Our partner

Is he narcissistic?

Narcissistic Personality Disorder message board, open discussion, and online support group.

Re: Is he narcissistic?

Postby Après L Orage » Sat Jan 07, 2017 8:45 pm

Akuma wrote:Well the practical difference is one of motivation. If you want to become something there will be energetic investment into the goal, you will strive to achieve it [eventho mostly unconsciously]. If you think you are it already, there will be investment into the self, a closed loop of "im good, im good", but no goal-setting.


Ok, thank you very much. Valuable information.
Après L Orage
Consumer 6
Consumer 6
 
Posts: 626
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2015 4:21 am
Local time: Thu Mar 28, 2024 11:59 am
Blog: View Blog (6)


ADVERTISEMENT

Re: Is he narcissistic?

Postby Gomba13 » Fri Jan 13, 2017 7:52 pm

Après L Orage wrote:PwNPD on the other hand, will tend to think they're just the best. In general.

So I don't know what category you belong to.


I don't think I belong to any category because:

1. I don't flaunt my above average abilities. I only talk about them when it is relevant, e.g., when asked by a psychiatrist about why I have such difficulty finding people to socialize with whom I am minimally compatible with, or when over the course of a conversation, people inquire about how the hell do I know all the things I know, and where do I get those original ideas from (I am a lateral thinker). It actually kind of makes me feel nervous when people compliment my abilities: I feel there is some kind of pressure to always be the smart one, and also that I get categorized as the intellectual, which draws attention away from my other qualities. Besides being a walking, talking dictionary and a thinking machine, I am also a kind, warm, open-minded person, and I would rather people concentrate on that, because that helps me to socialize much more than brilliance. I can also be good company for a game of pool, a trustworthy non-judgmental friend and a great workout buddy. I am not ALL ABOUT intellectual stuff - I don't take myself that seriously, I don't need to win every debate and I definitely don't need people complimenting me all the time. I believe I have average, healthy self-esteem.

I have a bit of an impostor complex: other people who have similar levels of knowledge and have similar abilities to use them got that from higher education, and I never got to go beyond high school. Often, when people remark on all the stuff I know and my ability to use that, it is closely followed by "what did you study in college?", and I hate to have to say I never went to college. I am not ashamed of not having been to college, it is not my fault - but most people who have been to college stop discussing college-level topics with me once they find out I have never been to college. I enjoy such discussions, it allows me to use my most developed positive quality, it gives me validation to be able to hold my own in such discussions and such discussions are a great opportunity to learn something new. My world doesn't revolve around such discussions, but I do need a fair amount of that on a regular basis. Not to mention I also get to socialize, which is my most pressing need and the thing lacking from my life the most. Then there are those people who have much higher education who cannot take it when someone who has much less education shows better mastery of specific aspects of a topic they have formally studied than their own level of mastery (I obviously never have better GENERAL mastery of a topic the other person studied formally - that would be genius and I am no genius). I get told fairly often I make people feel stupid. I don't want to make people feel stupid. So, I am always stuck between being true to myself and unintentionally antagonizing people with my abilities (it is often seen as arrogance) or pretending to be someone whose level of knowledge is on par with a high school diploma, which is tantamount to lying and keeps me from using my abilities. It makes me anxious to have to control that all the time, and I have a lot of trouble reading people in a way that will allow me to determine which is the better strategy. I don't believe I should have to pretend to be less able than I truly am, so I only look to develop relationships with those few people who are okay with someone who has no formal education yet dares to partake in intellectual discussions - people who don't judge, basically. Feels like looking for a needle in a haystack.

I find people like to believe that they have an open mind but they are mistaken about that most of the time. Although they might have an open mind, it is seldom as open as they think it is. Another thing people are systematically mistaken about is that being open-minded is an entirely positive personality trait. I am extremely open-minded and, trust me, past a certain level, it becomes a hindrance: you are seen as a person who lacks in morals, who lacks in judgment and people just cannot keep up with your ideas (e.g., when I say that pedophiles likely have just as much morals as the rest of us - hardly anyone can digest the idea that behaving immorally doesn't automatically make you an immoral person). Ultimately, you end up alone.

