Published: March 2, 2026
“Trauma does not exist.”
One of the most offensive claims in psychology..
And yet, it comes from the lesser discussed philosopher, Adler — whose work has shaped my thinking more than any other.
When I first came across this idea I rejected it immediately.
I believed trauma explained far more about our lives than anything else.
It seemed counterintuitive to suggest otherwise.
But the deeper I studied Adler, the more… unsettling his logic became.
👉 His philosophy rests on three core ideas:
1. We get benefits from the persistent negative things in our lives.
2. Because of that, persistent problems are often “goals” of the subconscious mind.
3. Freedom comes from radical responsibility.
I’ve experienced what many people would label trauma, and along the way I even collected a few convenient diagnoses — cPTSD, attachment issues, ++.
For years I believed those labels explained my patterns.
I would say I wanted to change…
That I didn’t want to push people away, didn’t want anxiety controlling my life, didn’t want the same relationship dynamics repeating themselves.
👉 But Adler’s philosophy forced me to ask a much harder question.
What if the patterns I claimed to hate were also giving me something?
Some personal examples.
I have noticed that my anxiety often brought attention, care, and allowances from people around me.
I noticed that repeatedly attracting the same kind of partner was simply familiar, and also gave me someone to blame - instead of forcing me to examine my own patterns.
Even periods of illness sometimes came with unexpected “benefits” —
Doting care, protection from certain expectations, and the ability to withdraw from situations that overwhelmed me.
With that said, Adler’s argument isn’t that pain isn’t real.
His argument is that *persistent* patterns remain in our lives because they serve a function and has benefits.
Once I started recognizing the hidden benefits I was getting from problems I said I wanted to solve..
the entire framework of “trauma explaining everything” started to look very different.
This philosophy is uncomfortable, and many people will disagree with it.
But even *considering* the idea forces a level of honesty that therapy and most mindset courses don’t encourage.
👉 I recently wrote an extremely detailed breakdown explaining why this specific philosophical frame changed how I see the idea of healing and changing itself.
You don’t have to agree with it.
But stretching our minds to consider ideas that we disagree with at first is, in itself, a big step towards mental sovereignty.
That’s the point of this of this edition.
JT
--
To read the full edition, go to the Private Newsletter Classroom!
--
Comment your thoughts on this edition here!
This newsletter is all about Sovereignty- which you gain from considering ideas you may not otherwise hear about or agree with.
I know Adler's theories, and this edition, breaks lot of mental frames-- so I'd love to hear your additional thoughts on it.