Max Littman, LCSW
January 28, 2026
“Why be Self led?” is a question I find myself asking lately. The question is posed personally, philosophically, ethically, and relationally.
Often, I find the question and the parts of me inside that asked it are bypassed by other parts. In these cases, the reasons behind being Self-led are assumed, treated as self-evident, and centered as a static premise rather than a living inquiry.
In IFS spaces, Self leadership is often spoken about as a goal, an ideal, a marker of maturity, or a gold standard of healing even if we intellectually understand it is a way of being in relationship to oneself, others, and the universe as a living practice rather than a simple goal. Something to orient toward. Something to cultivate. Something we should want. But underneath that shared orientation, I notice a more complicated internal landscape, both in myself and expressed by others. Parts that comply with the idea of Self leadership without ever feeling fully convinced. Parts that justify it intellectually. Parts that sell it. Parts that enforce it. Parts that resist it.
And parts that are genuinely unsure why it matters or unconvinced that it does.
Some parts answer the question pragmatically. Being Self led helps things work better. Relationships feel steadier. Decisions are less reactive. There is less inner chaos. These parts frame Self leadership as an efficiency upgrade, a way to reduce suffering and improve functioning. A cleaner operating system.
Other parts answer morally. Being Self led is the right way to be. It is more compassionate. More ethical. Less harmful. These parts often carry a quiet sense of obligation. They worry about what happens if we are not Self led. About misuse of power. About repeating harm. About being irresponsible with influence, especially in relational or professional roles.
Still other parts answer developmentally. Self leadership is framed as growing up. As evolution. As moving beyond trauma and defenses into something more integrated. These parts may carry pride or hope, but sometimes also impatience, both toward themselves and others.
And then there are parts that answer strategically. Being Self led helps us be seen as credible. As good therapists. As emotionally intelligent. As healed enough. These parts track perception. They are aware of cultural currents within healing communities and want to belong, to be respected, to not fall behind.
All of these answers make sense. None of them are wrong. And yet, I notice that when Self leadership is justified only through these lenses, something essential can go missing.
Because none of them actually answer the question from inside the experience.
When I slow down the question and listen patiently, I notice parts in me that are not particularly inspired by Self leadership as a concept. For these parts, being told that the goal is to be Self led can feel abstract at best and threatening at worst.
What they want to know is not why Self leadership is good in theory, but why they should trust it.
Why loosen their grip?
Why step back?
Why risk something unfamiliar?
What I notice in tandem is how quickly the question turns recursive.
When I actually sit with “why be Self led,” it can feel like standing between mirrors. Each answer reflects back into another question. Each justification folds in on itself. The mind produces reasons, then questions those reasons. The body offers signals, then doubts them. Nothing settles. The inquiry keeps looping.
At times it feels like circular logic. Not only cognitively, but somatically. A sense of returning to the same place from a slightly different angle. A tightening. A softening. A pause. Then back again. Some parts experience this as frustrating or pointless. Others find it strangely familiar. Not wrong, just unresolved.
I notice parts that want the loop to stop. They want an exit. A conclusion they can lean on. Something that makes the orientation feel justified rather than endlessly provisional.
But the question does not seem to function that way.
“Why be Self led” does not appear to have a single answer that applies across the system. One part might orient toward Self because it brings a little more space. Another because it reduces conflict. Another because it feels less violent internally. Another because it aligns with values, training, or identity. Another may not see the point at all.
And those answers are not stable.
What feels true in one season does not hold in another. What makes sense in a therapy room may feel irrelevant in a family interaction. What supports one person’s system may not support another’s. Even within the same body, the answer shifts depending on context, stress, history, and capacity.
This makes the question difficult to teach, promote, or defend.
It defies standardization. It defies consensus. It defies being settled once and for all.
I find that when I stop trying to land on an answer, spaciousness becomes possible.
Spaciousness for the inquiry to remain circular.
Spaciousness for parts to experience the question differently.
Spaciousness for the answer to change, or to be partial, or to go quiet altogether.
Why be Self led?
I do not know.
And I am less convinced that I need to know.
Perhaps the greatest gift this question, and those who keep asking it, brings is an increased capacity to be fearless when in the hall of mirrors, regardless of whether feeling oriented or not.
The question keeps moving. The answers keep shifting. Different parts, different people, different moments each find their own way of relating to it.
For now, staying in honest contact with the question feels more aligned than arriving at an answer that attempts to be universal.
For feedback and comments, I can be reached at max@maxlittman.com.
I provide consultation and therapy for therapists.
Purchase my new book IFS Therapy for Gay and Queer Men here.