2. I don't consider myself to be better than most people, I don't consider myself superior, I don't consider most people stupid. I do have above average intellectual abilities, but I also have somewhat below average emotional abilities. I shine in certain situations but fail miserably in others. So, overall, if you ask me, I am no worse nor better than the average person. I don't look down upon people whose intellectual abilities are inferior to mine as I realize it is not they who are stupid, it is me who is exceptionally developed in that regard. I instead try to find their strengths and work with that. Even the most unschooled, inexperienced person from the "lowest" levels of society has something to teach me, always, and I can enjoy them in non-intellectual contexts. The only issue I have with people who have average or below average intellectual abilities is that they will judge and categorize too quickly and even when not warranted ("let's not discuss rampant sexism with women - they will get emotional about it", "you are so skinny - do you have an eating disorder?", "I will vote for this candidate because they seem more human than the other candidate, so their policies on welfare will surely be more satisfactory", "it is high time we have a black/female president", etc.), and then I either try to ignore it but never quite can and get frustrated, or I take it up with them and, as pacifically as I can, point out the fallacies in their ideas (indirectly, by merely mentioning other options, not head on), which always comes across as criticism even though it seldom is.

I am just amazed at how psychiatrists also tend to judge and categorize just as quickly, as if there were only about as many kinds of people as there are diseases in the DSM. As though we all clearly belonged to one of sixteen personalities. As though being high in neuroticism in the Big Five necessarily meant something is wrong with your head. I am amazed at the closed-mindedness and rigid thinking I have encountered in psychiatry, and am really crossing my fingers that I was just very unfortunate to come across crappy psychiatrists, because if they are all more or less this way, no wonder most of their patients get worse over time under and despite (or as a result of?) their care.

As I mentioned earlier, the problem with the DSM is that the criteria are based on behavior and they don't take into account the motivations behind the behaviors. To a psychiatrist, if you scratch yourself often, you must have OCD - your GP might have told your psychiatrist that you have eczema, or you might have told the psychiatrist that you tried a new body lotion and you are having an allergic reaction, but the psychiatrist will ask neither you nor your GP about it. Supposing that a person who says they have above average abilities in something means they are overly narcissistic is tantamount to saying that every mentally sane person should be average at everything - should we kiss the Olympic Games, beauty pageants and magna cum laude goodbye?

The message I get from the psychiatrist who thinks my being aware of above average abilities in myself is unhealthy narcissism is this: it is wrong in society to be better at something than most others are. I could easily jump to conclusions from there. For example, I could tell myself that it is wrong to be smart, find fault with my being smart, develop a complex about my smarts, try to hide my being smart or even actually try to dumb myself down (e.g., by using drugs - which the psychiatrist would most definitely misdiagnose as mere drug addiction). Would it be mentally healthy to do that? I won't bother asking a psychiatrist to answer that...
Gomba13
Consumer 4
Consumer 4
 
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 12:13 am
Local time: Thu Mar 28, 2024 11:59 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Is he narcissistic?

Postby Gomba13 » Fri Jan 13, 2017 9:11 pm

To get back on topic, the following is taken from a great book on narcissism and NPD. It nicely sums up what I was trying to say earlier about the continuum of narcissism as an inherent character (as opposed to personality) trait. (The difference between personality and character is that the former is acquired and the latter is innate and is the foundation upon which the former is built.)

As mentioned earlier, I only have high school education, so I am not sure how to properly quote works, so please bear with me.

