Where does self-confidence end, and narcissism begin?

vcrpamphlet wrote:Cheers for sharing. Now it makes sense why you seem fairly normal here. What subtype does it come under?

I’m not aware of any sub type, I think I come off as normal because I am not posting as some kind of cartoonish over-exaggerated character that in my 45 years on earth I’ve never met in real life like half of the ASPD forum. There is more posturing on here than in a prison yard. I find it ludicrous to be honest. I have a couple friends here otherwise I’d never post again in this toilet.

Akuma wrote:

To be honest, was hoping you'd agree the conversation was going no-where.

I do which is why I asked for the point of it. Your reference to rehab was so small that I completely overread it. I think overall you underestimate your vagueness and variance in the use of concepts though. I might be very stubborn and stiff but you are on the other end very open to using lots of ideas almost interchangeably, which might add to your problems when concepts really become contradictory. For example you keep on talking about the self as an illusion, while I pointed out that the self in the psychological sense does have real functions which would get eradicated once this self would vanish. Or in simpler terms, an illusory self would only have illusory functions.
Thats not complicated logic, or contradictory, it becomes contradictory because you superimpose a spiritual "illusory" self on a situation, in which a very real self is faced with real issues.

Have kept the least emotional part of your post quoted above. You do realise this is just our dominant egos slinging sh*t at each other at this point, right? Could have just left it at the handshake dude; these types of exchanges are actually fun from my pov - tried to give fair courtesy in ending the conversation as a sign of respectability, rather than to keep deconstructing your faulty/increasingly emotional responses, but, here we are. The Battle of Two Narcs.

Please demonstrate where my use of language has been vague enough to be inaccurate or faulty. I've no doubt there are some, potentially, given the sheer bulk of content I've written, but in each and every case where you have tried to infer a superiority in this regard through an affectation of confusion, I've corrected you, and you've not once rebuked any of those corrections or been able to justify the claim; there has been no establishment of language misuse on my part at all (and wouldn't it have been simpler, to have made attempts to understand the point - as I was doing with you, in seeking clarification, etc. - rather than being needlessly obstinate?)...and that being the case, things have suddenly gone full circle back to the self.

Did you watch the Sam Harris clip?

The actual question being asked, in the first place, wasn't whether complete dissolution of the self would be helpful; it was whether methods towards that goal, would be helpful. Very easily clarified, if you'd asked. Or read it properly. Instead, it's the entitled presumption that my thinking is wrong, that there there are errors in my logic, that simply aren't there. Or, more likely, that this discussion has been threatening to your self-image somehow - the rationale to continue the discussion when I offered a cease-fire, for instance, is extremely lacking.

There are two schools of thought here, neither being spiritual. I admit I don't fully understand the psychodynamic version that well, hence the questions I was asking being quite genuine in their curiosity. So we have a situation where I desire to learn whether a "lessening of the (part)self-fixation present in narcissism can be achieved by working towards total self-dissolution" from your more-educated-than-me perspective, and therefore have a curiosity towards your own psychodynamic worldview; whereas you simply reject the question outright, with obstinacy, as you presume it to be based on an irrational set of bs spiritual beliefs - even though it was never presented to you as anything but rational.

I understand better now, where this confusion comes from. Finally, you've alluded more specifically/helpfully to the fact that under the psychodynamic model, the self (even in the sense San Harris describes it) is really the tip of the iceberg, of the whole self. I can only presume that in the first posts when this was brought up and you clarified it was only part of the self that was relevent to narcissism (and then used a schizoid example), that that's also the conscious tip of which The Self Illusion also happens to apply.

I don't have much confidence in your ability to give straight answers on this topic, at this point, but taking the question as a hypothetical where it's accepted the self-dissolution procedure works, if only partially, would that development not have a proportionate improvement on a person's narcissism?

It's very late here now, so not overly motivated to go on your journey into spirituality rejection when it never applied to the essence of the question. You are clearly fairly perturbed by this post exchange, and are resorting to some kind of disparagement that unfortunately to you, in no way applies to NY worldview. I actually reject Buddhist philosophy, lol. It's a pool of bullsh*t with some helpful guidelines around egolessness, eradication of the self-attachment, compassion to others, loving kindness, and so on; the higher level theory of Vipassana doesn't interest me in the slightest.

