ABSTRACT
Many people, especially women, experience feelings of fraudulence when singled out for praise, publicity, or promotion. While such feelings of fraudulence may be deplorable, especially if and when they trouble women more than men, these same feelings also may indicate a wise reluctance to believe in the accuracy of absolute ranking, and may point the way to a valid critique of hierarchical structures. Apology and self-disparagement may indicate an honest refusal to internalize the idea that having power or public exposure proves one’s merit and/or authority. Apologetic or hedging speech may indicate uneasiness with rhetorical or coercive forms of speech and behavior, and may signal a desire to find more collaborative forms. People who feel in public like imposters are perhaps more to be trusted than those who have never experienced feelings of fraudulence. The analysis is placed in context of a theoretical model of a double and conflicting structure within the psyche and within the society: overvalued, overdeveloped, “vertical,” competitive functions at odds with undervalued, under-recognized, “lateral,” collaborative functions. A double vision of these double functions within both psyche and society is recommended to understand feelings of fraudulence and to overcome them in contexts where that is necessary.
