It's a matter of whether you see the self as fundamentally in relationship to other selves or not - whether you see the boundary between self and the world as relatively permeable, which makes you "interdependent" (collectivist) in outlook, or relatively impermeable, which makes you "independent" (individualistic).

It's a matter of whether you see the self as fundamentally in relationship to other selves or not - whether you see the boundary between self and the world as relatively permeable, which makes you "interdependent" (collectivist) in outlook, or relatively impermeable, which makes you "independent" (individualistic).

I think that there is a bias in the current literary climate, which is not only very Western but very male.

For students who are in the most creative group in America to somehow be presumed to be narrow is just completely meshugga.

The independents are the ones who tend to commit suicide. I'm not against this way of being in the world. Individuals have brought us many treasures. You can't just say that's a bad way of being in the world - it's not. But it's not everyone's way of being in the world.

These are ideas that work for many, and that may well reflect your true understanding of life.

Many women tend toward the interdependent end of things, we tend to see ourselves in relationship to others to a far greater degree than men.