Hysterical?

ElephantEyes wrote:...
Yes, I think the theory is that most PDs are ego syntonic and the person is happy with who they are and don't want to change.

So as you said its getting into fuzzy territory; are we evaluating someone else based on our own values? What if that person is happy the way they are? Who are we to change them? etc...I think these are really good points.

Not that its out of line to present alternatives, or to challenge a person, as Castle suggested.

But the need or desire to change another person can become unhealthy. I guess, when it becomes about that person's own needs, and not necessarily about the "disordered" person. It can be a fine line sometimes, I think. It can be hard to untangle, who is showing the disordered behavior, who here really needs to change, what are the real issues, etc.? And it gets tied up in culture, values, personal preference, etc.
...

Yea, exactly. The more I learned, the more I learned that the way forward is to turn my focus from what is going on with my partner to what's going on with me. I am not saying there is no objective reality either, but even in the context of this thread, it's a great relief to spend less energy evaluating her personality (i.e., my belief she is 'too' emotional, dramatic, fill in the blank) and spend more evaluating my own.

Ironically, she has taught me somethings too, things I'd never had learned otherwise. Specifically she is very clear minded, she perceives her lack of empathy as a positive trait. She makes a good argument for it too. Why should she expend energy on what others are going through? Why should she change when she is content with who she is? Why do I think she is overly dramatic, others don't say that! I was so absolutely certain she was missing out on something, but the wow moments were me pondering maybe I'm missing out on something. Maybe there is something I can learn from her, to find my own balance. Indeed there is.

Again I'm not saying there is no objective reality in the middle, including the norm tends to settle on a range of personality traits, and that extremes can have positive and negative consequences, but just as changing ourselves can feel damn near impossible at times, even more true is it's always easier to find fault in others, but it's no easier for them to change, and maybe even more difficult when we are being critical.

xdude wrote:

ElephantEyes wrote:...
Yes, I think the theory is that most PDs are ego syntonic and the person is happy with who they are and don't want to change.

So as you said its getting into fuzzy territory; are we evaluating someone else based on our own values? What if that person is happy the way they are? Who are we to change them? etc...I think these are really good points.

Not that its out of line to present alternatives, or to challenge a person, as Castle suggested.

But the need or desire to change another person can become unhealthy. I guess, when it becomes about that person's own needs, and not necessarily about the "disordered" person. It can be a fine line sometimes, I think. It can be hard to untangle, who is showing the disordered behavior, who here really needs to change, what are the real issues, etc.? And it gets tied up in culture, values, personal preference, etc.
...

Yea, exactly. The more I learned, the more I learned that the way forward is to turn my focus from what is going on with my partner to what's going on with me. I am not saying there is no objective reality either, but even in the context of this thread, it's a great relief to spend less energy evaluating her personality (i.e., my belief she is 'too' emotional, dramatic, fill in the blank) and spend more evaluating my own.

Definitely. The alternative seems somewhat codependent.

xdude wrote:Ironically, she has taught me somethings too, things I'd never had learned otherwise. Specifically she is very clear minded, she perceives her lack of empathy as a positive trait. She makes a good argument for it too. Why should she expend energy on what others are going through? Why should she change when she is content with who she is? Why do I think she is overly dramatic, others don't say that! I was so absolutely certain she was missing out on something, but the wow moments were me pondering maybe I'm missing out on something. Maybe there is something I can learn from her, to find my own balance. Indeed there is.

This seems like a very emotionally removed way of seeing things. Reminds me a lot of how NPDs and AsPDs see things.

xdude wrote:Again I'm not saying there is no objective reality in the middle, including the norm tends to settle on a range of personality traits, and that extremes can have positive and negative consequences, but just as changing ourselves can feel damn near impossible at times, even more true is it's always easier to find fault in others, but it's no easier for them to change, and maybe even more difficult when we are being critical.

I agree with this. I also think there should be some structure on what is the ultimate goal. Each person's own individual "actualization"... Or is there some generic, standard ideal of "health" or normality each person should strive for.

ElephantEyes wrote:...
This seems like a very emotionally removed way of seeing things. Reminds me a lot of how NPDs and AsPDs see things.

It is, but it's enlightening to read articles and books that question, is it self-harmful to be overly empathetic? Most of that material does not go to the extreme of suggesting lose all empathy, but does question is it self-harmful to be overly affected by what is out of our control?, to put self second far too often, etc. By the way even that's something to ponder, is being overly empathetic motivated in whole or part by the need to be 'in control'? But I think you hit the nail on the head below...

ElephantEyes wrote:...
I agree with this. I also think there should be some structure on what is the ultimate goal. Each person's own individual "actualization"... Or is there some generic, standard ideal of "health" or normality each person should strive for.

Very cool. Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs is still considered valid work, and I've been a fan of this theory for most of my life.

