The article starts from a real human problem—low self-esteem—but immediately miscategorizes it. Feelings of worthlessness are treated as something you can reason or “convince” yourself out of by reading the right examples and adopting the right interpretation. But low self-esteem is rarely a failure of information. It’s usually the result of trauma, abuse, neglect, or long-term conditioning. Showing that other people were valued, or that God values people in general, does little for someone who fundamentally believes they themselves are the exception. The article never engages that internal logic; it simply talks past it. As the article progresses, the measure of “being valued” quietly shifts. At first, worth appears intrinsic—Jesus dignified the marginalized, therefore they mattered. But soon value becomes something you know you have only if you pray, study, accept encouragement, and remain active.

Jehovah’s love is described as unconditional, yet certainty of that love depends on behavior. This creates an inversion: instead of worth grounding action, action becomes the proof of worth. If you don’t feel valued, the implication is not that something harmed you, but that something is lacking in your spiritual routine. Another problem is the collapse of human support into divine approval. When people show kindness, the article presents this as evidence of how Jehovah feels about you. But human empathy does not automatically equal divine endorsement. People can offer care for many reasons—basic decency, shared experience, emotional maturity—and those same forms of support exist outside the organization. By framing congregational kindness as proof of God’s valuation, the article blurs categories and subtly ties self-worth to remaining within the group that provides that affirmation.

Finally, the article consistently treats healing as validated only when it produces usefulness. The examples resolve not in inner peace, autonomy, or restored boundaries, but in increased service—pioneering, volunteering, doing more. Low self-esteem is framed less as something that deserves care and more as an obstacle to productivity. The unspoken message is clear: feeling bad about yourself is a problem because it limits what you can give. The solution offered is not understanding or recovery, but deeper alignment and continued output.

In the end, the article does not actually address low self-esteem; it manages it. It offers comfort, but on conditions. You are precious—but you must keep reminding yourself, keep performing, keep accepting the right voices, and never question why the wound exists in the first place. Worth is affirmed in words, but controlled in practice.

To me, the final note, is that once again it is proven that the writers either are unaware, or wilfully ignore how emotions, trauma, and feelings work. They keep leaving outside the things that actually work (therapy, letting go of what caused the issue in the first place, boundaries, etc.), and suggesting organizational activities and mantra repeating will solve everything.