The surprising personal and social benefits of being vain (according to Rousseau and Adam Smith)

Young man taking a photo in the bathroom — Photo foot, Vanity is not only an aesthetic concern, but how we see each other before other people.

- Author, Nat Rutherford, political theorist
- Author's title, BBC Reel*
5 julio 2025

If you think you are not, you should probably think about it again.

Vanity is one of the most obvious modern vices.

We criticize people who think too much about themselves, who care too much about their appearance and what other people think of them.

But most of us care what others think of us, not only in terms of our physical appearance.

Vanity is not only an aesthetic concern, but how we see each other before other people.

It is a “What does the world think of me?”

For Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the Swiss philosopher of the 18th century, we only really became modern humans when we became vain.

Thus we obtained our self -esteem: product only from the value that others deposit in us.

Of love

Rousseau distinguished between two concepts of self -esteem.

Self -love (“Love to yourself”), The natural desire to worry about your own survival and Clean love (“self -love”), the desperate need to shine in the eyes of other people.

Or, in other words, vanity.

Retrato by Jean Jacques Rousseau — Photo foot, For the Francophophone Swiss polymata Rousseau (1712-1778) vanity was a product of the civilization of doubtful virtue.

From this point of view, vanity was the product of a life in society.

As societies developed, at some point among hunters-gatherers and illustration, says Rousseau, humans became able to live only from the opinion of others.

“By force of seeing each other, they could not do without doing so,” Rousseau said, in his “speech about the origin of inequality among men.”

The process was similar to the one we see when children become adults.

When passing through adolescence, they suddenly realize that they have a particular position or status within society.

And that is true for humanity in general.

As we socialized, we began to worry more and more about how others perceived us.

Human beings became more and more vain and unable to self -evaluate independently.

Rousseau desperate for everyone to spend looking at others and wishing them to look at them.

The one who sang or danced better, the most handsome, the strongest, the most skilled or the most eloquent became the most appreciated.

Until we value the opinion that people had of us, than the ability or virtue in ourselves.

The philosopher observed that it is not your eloquence, your beauty or your strength that matters to you: it is that others see you as eloquent, beautiful and strong.

In contrast

You create an image of yourself that you want others to see, and your self -esteem is determined by how other people respond to your mask.

Until finally the mask replaced the face underneath.

But Rousseau's occasional friend, the Scottish philosopher Adam Smith, saw things a bit differently.

Adam Smith portrait — Photo foot, “As selfish that man can be assumed, there are obviously in his nature some principles that make him interested in the fate of others,” Adam Smith (1723-1790) begins in his “theory of moral feelings.”

Smith thought that Rousseau was probably right that vanity was the main characteristic of modern humans, but also believed that it was necessary and the source of our redemption.

And he replied that it was “to be observed, treated, considered with sympathy, complacency and approval.”

“It is vanity, not comfort or pleasure that interests us.”

For Rousseau, self -esteem is an inescapable characteristic of modern human being.

It is also the source of social inequality.

In societies where appearance is more important than reality, it looks virtuous replaces to be virtuous, as our main motivation.

And so, we pursue wealth and power to seem important.

But Smith thought that this alleged vice was the source of our sociability and our morality.

We are vain, and society makes us be, but it is our vanity that really allows society to work.

We care what other people think of us and, therefore, we adjust our behavior accordingly.

We want to be seen as responsible, so we behave responsible.

We want to be seen as generous and that's why we give generously.

We want to be seen as friendly and that's why we act kindly.

Two people with masks — Photo foot, It is true that what we show to the world are masks, says Smith, but we care that what they project is true.

Rousseau thought that vanity leads us to worry about status rather than morality.

It makes us worry about the mask and not for the face underneath. His vanity leaves us all living in a mirrors.

In contrast, for Smith there can be no society without the mask, because the mask is what makes moral social interaction possible.

Be praised and worthy

To see yourself through the eyes of others is to submit to the judgment of humanity, according to the vision of the Scottish philosopher.

It is our vanity that makes us responsible to other people.

But vanity, for Smith, is not simply a mask.

“What greater happiness is to be loved and know that we deserve it? What misfortune than that of being hated and knowing that we deserve it?” He says.

“The human being wants naturally not only to be loved but be kind, that is, to be what is the natural and typical object of love.

“Naturally fears not only be hated but odiable, that is, be a natural and appropriate object for hate.

“Not only want praise, but be laudable, or be a natural and adequate objective for the commendation, although in practice nobody praises it.

“Not only does it scare the reproach but being reproachable, or be a natural and adequate objective for reproach, although in practice nobody reproaches anything.”

We want not only to be praised but be worthy of being.

And so, our vanity forces us to win the praise of others: we need to deserve our social status.

Unlike Rousseau, Smith did not think that vanity was the result or cause of moral corruption, because there can be no moral or society without vanity.

So are you vain?

Hopefully yes, then being social, and therefore, being human is being vain.

Or as the novelist Kurt Vonnegut said: “We are what we intend to be, so we must be careful with what we intend to be.”