Misunderstanding narcissism

By -
Many times, people apply the term "narcissist" someone who thinks a lot of themselves. But clinically speaking, that is almost the complete opposite of what the term really means.

Narcissists are, in fact, people who think so little of themselves that all of their actions are directed towards the maintenance of that extremely fragile self-image. So, for instance, if someone tells me Donald Trump is a narcissist, I know they have no idea what they are talking about. Trump may perhaps be an egomaniac, but he is absolutely not a narcissist.

Comments

  1. Lord12:53 AM

    Is that because he is singularly ineffective at it?

    ReplyDelete
  2. rob10:13 AM

    Based on the clinical definition was Narcissus a Narcissist? He hid his fragile self-image quite well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah9:02 AM

      Wrong: he fell in love with the reflection because he did not even recognize it as himself.

      Delete
    2. rob3:58 PM

      This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  3. Thomas L. Knapp4:19 PM

    "Clinically speaking" (per the DSM-5) the diagnostic criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder are most or all of the following:

    1. Grandiosity with expectations of superior treatment from others
    2. Fixated on fantasies of power, success, intelligence, attractiveness, etc.
    3. Self-perception of being unique, superior and associated with high-status people and institutions
    4. Needing constant admiration from others
    5. Sense of entitlement to special treatment and to obedience from others
    6. Exploitative of others to achieve personal gain
    7. Unwilling to empathize with others' feelings, wishes, or needs
    8. Intensely envious of others and the belief that others are equally envious of them
    9. Pompous and arrogant demeanor

    Trump seems -- SEEMS -- to display each and every one of those qualities in abundance. But not being a psychologist or psychiatrist, and not having interviewed him in a clinical setting, I'm not qualified to diagnose him as what he seems to be, which is a "narcissist" in the "clinical" sense.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ken B7:21 PM

      No, not 7, according to those who know him.

      Delete
    2. gcallah9:03 AM

      Well, I choose Freud over a hodge-podge chucked together by committee like DSM-5.

      Delete
    3. Thomas L. Knapp11:09 AM

      I can dig that -- not a big fan of DSM myself. But it seems to me that most people would understand that to represent "clinically speaking" more so than Freud these days, is all.

      Delete
    4. Keshav Srinivasan12:18 AM

      Well, considering that Trump seems to meet both the popular usage of narcissist and he also seems to meet every single criterion that modern psychiatry uses to define narcissistic personality disorder, I think it makes complete sense for people to call Trump a narcissist.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more