Page 1 of 2 12>
Topic Options
#50824 - 03/12/11 09:23 AM The psychoanalytic strawman of the Narcissist
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
First a thesis on what is Narcissism. Below this is a short antithesis and partial synthesis, left open to interpretation for replies to amount and fill in the gaps of the synthesis. Before you begin to read, watch out for subliminal use of words in the societal essay to exaggerate and sublimify areas of Narcissistic behaviour as undesirable by use of subliminal association with a juxtaposing negative set of traits. Such is synonymous with the Christianised demonisation of Lucifer's actions. Even being the most beautiful of the angels by design of the Narcissistic Yahweh, Lucifer was disgusted by Yahweh's Narcissism, and not the other way round. As God, being the all powerful creator could have made Lucifer not rebel with his all powerful powers. Lucifer, knowing this was arrogance and manipulation, stood against God face to face and chose to renounce all rewards of comfort in subservience to somebody else. He chose Hell, to have nothing. Instead he/she found enlightenment in absolute darkness. And we will get to this in relation to the dark subconsciousness and a persons Will and nature, later in the post.


Ok, so. bare in mind that a societal bias toward self love is prevalent in this essay and it is not mine. The text below the first essay is marked as mine.

Narcissistic personality disorder is a condition characterized by an inflated sense of self-importance, need for admiration, extreme self-involvement, and lack of empathy for others. Individuals with this disorder are usually arrogantly self-assured and confident. They expect to be noticed as superior. Many highly successful individuals might be considered narcissistic. However, this disorder is only diagnosed when these behaviours become persistent and very disabling or distressing.

Complications:

Vulnerability in self-esteem makes individuals with this disorder very sensitive to criticism or defeat. Although they may not show it outwardly, criticism may haunt these individuals these individuals and may leave them feeling humiliated, degraded, hollow, and empty. They may react with disdain, rage, or defiant counterattack. Their social life is often impaired due to problems derived from entitlement, the need for admiration, and the relative disregard for the sensitivities of others. Though their excessive ambition and confidence may lead to high achievement; performance may be disrupted due to intolerance of criticism or defeat. Sometimes vocational functioning can be very low, reflecting an unwillingness to take a risk in competitive or other situations in which defeat is possible. Individuals with this disorder have special difficulties adjusting to growing old and losing their former superiority.

Comorbidity:

In this disorder, sustained feelings of shame or humiliation and the attendant self-criticism may be associated with social withdrawal, depressed mood, and Dysthymic or Major Depressive Disorder. In contrast, sustained periods of grandiosity may be associated with a hypomanic mood. Anorexia Nervosa, Substance-Related Disorders (especially related to cocaine), and other Personality Disorders (especially Histrionic, Borderline, Antisocial, and Paranoid) frequently co-occur with this disorder.

Associated Laboratory Findings:

No laboratory test has been found to be diagnostic of this disorder.

Prevalence:

The prevalence of Narcissistic Personality Disorder is less than 1% of the general population. It is seen in 2% to 16% of psychiatric outpatients. This disorder is more frequent in males (50% to 75%) than females.

Course:

Narcissistic traits are very common in adolescents, but most adolescents grow out of this behaviour. Unfortunately, for some, this narcissistic behaviour persists and intensifies into adulthood; thus they become diagnosed with this disorder.



Narcissists are effective and alluring. They're tough. I like the idea of someone who can withstand the storm of rejections, betrayals and humiliations that life is bound to offer and remain convinced that he's special.

The shamelessness of a narcissist — barrelling forward at everyone's expense, demanding more attention than anyone else at the cocktail party, barking opinions without any discernible evidence to back them up — is offensive but also fascinating.

"Narcissistic" — like "intimidating" -- is one of those bullying insults that contains a hint of admiration, even jealousy, that makes it seem more like a compliment in the end. Though we pretend the word offers a damning assessment of someone's character, it also secretly portrays them as bold, forceful, exciting. So what's not to like?"