Part of how it can work for the secular humanist - that's how I identify - is to train the mind as you would a muscle-group in the gym, to become more attentive to truthful reality both in front of and inside the body, especially w/r/t the reality of the mind. The intensity in which the technique works to accomplish this makes CBT seem like kindergarten. The faculty of awareness it promotes allows a capacity to control your own thinking more swiftly, and in the case of selflessness, to simply remove egocentricity, over time, from the cognitive frame altogether, with rote reinforcement through constant practice. But not to be misleading here: I haven't meditated for the better part of a year, and the last period was short-lived - but the mindfulness faculty is still very much there, the issue is that I also happen to be a slightly aspie slightly borderline highly obsessive hedonistic narcissist with bipolar 2 and a chronic drug problem, and it's taking a long time to achieve consistency of method, even though my thinking is much more stable than it's been in the past. Side-note: this paragraph, similar to the expounding of my rehab experience, is verbose and indulgent - hardly vague, though, if we're including your own writing in the context - just as much of this reply and the last have been, because I feel like it. The absurdity of this exchange, at this point, is hilarious.

Akuma wrote:But ok, so if I get this right your problem is that you want to catch the moment where your thinking becomes unhealthy? But thats control behavior isnt it. Control is narcissistic. Now what do you do!

Haha. No, not that at all. I was just asking about the abstract of that question - which your first reply, and especially ZeroZ's concise contribution, have already satisfied. I have enough experience with my own thought mechanics, to have idea on what's possible or not.

The more practical questions we got into, were mostly unrelated to the OP.

ZeroZ wrote:

vcrpamphlet wrote:Cheers for sharing. Now it makes sense why you seem fairly normal here. What subtype does it come under?

I’m not aware of any sub type, I think I come off as normal because I am not posting as some kind of cartoonish over-exaggerated character that in my 45 years on earth I’ve never met in real life like half of the ASPD forum. There is more posturing on here than in a prison yard. I find it ludicrous to be honest. I have a couple friends here otherwise I’d never post again in this toilet.

You seem to contribute more than that suggests you'd be invested in, though. Have you met many ASPDs or psychopaths or other extreme PD examples in person? When you think about it, even though there's plenty of bs, this site would attract many types of individuals you could go years without meeting in the real world, and even then they mightn't show who they really are. I don't really see it the same way: when the posturing becomes silly, it just makes people look silly, or young - not edgelordish, or whatever (jmo). And in someone like Reaper, she does it part ironically, has learnt enough self-awareness to have fun with it all.

You have a very healthy looking foot for a 45 year old.

vcrpamphlet wrote:

Cassandre wrote:Patting the steak...

As in masturbating?

You spelled gorilla wrong.

as in evaluating the person you're talking to ...

Also

xdude wrote:My answer is that at some point in life I had a personal epiphany, realized I was not enjoying life, and that most of what I was doing was reacting to perceived ego threats, and perceived ego boosts. I am overall happier now that I am not constantly chasing those ego boosts, and reacting less to other's reactions. I am however less successful as defined by society, that was my one up advantage, driven to be better/loftier than others. On the flip side, I relate to others better now.

A more intellectual view... I think it really depends on how you want to define self-confidence, and it's a moving target depending on who you ask.

I was surprised when I read the bolded part. I could not feel any more different. With less baggage, I feel edgier, clearer, I communicate more clearly, I communicate more clearly what I want, meaning sometimes I get what I want. It's not perfect but so much better than chasing shadows all the time.

I guess I'm curious how you define advantage? As even by society standards, I have a hard time conceptualizing what beats healthy self confidence.

vcrpamphlet wrote:How would you say self-confidence relates to happiness in the external way you just mentioned?

Kind of missed looking at this, how self-confidence is defined, because it seems like something most of us tend to agree on when it's in front of us. ...

How long did it take for those changes you mentioned to become entirely natural and removed from covert thinking?

I ended up on that boundary between BPD and NPD. Whatever works, and that's what worked for me.

It took 2 decades (yes 20 years) of fighting with myself to make a change and it's still a fragile work in progress. The main thing was I realized I wasn't happy living on mount high (in my own mind) and I wasn't happy with always feeling I needed to react to perceived ego threats (of course I still do). In reality though I still can go for the throat at times when I feel threatened, and often later regret it (my BPD side). Those changes are still not entirely natural, and the changes came at a cost... going from a highly paid leader position to rarely working which leads into...

But I think the real key thing is that people are not conscious of they encourage NPD and at times BPD. It's a kind of mental blindness. There are positives, archetypes, associated with these personality types. Since this is the NPD forum, and nobody will be truly offended (haha!), let's face it, "I fell for your appearance of self-confidence", or "appearance of dependence", is entirely understandable, except again, problem is then others want to mold us into something else. I want you to be a NPD leader type, until I don't applies.

We learned to be NPD because that's what we were rewarded for, until we aren't.

xdude wrote:

vcrpamphlet wrote:Kind of missed looking at this, how self-confidence is defined, because it seems like something most of us tend to agree on when it's in front of us. ...