At the top of the pyramid of needs is the need to achieve 'self actualization'. There is no exact definition of what it means, nothing that implies having great relationships with everyone is 'the goal', and maybe even the opposite (i.e., being content with who we are could well mean not everyone likes us). It really is just about fulfilling our own sense of self-potential.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-actualization

"Maslow examined the lives of each of these people in order to assess the common qualities that led each to become self-actualized. In general he found that these individuals were very accepting of themselves and of their life circumstances; were focused on finding solutions to cultural problems rather than to personal problems; were open to others' opinions and ideas; had strong senses of privacy, autonomy, human values and appreciation of life; and a few intimate friendships rather than many superficial ones. He also believed that each of these people had somehow managed to find their core-nature that is unique to them, and is one of the true goals of life."

xdude wrote:

ElephantEyes wrote:...
This seems like a very emotionally removed way of seeing things. Reminds me a lot of how NPDs and AsPDs see things.

It is, but it's enlightening to read articles and books that question, is it self-harmful to be overly empathetic? Most of that material does not go to the extreme of suggesting lose all empathy, but does question is it self-harmful to be overly affected by what is out of our control?, to put self second far too often, etc. By the way even that's something to ponder, is being overly empathetic motivated in whole or part by the need to be 'in control'? But I think you hit the nail on the head below...

Yeah, good questions. Are very empathetic people in control of their empathy, i.e. is it an intellectual decision to be empathetic towards someone, or is it a knee-jerk, reflexive response they can't control?

When is it appropriate to help? Only anonymously, which is proof that the person is not helping in exchange for something, to put the other person in their debt?

Most of the time there does seem to be strings attached to another person's help. How many people give anonymous donations, or do something kind that nobody ever knows about?

It probably does often have some manipulative motivation, someone hoping to get something back, or maybe its the need to be in control.

Maybe true empathy is actually rare. By that I mean non-selfish empathy; altruism.

xdude wrote:
Very cool. Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs is still considered valid work, and I've been a fan of this theory for most of my life.

At the top of the pyramid of needs is the need to achieve 'self actualization'. There is no exact definition of what it means, nothing that implies having great relationships with everyone is 'the goal', and maybe even the opposite (i.e., being content with who we are could well mean not everyone likes us). It really is just about fulfilling our own sense of self-potential.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-actualization

"Maslow examined the lives of each of these people in order to assess the common qualities that led each to become self-actualized. In general he found that these individuals were very accepting of themselves and of their life circumstances; were focused on finding solutions to cultural problems rather than to personal problems; were open to others' opinions and ideas; had strong senses of privacy, autonomy, human values and appreciation of life; and a few intimate friendships rather than many superficial ones. He also believed that each of these people had somehow managed to find their core-nature that is unique to them, and is one of the true goals of life."

Very interesting.

I wonder what that core-nature is. May some PD people who are less influenced by the need to adapt and blend in to society, actually be more self-actualized? Or is the PD always a defense mechanism developed out of pain and trauma?

Maslow's hierarchy of needs (yes needs, not wants), places esteem needs and relationships below self-actualization.

His theory though is that most people must fulfill each level of need before they can move forward. Of course he doesn't mean "I am done with the previous need", but that we need that foundation before we are ready to take the next stop.

Self-actualization doesn't necessarily mean giving up on relationships or social status either, but it does mean pursuing our talents without regret, being true to ourselves, etc., and that may mean some relationships fail. I do think Maslow had something in mind, maybe not said, but I think he meant the self-actualized pursue the best of what it means to be human, not just personal pleasure or goals.

http://mind-development.eu/maslow.html

"Maslow's writings tell us much about the nature of wisdom. The self-actualizing people that Maslow describes focus on concerns outside of themselves; they like solitude and privacy more than the average person, and they tend to be more detached than usual from the dictates and expectations of their culture. They are inner-directed people. They appreciate the world around them with a sense of awe and wonder. In love relationships they respect the other's individuality and feel joy at the another's success. They give more love than most people, and need less. Because they take an independent view, they can see situations and problems more objectively and consequently they tend to be creative and make valuable contributions to society."

I have always been a fan of Maslow's thinking regarding needs. Reading that passage regarding self-actualization reminds me just how far I have to go on my own journey.

I have tried to condense this thinking into a rather simple (perhaps too simple) thought; the sign of a successful life is to do one's best with what one has been given in life. This recognizes that we all have different circumstances and challenges.

In the concept of Personality Disorders, perhaps actualizing the "self" is simply putting one foot in front of the other, day by day and moment by moment. Looking for and securing any moment of happiness or self affirmation. Any hope or breakthrough. Perhaps these are just cliché's. But perhaps that is all one can expect of the self.

I'm a fan too. I read Maslow at a fairly young age, and it's had an impact on me ever since.

My take away has been -

1.) We all need our basic needs fulfilled, and there is no shame in this. Also it helped me to see, do not judge those who are struggling with basic foundation needs.
2.) We all need relationships.
3.) We all need a sense of self-esteem.
4.) Yes, people vary in their path to self-actualization.
5.) We can get stuck on any of these needs, and if we do, we are only doing ourselves a disservice. There is more, but it's also easy to get stuck, and avoid the next step, because each of those steps is a trade-off for the devil we know vs the one we don't. We will change if we move forward.