This seems to share the same sentiment I have been hearing from a lot of places recently, the only person you should be comparing yourself to is the past version of yourself.
Maybe they're more likely to report imposter syndrome? How exactly can we distinguish between a self-aware narcissist who knows they have imposter-like tendencies and someone who gets satisfaction over having a pathology that others will be sympathetic towards? Nothing I've read here suggests an answer to this, I think.
TIL I'm a narcissist. Not how I expected this morning to go.
I think these kind of categories that come from psychology are useful and also dangerous. Our innate tendency towards heuristics makes it difficult to talk about this stuff, especially with words like "narcissist" that have strongly negative connotations. The brain is a complicated mess. Maybe the most complicated mess in the universe. We try to impose some order on it without understanding it. It's true that "everyone in this room loves me" and "everyone in this room hates me" could be manifestations of a similar neurological configuration, and we could put the label "narcissist" on it. But the label is somewhat arbitrary and the behavioral results are often very different.
Agreed. This striving towards binary classification is so flawed from any broader perspective.
I, too, just learned that I'm a narcissist.
I had to squint quite a bit at the diagnostic list there, and sort of wedge my own psychological dispositions creatively into the qualifications list there but then yeah -- snap (and crap!) -- I'm a narcissist.
Oh, but if I use just a little more nuanced application of thought, then suddenly I'm not a narcissist. Or at least in a safer position on the linear spectrum that is assumed in this kind of "scientific" categorization.
Which is really quite absurd as you have pointed out.
By no means is this a universal truism, but in general if you think you have a Cluster B personality disorder, you probably don’t. If you think you’re the smartest, best person in the world and other people are inferior and should know it... then you might.
The diagnosis is not arbitrary and the lack of self-awareness those suffering from NPD experience places them at a disadvantage at self-diagnosis. DSM standards have moved a lot over the years, but NPD has remained largely the same. Ask a child, love-interest or spouse of someone with NPD about the manifestations of the condition on their lives and you'll get a remarkably consistent story. There are two grey areas: First, NPD in women can be confused with Asperger syndrome. Second, NPD is often accompanied (co-morbid) with other disorders (eg. BPD).
Narcissism is not something you truly understand until you meet someone who really is one at the far end of the spectrum. Until you spend weeks, months or even years trying to work out why they have had their empathy glands removed you just don't fully understand the 'narcissism' concept. We see narcissists like The Donald and think that is it, actually you need to be on the sharp end of it, in a relationship directly or once removed through family or work to fully understand how insidious it is.
Only when you have learned the importance of 'no contact' do you understand narcissism fully.
All of us have a few traits that the narcissist has however, it is the cluster of characteristics that matters. With the HN readership I expect a fair few people here have genuinely found themselves on teambuilding exercises etc. where they really are the 'brightest person in the room' and have had to step up to 'leadership' because otherwise nothing would get done. That could be a tickbox on your internal 'I must be a narcissist' list. It doesn't make you one though. A lot of boxes have to be ticked.
Furthermore, the true narcissist does not have the brain cells to identify what the condition is. They can even hear of the story of Narcissus and think it is an 'incredibly sweet story', one worth sharing with others. How little they know...
Interestingly teambuilding exercises can lead to moments of 'imposter syndrome'. For instance you might never do sports yet fluke it with 'beginners luck' to beat everyone else. This happened with my sister who can't drive. When she went go-karting with her petrol-head workmates she somehow won. On that day she felt quite the 'imposter' in collecting the prize, not believing it. She was 'quite full of herself', ego brimming, and with a few 'narcissist checkboxes' ticked that day. So there is a correlation.
I've always wanted to be a Narcissist, for years have strived to become one, but I never quite feel like I am one. I always feel like a wannabe-Narcissist, like an impost....
If you are interested in this topic and want to discover more about yourself and maladaptive behaviors and coping mechanisms, a great resource for personality disorders is the “Out of the Fog” website[1].
I also find Sam Vaknin has written a lot of interesting stuff on covert narcissism and the concept of narcissistic supply. (he also has a youtube channel) [2]
I feel that covert NPD shares a lot of traits with BPD.