In basing our definition of narcissism on the individual's needs, motives, and regulatory capacities, we explicitly distinguish between what narcissism is (i.e., underlying psychological structures and processes) and how it is expressed in thought, feeling, and behavior. We believe it is important to recognize the difference between a definition of psychopathology and the description of individual differences in its phenomenological expression (Pincus, Lukowitsky & Wright, 2010; Pincus & Wright, 2010), the latter often found in self-report scales, diagnostic interview questions, and DSM criteria. (Pincus, 2005a, 2005b; Widiger, 1991). Such an approach helps resolve apparent paradoxes and contradictions many have noted (e.g., Horvath & Morf, 2009; Morf & Rhodewalt, 2001). From our perspective, the fundamental dysfunction associated with pathological narcissism is related to intense needs for validation and admiration that energize the person to seek out self-enhancement experiences. Such needs and motives are normal aspects of personality, but they become pathological when they are extreme and coupled with impaired regulatory capacities. It is normal for individuals to strive to see themselves in a positive light and to seek experiences of self-enhancement (e.g., Hepper, Gramzow & Sedikides, 2010), such as successful achievements and competitive victories (Conroy, Elliot & Thrash, 2009). Most individuals can manage these needs effectively, seek out their gratification in acceptable ways and contexts, and regulate self-esteem, negative emotion, and interpersonal behavior when disappointments are experienced. In contrast, pathological narcissism involves impairment in the ability to manage and satisfy needs for validation and admiration, such that self-enhancement becomes an overriding goal in nearly all situations and may be sought in maladaptive ways and inappropriate contexts. This heightens sensitivity to the daily ups and downs of life and relationships (McCullough, Emmons, Kilpatrick & Mooney, 2003; Pincus, Conroy, Hyde & Ram, 2010) and impairs regulation of self-esteem, emotion, and behavior. Importantly, our definition of pathological narcissism incorporates the two main themes of narcissistic dysfunction identified in reviews of theory and research on narcissism (Cain et al., 2008; Pincus & Lukowitsky, 2010; Ronningstam, 2009).

Excerpt from The Handbook of Narcissism and Narcissistic Personality Disorder
Edited by W. Keith Campbell & Joshua D. Miller
John Wiley & Sons, 2011

Chapter 4 (page 32)
Narcissistic Grandiosity and Narcissistic Vulnerability
by Aaron A. Pincus and Michael J. Roche


Note that there is no mention in this excerpt of a personality disorder. I will not add another excerpt here, especially since I have no idea in which chapter it can be found, but elsewhere in the same book, there is mention of pathological narcissism possibly existing outside of NPD. If I remember correctly, it is possibly somewhere in the middle of the continuum, more severe than inherent narcissism (seeking out self-enhancement through comparison of self with others and feedback from others) and less severe than full-blown NPD.

Also note that the very first sentence in the above excerpt goes way beyond DSM criteria, the latter being merely based on behavior alone, while the above definition also takes into account motives and regulatory capacities. I am not saying this definition is closer to the truth than what the DSM says, but seeing as the present approach is more systemic, it is also more complete and thus, at least as far as I am concerned, that much more credible.

BIG REMINDER: ALL of the literature on narcissism, NPD, personality disorders and personality in general is based on theory. None of the literature should be seen as fact. Take some and leave some. Ultimately, it is up to your individual judgment to accept or reject these ideas.

As far as the OP's question is concerned, what she describes is littered with narcissism. I see a lot of lack of empathy and exploiting behavior. However, it could be NPD, it could be pathological narcissism and it could be healthy narcissism (with a sizable portion of A-hole behavior sprinkled on top). Now, when someone posts such a question in a forum, my worry is that that person might be under the spell of a narcissist and trying to justify the narcissist's behavior, maybe in the hopes of helping the narcissist improve or finding a way to build a healthy relationship with them despite the narcissism. I might agree with her that it might not be his fault, that he might not even be aware of what he does and that thus he might not have control over his behavior. But the issue remains: can she afford to try to deal with him? At this point, whether he is a narcissist, pathological or otherwise, becomes irrelevant.

If he is a pathological narcissist, there is no way you can help him, and there might be no way you could suffer him long term either. There is a very real possibility of getting damaged by him. You will likely never know if he has a pathology. Supposing he does, then it is safe to assume that most of the personality you fell for is not real. In that case, the man you are in love with does not exist. In that case, all the nice things he says to you about you is a steaming pile of donkey dung. That cannot possibly end well for you.

Cross your fingers and hope that, if he is pathological, he will suffer terrible losses through which he will lose all of his supply at once, and then maybe he will look for professional help. It is always a long shot, but a few people have managed to improve thanks to therapy. Contrarily to what most people seem to believe, even if it is a long shot, it is always worth trying therapy. But you cannot bring him to do it.

Most importantly, your own needs and interests should always be of greater import than other people's (except if you have kids or are the caregiver of a disabled person - then they come first). Yes, this is selfish, but selfishness also is a continuum, and looking out for your own happiness and well-being before tending to those of others is perfectly healthy selfishness.
Gomba13
Consumer 4
Consumer 4
 
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 12:13 am
Local time: Thu Mar 28, 2024 11:59 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Previous

Return to Narcissistic Personality Disorder Forum




  • Related articles
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests