The traditional notion of authenticity fails because it assumes that there is a core self or brand that needs to be effectively expressed in the world.

My approach is more sophisticated. Authenticity still depends on a notion of the “true self”. But, this true self is not some isolated core. In my sense, the self/brand is an interaction between the self/brand and the world. The true self arises only in encountering the “outside” world. In this way, the self is not a hard core. It’s a dynamic, changing, and permeable set of meanings—meanings that are always already integrated into the meaning-systems of the world around it.

Because of this, authenticity is not the expression of some fixed core. Authenticity is also a dynamic, interactive process. It is not the simple activity of matching up a meaning to a core. Rather, authenticity is the process of becoming—becoming who you already are.

Authenticity is based on the idea that there is something “inside” that is the true essence of the person or the company. Behaving authentically, then, is expressing this inner core accurately in the outer world. It’s always the case in these discussions that the inner world is pure and the outer world is corrupting. So, we must “stay true to ourselves” in the face of this corruption.

Of course, the whole idea depends on the distinction between the inner and the outer, viz. the core, “real” you and the outside world. This whole discussion is based on this distinction. Yet, this distinction isn’t correct. There is, in fact, no such distinction.

It’s easy to see why. Ask yourself, “who am I?”. If authenticity were possible in this sense, you would be able to immediately and clearly know yourself without using any worldly tools, like expressions, or other people. The deeply confusing nature of this question directly undermines this simplistic notion of authenticity.

Since there is no inner/outer distinction, then there is no basis for authenticity. There is no inner self to actualize in the outside world. So, this notion of authenticity is deeply flawed.

Next time, we’ll talk more about a more intelligent notion of authenticity.