To Have Or To Be?

To Have Or To Be? Plot Summary

Introduction

The fundamental distinction between two modes of existence—having and being—constitutes one of the most significant insights into human nature. These modes represent not merely different attitudes but entirely different orientations toward self, others, and the world. In the having mode, one's relationship to the world is based on possessing, controlling, and consuming. Identity is defined by what one has—property, status, power—rather than by who one is. Conversely, the being mode is characterized by aliveness, authentic relatedness, and productive activity without the compulsion to possess or control. This distinction offers a profound critique of modern industrial society, which promotes acquisition and consumption as pathways to happiness. Contemporary civilization faces a critical juncture where unlimited growth collides with ecological limits, where technological progress fails to deliver increased well-being, and where excessive focus on material prosperity undermines psychological health. Through philosophical analysis, psychological insight, and sociocultural critique, the investigation of these contrasting modes of existence illuminates why modern society produces such widespread unhappiness despite unprecedented material wealth. The exploration goes beyond mere intellectual exercise, proposing that transformation from having-dominance to being-orientation represents our most viable path forward—both individually and collectively.

Chapter 1: The Fundamental Distinction Between Having and Being Modes

The distinction between having and being constitutes a fundamental difference in human orientation toward life. In common sense, having seems essential to living—we must have food, shelter, clothing to survive. Yet beyond these basic needs, having becomes problematic when it turns into the predominant mode of existence. The having mode is characterized by the tendency to transform everything into possessions, including relationships, ideas, and even one's sense of self. This orientation manifests as an insatiable desire to acquire, control, and consume. Throughout history, profound thinkers have warned against the dangers of the having orientation. Buddha taught that freedom from suffering requires abandoning craving for possessions. Jesus admonished that gaining the whole world while losing oneself is no gain at all. Master Eckhart, the medieval mystic, spoke of emptying oneself of possessions and even of self to achieve spiritual wealth. Marx, despite later distortions of his thought, argued that human nature requires being rather than having—productive activity rather than passive possession. Language reveals this fundamental distinction. When expressing having, one uses nouns—static, fixed things that can be possessed. In contrast, being is expressed through verbs—active, dynamic, alive processes. The difference appears in everyday expressions: compare "I have a problem" (the problem owns me) with "I am troubled" (describing an experiential state). These linguistic patterns reflect deeper existential orientations that shape entire cultures and historical periods. The having mode dominates contemporary industrial societies, where personal worth is measured by the market value of what one possesses rather than by one's intrinsic human qualities. This orientation transforms people themselves into commodities—beings who have value based on their exchange value rather than their intrinsic human qualities. Even experiences become things to collect and display rather than transformative moments of growth. In contrast, the being mode centers on aliveness, growth, and relatedness. Rather than possessing and controlling, being involves sharing, giving, and sacrificing. Instead of protecting boundaries, it breaks them down in productive engagement with the world. This orientation finds expression in activities where process matters more than outcome—in art, meaningful conversation, relationships based on love rather than possession, and authentic engagement with nature.

Chapter 2: Having Mode: Possessing and Consuming as Identity

The having mode represents an orientation where identity becomes defined by what one possesses. This extends beyond material objects to include knowledge, people, memories, virtues, power, and even one's own ego. In this mode, the relationship between subject and object becomes one of deadness rather than aliveness—the possessed item and the possessor both become things, frozen in their relationship. The anxiety that permeates this orientation stems from the constant fear of losing what defines one's very existence. This mode manifests in how people relate to knowledge. In education, students in the having mode approach learning as acquisition—they memorize facts, store information, and amass credentials without integrating insights into their being. They become collectors of ideas rather than thinkers transformed by understanding. Similarly, conversations become exchanges of commodities—information, status, credentials—rather than mutual growth. Even reading becomes consumption rather than engagement, with people "having" opinions about books they've read without allowing texts to challenge their thinking. Modern consumer society intensely cultivates the having orientation. The economic system requires people to constantly desire more possessions to maintain production growth. This necessitates creating artificial needs, transforming luxuries into necessities, and ensuring rapid obsolescence of products. The automobile exemplifies this process—often purchased for status rather than transportation, replaced regularly not from necessity but from artificially stimulated desires for newness. This pattern of acquisition, brief possession, discard, and reacquisition forms the cycle of consumer buying. Psychologically, the having mode correlates with what Freud identified as the anal character—fixated on orderliness, possessiveness, and hoarding. This character structure becomes socially adaptive in capitalist societies that reward accumulation and control. The obsession with private property—extending the principle of exclusive ownership to all areas of experience—forms the foundation of social institutions that further reinforce having as the dominant mode of existence. The most profound danger of the having orientation lies in how it structures human relationships. When people relate to others as possessions, love transforms into control, conversation into manipulation, and cooperation into domination. Even the self becomes a possession to manage rather than a living process to experience. The ultimate paradox emerges: the more one has, the less one is. As possessions multiply, aliveness diminishes.