This is my point of view: Everyone is a narcissist maximally. It's not a spectrum, just a maximum state that is always on, always self preserving, but personality differs quite a bit. Personality causes others to perceive others as being more or less narcissistic. In other words we started using the word narcissistic to start describing personality types.
no... there really are people out there that really think they're better than you, on an existential level, and that the only reason you're better at any one thing than them is because they haven't gotten around to doing it better than you yet.
The short test for narcissism is: "Are you a narcissist?" Actual, pathological, narcissists answer 'yes' so often that it's almost useful as a diagnostic tool. Most people have some idea of their shortcomings.
Next you'll come for our precious Dunning-Kruger effect! If my sense of incompetence doesn't mean that I'm actually a big brainy boy, what've I got left?
From my experience with "grandiose" narcissists, they share most of the traits of "vulnerable" narcissists, but they try very hard not to show them. If you want to understand their behavior, you have to realize that beneath their self-confident facade, these are extremely vulnerable people as well.
This just smells like using the same word for two different concept, and then conflating them. Thinking that the world only exists for your own benefit, and thinking that you don't fit in the world, both have an aspect of separating yourself from the world, but it's more harm than help to lump them together. If "narcissism" means having any sense of self identity, then the word means very little as a pathology.
Non-narcissist here, apparently. I do find the premise somewhat troubling. If you’re supremely confident and never doubt yourself, even in situations where you should, you could be described as a narcissist. And if you’re lacking in self-confidence, and constantly think you’ll be found out, you’re also a narcissist. And there’s probably narcissists who experience a moderate level of self-doubt in between.
It’s more likely narcissism and self doubt are just independent variables.
I think the key to understanding narcissism is that narcissists only try very hard to appear confident but on the inside they're anything but. The grandiosity they display is just a kind of coping mechanism.
It's notable that over the last couple decades, we've moved to where we refer to diabetics as people with diabetes, schizophrenics as people exhibiting symptoms of a variety of mental disorders, disabled as people with disabilities, the obese as people coping with obesity - but narcissists, sociopaths, and psychopaths are still othered, and yet still within the domain of detatched clinical assessment.
These are moral assessments of character, and ones that aren't wrong to make. But it's disingenuous to say that we have a medical definition of what is essentially an evil tendency that we can treat (and presumably, eradicate) as a disease.
The more literary theme among the obvious narcissists and psycho's I've met was they lacked self acceptance, and were pathologically actuated by the approval of others, particularly imagined others. They filtered their experiences to only ones that reflected a deep seated idea of a perfect and adorable self, and they had adapted to ferociously attack anything that threatened this perfect and vulnerable self image.
That's not a disease, it's poor parenting exacerbated by a culture that enables it.
People can learn and change, and they do it every day. The popular pseudo scientific discourse around narcissists and sociopaths is politically dangerous and in many cases, I suspect motivated by a purifying urge that is a much deeper evil.
I never understood the difference between narcisms and self confidence. The same way this article makes it unclear what the difference between being insecure and no self confidence and narcism. Is insecurity a disorder?
Imposter syndrome, like social anxiety, is the result of an incessant obsession with what others think of you. Both of these are conceited forms of narcissism.
This is true as well. But historically diagnosis was used as a way to strip liberty away from people.
Women who refused to sleep with husbands were routinely committed.
Capitalism is intense and is resulting in mental health issues for many people. The system doesn’t self critique rather it labels the people as “ill” and sells them a pill, at a profit of course.
The practitioners often benefit and reinforce the dynamics that create the symptoms in our culture.
Open Dialogue is an approach which does a great job at healing folks in the context of community.
35 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 76.6 ms ] threadhttp://outofthefog.website/personality-disorders-1/2015/12/6...
I think these kind of categories that come from psychology are useful and also dangerous. Our innate tendency towards heuristics makes it difficult to talk about this stuff, especially with words like "narcissist" that have strongly negative connotations. The brain is a complicated mess. Maybe the most complicated mess in the universe. We try to impose some order on it without understanding it. It's true that "everyone in this room loves me" and "everyone in this room hates me" could be manifestations of a similar neurological configuration, and we could put the label "narcissist" on it. But the label is somewhat arbitrary and the behavioral results are often very different.
I, too, just learned that I'm a narcissist.