By the way for whatever it's worth, I think there are two definitions of self-confidence, but I can only try to put them into words.

1.) In one definition, it's about rising above, though the person still feels deeply threatened.

2.) In the other definition, it's about not feeling threatened, so no need to rise above.

Problem is that #1 is what is often most attractive to others on a primal level (we like our heroic figures), while #2 is so under the radar others may just think of it as a weakness.

I don't have much confidence in your ability to give straight answers on this topic, at this point, but taking the question as a hypothetical where it's accepted the self-dissolution procedure works, if only partially, would that development not have a proportionate improvement on a person's narcissism?

Clearly define what you mean by self-dissolution and by narcissism in the context of your question and you'll get as straight an answer as possible. Because I still have no clue what you mean by those terms

Side-note: this paragraph, similar to the expounding of my rehab experience, is verbose and indulgent - hardly vague, though, if we're including your own writing in the context - just as much of this reply and the last have been, because I feel like it. The absurdity of this exchange, at this point, is hilarious.

Youre explaining that you want to reduce "narcissistic thinking" in your "rehab" and that there it was kind of better while out there its kind of worse. You are expecting a lot of background knowledge to fill gaps there. For me at least your story does not give me any clar picture of either what happened or what you consider as your problem.

xdude wrote:I ended up on that boundary between BPD and NPD. Whatever works, and that's what worked for me.

It took 2 decades (yes 20 years) of fighting with myself to make a change and it's still a fragile work in progress. The main thing was I realized I wasn't happy living on mount high (in my own mind) and I wasn't happy with always feeling I needed to react to perceived ego threats (of course I still do). In reality though I still can go for the throat at times when I feel threatened, and often later regret it (my BPD side). Those changes are still not entirely natural, and the changes came at a cost... going from a highly paid leader position to rarely working which leads into...

But I think the real key thing is that people are not conscious of they encourage NPD and at times BPD. It's a kind of mental blindness. There are positives, archetypes, associated with these personality types. Since this is the NPD forum, and nobody will be truly offended (haha!), let's face it, "I fell for your appearance of self-confidence", or "appearance of dependence", is entirely understandable, except again, problem is then others want to mold us into something else. I want you to be a NPD leader type, until I don't applies.

We learned to be NPD because that's what we were rewarded for, until we aren't.

Why did you need to go from leadership, to not working much at all? Isn't there something intermediate to the two - or a change in profession perhaps?

It more sounds like you've rationalised a change in circumstance that happened to you, rather than made a conscious choice that not working much was a better option. If that sounds harsh, it's not meant to be - it's an interesting turn in life for the sake of greater inner peace, because most people are highly predisposed to being socially useful, in order to be happy. It sounds like an extreme compromise.

I mean, what would you say others - like me - could draw from your story? I haven't had a desk job in the better part of 4 years, most of which has been spent smoking weed and drinking Wild Turkey, and all it's done is taught me the value of manual labour and volunteer work in the absence of paid work...can you see where I'm coming from?

How can a person improve their narcissistic Me thinking, while still working full-time?

xdude wrote:By the way for whatever it's worth, I think there are two definitions of self-confidence, but I can only try to put them into words.

1.) In one definition, it's about rising above, though the person still feels deeply threatened.

2.) In the other definition, it's about not feeling threatened, so no need to rise above.

Problem is that #1 is what is often most attractive to others on a primal level (we like our heroic figures), while #2 is so under the radar others may just think of it as a weakness.

That's actually really interesting. Cheers, will give it some thought. At a glance, to me it's the second one that's self-confidence; the first sounds more narcissistic in nature.

-- Thu May 23, 2019 12:53 am --

@Akuma

Will have a think over the next couple of days if there's a better way to phrase and contextualise the question. To be honest, it's already been mostly answered, in a way - but yeah, still interested in your insights if you reckon a bigger framework of the question will make it easier.

vcrpamphlet wrote:Why did you need to go from leadership, to not working much at all? Isn't there something intermediate to the two - or a change in profession perhaps?

It more sounds like you've rationalised a change in circumstance that happened to you, rather than made a conscious choice that not working much was a better option. If that sounds harsh, it's not meant to be - it's an interesting turn in life for the sake of greater inner peace, because most people are highly predisposed to being socially useful, in order to be happy. It sounds like an extreme compromise.

No worries. It's a conscious choice, to take life from a different angle for a while. To disengage from behaviors that were my norm and try wearing a different hat. Yes to being socially useful, and to add to that, socially valued, but what is working for me is to take some extreme actions to counteract some extremes of my personality. That's not advice, and don't do it unless you can afford to do so, but getting out of the rat race has helped me to view it (and my role) differently.