Chapter 3: Being Mode: Activity, Sharing, and Authentic Connection

The being mode represents an entirely different orientation to existence—one defined not by possession but by productive activity and authentic relatedness. Unlike the passive having mode, being involves aliveness, engagement, and presence in each moment. This orientation manifests through productive activity—not merely busyness or motion, but meaningful engagement that expresses one's powers and connects one with the world. Central to the being mode is a distinct form of activity that must be distinguished from mere busyness. Alienated activity (characteristic of the having mode) occurs when people act mechanically, without connection to their authentic selves or genuine engagement with others. In contrast, non-alienated activity in the being mode represents the productive expression of one's inherent capacities—thinking, feeling, seeing, loving—regardless of whether anything tangible is produced. The distinction lies not in what is done but in the quality of presence and engagement during action. Throughout philosophical tradition, from Aristotle to Spinoza, authentic activity has been distinguished from mere motion or busyness. For Aristotle, even contemplation represented the highest form of activity—not passive reception but active engagement with truth. Spinoza articulated that true activity springs from one's own nature rather than from external compulsion. Both recognized that genuine human power emerges not from controlling others but from self-determined expression of one's essential nature. In relationships, the being mode manifests as sharing rather than possessing. When people relate from being, they experience solidarity, joy in giving, and authentic connection rather than using others as extensions of themselves. Conversations become creative dialogues rather than competitive exchanges. Even awareness of the surrounding world transforms—nature is perceived not as something to exploit but as something to commune with and understand on its own terms. The security found in the being mode differs fundamentally from that in the having mode. Those centered in having fear loss constantly because external possessions can always be taken away. Being-oriented individuals find security in their capacity to express their essential powers and respond creatively to new situations. Their identity resides not in what they have but in who they are—an orientation that cannot be destroyed by external forces. While material possessions may be lost, the capacity for love, reason, joy, and solidarity remains as long as one lives. This mode of existence requires faith—not in the religious sense, but as trust in one's inherent powers and in meaningful existence. It requires courage to tolerate uncertainty without retreating to the illusory security of possessions. Throughout history, those who have embraced the being mode have often been considered heroes or exemplars—individuals who dared to define themselves by giving rather than taking, by growth rather than accumulation.

Chapter 4: Daily Experiences Through Having and Being Lenses

The contrast between having and being penetrates every dimension of daily life, transforming even the most mundane experiences. In learning, the having-oriented student approaches knowledge as something to possess—collecting facts, memorizing data, and storing information without internal transformation. Conversely, the being-oriented learner engages actively with ideas, questions assumptions, and allows knowledge to transform their understanding. The former remains unchanged by what they learn; the latter grows through the learning process itself. This distinction manifests vividly in conversation. In the having mode, participants prepare carefully, calculating what impressions to make, which credentials to display, and how to dominate the exchange. They speak from their possessions—status, knowledge, wit—rather than from authentic presence. By contrast, being-oriented conversation flows spontaneously, with participants responding creatively rather than defensively. Ideas emerge that surprise even the speakers themselves, as the dialogue becomes a mutual creation rather than an exchange of pre-packaged thoughts. Even ordinary perception reflects these contrasting modes. The having-oriented person approaches nature as something to catalog, classify, and ultimately control—taking photographs not to connect with beauty but to possess it. Reading becomes an act of collection rather than engagement, with books approached as containers of portable wisdom to be extracted rather than encounters with another mind. Authority transforms into domination rather than competence-based leadership that helps others grow. In sexuality, the having mode manifests as conquest and performance rather than mutual pleasure and connection. The body itself becomes property to display advantageously rather than the living ground of experience. The same pattern extends to knowledge—having-oriented knowledge serves status and control, while being-oriented understanding seeks truth regardless of who possesses it. Faith itself divides along these lines: in the having mode, faith means adhering to formulas and doctrines; in the being mode, it means trusting one's inner experience and capacity for growth. Memory itself operates differently in these contrasting modes. Having-oriented memory treats experiences as possessions to be cataloged and retrieved mechanically. Being-oriented memory actively recreates past experiences, bringing them alive in the present through engaged recollection. The former remains static; the latter transforms past into living present. Even time perception differs fundamentally—having orients toward past accumulations and future acquisitions, while being exists primarily in the present moment, where authentic experience actually occurs. These everyday examples reveal that the distinction between having and being extends far beyond philosophical abstraction. It represents fundamentally different ways of experiencing every dimension of human existence—from learning and loving to working and playing. The contrast appears not merely in what people do but in how they engage with their doing.