I had to squint quite a bit at the diagnostic list there, and sort of wedge my own psychological dispositions creatively into the qualifications list there but then yeah -- snap (and crap!) -- I'm a narcissist.
Oh, but if I use just a little more nuanced application of thought, then suddenly I'm not a narcissist. Or at least in a safer position on the linear spectrum that is assumed in this kind of "scientific" categorization.
Which is really quite absurd as you have pointed out.
But only when it comes to, say, J2EE?
Like I'm the 100th smartest person at J2EE in the world, and everyone else besides the approximately 100 above me are J2EE-inferior.
Am I a Narcissist? A J2EE-Narcissist?
Narcissism is not something you truly understand until you meet someone who really is one at the far end of the spectrum. Until you spend weeks, months or even years trying to work out why they have had their empathy glands removed you just don't fully understand the 'narcissism' concept. We see narcissists like The Donald and think that is it, actually you need to be on the sharp end of it, in a relationship directly or once removed through family or work to fully understand how insidious it is.
Only when you have learned the importance of 'no contact' do you understand narcissism fully.
All of us have a few traits that the narcissist has however, it is the cluster of characteristics that matters. With the HN readership I expect a fair few people here have genuinely found themselves on teambuilding exercises etc. where they really are the 'brightest person in the room' and have had to step up to 'leadership' because otherwise nothing would get done. That could be a tickbox on your internal 'I must be a narcissist' list. It doesn't make you one though. A lot of boxes have to be ticked.
Furthermore, the true narcissist does not have the brain cells to identify what the condition is. They can even hear of the story of Narcissus and think it is an 'incredibly sweet story', one worth sharing with others. How little they know...
Interestingly teambuilding exercises can lead to moments of 'imposter syndrome'. For instance you might never do sports yet fluke it with 'beginners luck' to beat everyone else. This happened with my sister who can't drive. When she went go-karting with her petrol-head workmates she somehow won. On that day she felt quite the 'imposter' in collecting the prize, not believing it. She was 'quite full of herself', ego brimming, and with a few 'narcissist checkboxes' ticked that day. So there is a correlation.
I feel that covert NPD shares a lot of traits with BPD.
[1] https://outofthefog.website [2] http://samvak.tripod.com
The short test for narcissism is: "Are you a narcissist?" Actual, pathological, narcissists answer 'yes' so often that it's almost useful as a diagnostic tool. Most people have some idea of their shortcomings.
You got anything to back up that claim? That sounds like a pretty big conclusion that you're jumping to without evidence.
It's not a "claim". It's literally the null hypothesis: two traits are assumed to be uncorrelated unless proven otherwise.
If you want to claim that a sense of "impostor syndrome" is actually indicative of increased skill, it's your job to prove it.
It’s more likely narcissism and self doubt are just independent variables.
These are moral assessments of character, and ones that aren't wrong to make. But it's disingenuous to say that we have a medical definition of what is essentially an evil tendency that we can treat (and presumably, eradicate) as a disease.
The more literary theme among the obvious narcissists and psycho's I've met was they lacked self acceptance, and were pathologically actuated by the approval of others, particularly imagined others. They filtered their experiences to only ones that reflected a deep seated idea of a perfect and adorable self, and they had adapted to ferociously attack anything that threatened this perfect and vulnerable self image.
That's not a disease, it's poor parenting exacerbated by a culture that enables it.
People can learn and change, and they do it every day. The popular pseudo scientific discourse around narcissists and sociopaths is politically dangerous and in many cases, I suspect motivated by a purifying urge that is a much deeper evil.
The blog is long defunct, but the archives are definitely worth a read.
If someone has a broken arm it’s observable and it’s pretty clear what the next step is.
With mental health diagnosis it’s not clear what the underlying issue is and at best you’ll be given something to supress symptoms.
We are doing a bit better on this with things like Psychedelics and Open Dialogue, but mental health is more of a context than a condition.
Women who refused to sleep with husbands were routinely committed.
Capitalism is intense and is resulting in mental health issues for many people. The system doesn’t self critique rather it labels the people as “ill” and sells them a pill, at a profit of course.
The practitioners often benefit and reinforce the dynamics that create the symptoms in our culture.
Open Dialogue is an approach which does a great job at healing folks in the context of community.