring, read than this one right now. I picked it up out of personal concern, as I had been thinking a lot about kindness, namely, do I experience kindness in the same way that I did—by being kind, by accepting others’ kindness—before lockdown? Phillips and Taylor write, "Our resistance to kindness is our resistance to encountering what kindness meets in us, and what we meet in other people by being kind to them." They illuminate the necessity, as well as the complicated nature, of kindness—and the necessity of its complicated nature. That kindness is not easy is what makes it kind.
January 1, 2023
I wasn't sure what to expect. This book is very insightful. History of kindness, kindness instinct, modern kindness are all sections of the book. Here are some sentences that appealed to me:
" feelings of connection and reciprocity are among the greatest pleasures that human beings can possess."
" there is a difference between kindness as a moral obligation and as a desire."
" childhood had become the least bastion of kindness, the last place where we may find more love in the world than there appears to be."
" feelings of connection and reciprocity are among the greatest pleasures that human beings can possess."
" there is a difference between kindness as a moral obligation and as a desire."
" childhood had become the least bastion of kindness, the last place where we may find more love in the world than there appears to be."
June 26, 2017
Liked the first part discussing the historical significance of kindness versus the egoists. Enjoyed the last part projecting kindness into a modern framework. Didn't really need the middle section with all of the psychoanalytical whoop de do but the book is well worth the read, particularly in today's political and economic climates. Kindness is not for losers, despite what Mr. Trump and his minions believe.
March 7, 2021
A short history of the various philosophies that landed us where we are. It is edited competently and makes narrative sense.
The history is well laid out; the argument the book is proposing is less so. Though it puts itself clearly on one side of this historic argument, it never delves too deep into the actual theory. For that reason, it's a good book on the history on altruism philosophy, but less so for kindness.
The history is well laid out; the argument the book is proposing is less so. Though it puts itself clearly on one side of this historic argument, it never delves too deep into the actual theory. For that reason, it's a good book on the history on altruism philosophy, but less so for kindness.
July 11, 2017
Much heavier than I expected, this book took me an age to make my way through. I read the kindle edition, and wonder if the physical book may have offered some better cues to changes in perspective and theme. I felt like I was sometimes thrown into a new school of thought with no warning.
I may have to reread this one to make more sense of it.
I may have to reread this one to make more sense of it.
September 9, 2019
A nice book but dry
The whole book discuss the concept of practicing kindness
Is kindness practiced by weak person
Or to control strong person
Or to create an impression to accept the love and allowed to mate
Or it's an act for survival
Every part of above detailedly discussed..
Good one to read!!
The whole book discuss the concept of practicing kindness
Is kindness practiced by weak person
Or to control strong person
Or to create an impression to accept the love and allowed to mate
Or it's an act for survival
Every part of above detailedly discussed..
Good one to read!!
May 26, 2020
On Kindness is perhaps less a definition, though there is an extensive historical review, than it is about the effects kindness or fellow feeling can have on society and the psyche. More than simply being nice, the authors propose kindness is being of a kind with others, and attempting to engage with them as they are.
March 8, 2024
Pretty good stuff, but as other reviewers have pointed out, the authors kind of fumble the bag when they spend two chapters deep going into the psychoanalytic theories of kindness. One of the authors is a psychoanalyst, so I guess other readers and I should have known what we were getting into, but other than that, it's short, sweet, and to the point. I quite liked it.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 86 reviews