Chapter 5: Historical and Religious Insights on Both Modes

The tension between having and being orientations has resonated throughout religious and philosophical traditions. The Old Testament dramatizes this conflict in the Exodus narrative, where liberation from Egyptian bondage required abandoning possessions and security for the uncertainty of desert wandering. The Sabbath itself embodies the being orientation—a day when work, production, and possession cease, allowing full presence and harmony to emerge. Similarly, the prophetic tradition consistently condemned materialism while affirming authentic relationship with others and with divine reality. Early Christianity articulated a radical critique of the having orientation. Jesus repeatedly warned about wealth's spiritual dangers, emphasizing that attachment to possessions prevents authentic human development. The early Christian communities practiced common ownership, rejecting private property as an obstacle to spiritual growth. Church fathers like Tertullian condemned avarice, while Chrysostomus declared that superfluous goods must not be produced or consumed—a sentiment that directly challenges modern consumer capitalism's foundational assumptions. Medieval mysticism, particularly in figures like Master Eckhart, developed profound insights into the being mode. Eckhart taught that true poverty means not merely lacking possessions but transcending the very desire to possess. He distinguished between the having mode (characterized by egoboundness and attachment) and the being mode (characterized by aliveness, flowing, and productive activity). For Eckhart, authentic existence required breaking through the property structure of human existence into genuine productivity and aliveness. Eastern philosophical traditions similarly emphasized being over having. Buddhism's critique of craving and attachment represents perhaps the most sustained analysis of how the having orientation creates suffering. The Buddha taught that attachment to possessions—whether material goods or mental constructs—prevents authentic happiness. Similarly, Taoist thought emphasized harmonious activity in accordance with nature rather than dominance and control. The Renaissance and Enlightenment periods witnessed an intensified conflict between these orientations. While humanism affirmed human dignity and potential beyond material possessions, emerging capitalism simultaneously intensified the having orientation through market relationships and commodity production. By the nineteenth century, thinkers like Marx articulated how capitalist property relations alienated people from their authentic productive capacities and from one another. Religious consciousness gradually transformed through these historical developments. Traditional religions, which had often critiqued material possession while paradoxically accumulating institutional wealth, increasingly accommodated themselves to capitalist values. Meanwhile, the having orientation itself developed religious characteristics—consumption became ritualized, markets acquired sacred status, and economic growth became an unquestioned value transcending rational critique. The historical development reveals not merely changing economic arrangements but transformations in human self-understanding and existential orientation.

Chapter 6: Character Structure and Socioeconomic Forces

The predominance of having or being orientations in a society does not result merely from individual choices but reflects deep interconnections between character structure and socioeconomic systems. The social character—the shared psychological orientation that enables people to function within a particular economic order—develops through family structures, educational institutions, and cultural patterns that prepare individuals for their economic roles. While both having and being potentials exist in human nature, social structures systematically cultivate one orientation over the other. Industrial capitalism requires a character structure oriented toward possession, consumption, and hierarchical control. People must desire ever-increasing consumption to maintain economic growth, must accept authority to function in bureaucratic systems, and must define success through acquisition rather than authentic development. This social character emerges not through conscious indoctrination but through the lived experience of family dynamics, educational practices, and work relationships that systematically reward having-oriented behaviors while punishing being-oriented alternatives. The economic system shapes character through multiple mechanisms. First, it rewards specific behaviors—competitive acquisition, consumption, status display—while punishing alternatives through economic deprivation. Second, it structures institutions like education to produce psychologically adaptive individuals who fit predetermined economic roles. Third, it transforms social values through advertising, entertainment, and media systems that normalize the having orientation while pathologizing alternatives. Religious structures play a critical role in legitimizing these socioeconomic arrangements. Traditional religions often accommodate themselves to prevailing economic systems despite their original critiques of materialism. Meanwhile, the economic system itself assumes religious functions—providing ritual, meaning, and sacred values that transcend rational critique. This "industrial religion" or "cybernetic religion" sacralizes consumption, technological control, and endless growth despite their human and ecological costs. The "marketing character" represents the culmination of these developmental trends. This character type experiences itself as a commodity whose value depends on successful self-marketing. Neither loving nor hating, neither committed to values nor rebellious against them, the marketing character adapts flexibly to whatever the market demands. This extreme alienation manifests in emotional underdevelopment coupled with cerebral hyperactivity—thinking without feeling, functioning without being. Despite these powerful forces, counter-currents persistently emerge. Revolutionary movements, religious reforms, philosophical critiques, and artistic expressions repeatedly challenge the dominance of the having orientation. Young people particularly often rebel against consumer values despite intensive socialization. These persistent protests against the having mode suggest that the being orientation, though suppressed, remains a viable alternative deeply rooted in human nature.

Chapter 7: The Path to Transformation: Individual and Social Change

Transforming society from having-dominance toward being-orientation requires addressing both individual character structure and socioeconomic systems simultaneously. Neither personal transformation alone nor structural change without psychological development can succeed. The necessary changes must occur at multiple levels—from individual consciousness through family patterns and institutional structures to global economic relationships. At the individual level, transformation begins with awareness of suffering and its causes. People must recognize how the having orientation creates anxiety, isolation, and emptiness despite material abundance. This requires challenging consumer society's basic premises—that happiness comes through acquisition, that identity depends on possessions, that security requires control. Developing alternative values demands both intellectual insight and practical experimentation with being-oriented lifestyles that emphasize authentic relationships, meaningful activity, and internal development over consumption and status. Economic transformation requires developing alternatives to unlimited growth. This includes shifting toward selective production that serves genuine human needs rather than artificially stimulated desires. It necessitates distinguishing between healthy and pathological consumption, between goods that enhance human development and those that impede it. Democratic planning must replace market domination, with production decisions reflecting community values rather than profit maximization. Such changes require developing new economic indicators that measure well-being rather than merely quantifying production. Political transformation demands replacing passive "spectator democracy" with participatory structures that enable authentic citizen engagement. This requires decentralizing decision-making, creating face-to-face deliberative communities, and ensuring that information flows openly rather than through manipulative channels. Bureaucratic management must yield to responsive administration based on human relationships rather than abstract rules. These changes necessitate limiting corporate power, restricting advertising manipulation, and creating economic security through guaranteed income programs. Perhaps most fundamentally, developing a humanistic science of man must replace the technological focus that dominates current thinking. This new science would integrate psychological insight, ecological understanding, and ethical wisdom to guide social reconstruction. Just as natural science enabled technological mastery, this humanistic science could enable social innovation that serves authentic human development rather than merely accelerating production and consumption. These transformations face formidable obstacles—corporate power, psychological inertia, political disempowerment, and ecological constraints. Yet there remains a genuine possibility for change. The crisis of the having orientation has become increasingly apparent as environmental limits, psychological distress, and social fragmentation reveal its fundamental unsustainability. The emergence of movements advocating simpler living, environmental responsibility, and authentic community suggests that alternatives to consumer capitalism resonate with deep human needs that transcend social conditioning.

Summary

The fundamental distinction between having and being modes of existence illuminates the core crisis of modern civilization. The having orientation—characterized by possessiveness, consumption, and control—dominates contemporary society despite creating widespread unhappiness, environmental destruction, and social fragmentation. The being orientation—characterized by aliveness, authentic relatedness, and productive activity—offers an alternative that better serves genuine human needs but remains systematically marginalized by economic and cultural forces that depend on endless acquisition and consumption. This analysis provides a framework for understanding seemingly disparate phenomena—from environmental degradation to psychological distress, from political apathy to religious commercialization—as manifestations of a single underlying pattern. The dominance of the having mode results not from immutable human nature but from specific historical developments, particularly industrial capitalism's systematic cultivation of possessive individualism and consumerist values. The interdependence between socioeconomic structures and character formation means that transformation requires addressing both simultaneously—neither individual lifestyle changes nor structural reforms alone can succeed. The path forward involves developing economic systems that prioritize meaningful needs over artificial desires, political structures that enable authentic participation rather than passive consumption, and cultural values that affirm being over having. While formidable obstacles stand in the way of such transformation, the growing recognition that current arrangements threaten both ecological sustainability and psychological well-being creates genuine possibilities for fundamental change.

About Author

Loading...

Erich Fromm

Erich Fromm, Ph.D. (Sociology, University of Heidelberg, 1922) was a German-American social psychologist, psychoanalyst, sociologist, humanistic philosopher, and democratic socialist. He was a German Jew who fled the Nazi regime and settled in the United States. He was one of the founders of The William Alanson White Institute of Psychiatry, Psychoanalysis and Psychology in New York City and was associated with the Frankfurt School of critical theory.Fromm explored the interaction between psychology and society, and held various professorships in psychology in the U.S. and Mexico in the mid-20th century.Fromm's theory is a rather unique blend of Freud and Marx. Freud, of course, emphasized the unconscious, biological drives, repression, and so on. In other words, Freud postulated that our characters were determined by biology. Marx, on the other hand, saw people as determined by their society, and most especially by their economic systems.

Read more

Related Books by Erich Fromm

Loading...

The Art of Loving

Erich Fromm

The classic guide to love

★★★★☆4.0

Loading...

Escape from Freedom

Erich Fromm

Dig Deep into Democracy and Dictatorship

★★★★☆4.3