"Their needs are more important than anyone else's, and they expect to be accommodated in all things. They can't comprehend why they might not always come first".

"Their expectations have an almost childlike quality, yet they can be tyrannically outraged or pitifully depressed when thwarted".

—————————————

The above is from a few articles and academic thesis/essays and below is a off the wall scrawling by me attempting antithesis towards synthesising the differences between what is an aware Narcissist with a reasonable degree of emotional intelligence, empathy, and an oblivious and deluded, egoistic Narcissist. Such is synonymous with societies way of dumping philosophical Satanists and oblivious nihilists dabbling in sin unbeknownst in the same societal melting pot of base shallow judgemental attitude. Let us not be mistaken, at any given time in a mundanes, life you will find him making plans for comfort, anything that sheds light on his mediocre existence disgruntles him. And so it ought to be, wretched contentment is what leads us out of the wretched land of comfort into a life on the edge.

The standard psychoanalytic approach of Magian academics asserts that it's all rooted in infancy; and that the individual did not individuate "successfully". Clearly portraying what the "disorder" entails some kind of "failure". They assert this knowledge, as if by a freak of nature, the Narcissist has no ability to value, or even to recognize the feelings of other people. In this we see that a societal bias has been constructed against anyone who displays overt confidence and sense of self worth no matter if the Narcissist has high emotional intelligence or is if he is an oblivious egoist with a need for attention. Instead all individuals who display Narcissism are attention seeking, emotionally shallow and sensitive to criticisms. If this is so, then why are some Narcissist seemingly immune to criticism and rejection? I'll tell you, I'm not immune, I just have good emotional control due to maturity. I only get deeply wounded if I have acted with ignorance or neglected a close ones emotions, thus feeling rather ignorant.

I actually laugh at betrayal as something indicative of an infidel and due to never relying on anyone for anything either intrinsic or extrinsic this only happens when others assume I need them. I have a sense of humour and an understanding that thinking one is perfection, is a weakness, I realise that all extrinsic standards of perfection are ultimately insufficient, and that ego is something to perpetually overcome, that all systems in the mind, no matter how solid and secure they seem are subject to fracture in their very foundations as anything inflexible is fundamentally fragile, this includes ego which ought to be as absorbent as the colour black. Black absorbs all visible light, so does the individual absorb the full spectrum of the external to unify opposites and create new opposites from the state of primordial Chaos within his being. The individual creates his/her universe and this is more true than many will come to realise. What I will say is that ego, or consciousness, is not the centre of self, as is commonly believed.

A source of dissatisfaction is more inspiration to my own imaginations, from the depths of ego? surely the dark subconsciousness is the source of the joylessness that I seek. My works often disappoint me, often by design, inspiring darker mental activity which heralds evolution toward darkening the ego and thus future works will emit darker radiance, blooming the dark seeds in the collective world soul. Delusions of grandeur or knowledge of the global consciousness shift?

Now, away from the surreal approach and to be more on topic.

Whether they are shallow or deep emotionally (whatever the fuck that means), some individuals are not dependent on anyone but themselves and thus truly independent, anyone who is called a Narcissist whilst being independent ought to stand and make an argument against such a strawman fallacy. Anyone who is 'based upon' being dependent on others for gain is not independent or a Narcissist but simply a person dabbling in egoism without any tact, sitting on the fence between independence and a meek need for reassurance, mirrored by carefully selected surrounding people. To an independent person, others displaying inferiority ie. envy, are light entertainment and a sorry sight at best, they are quickly dismissed as boring and forgotten.

The meek have an obsession with supreme egotists whether those individuals are dependent on others for their Narcissistic supply or if they are independent and self supplying, all Narcissists are the same feared individual that the meek, moralised and modest huddle away from and yet look upon with awe and admiration. It is they who think and work in the ways of what they describe as Narcissism that defines them as dependent and emotionally shallow. Why? Because having matured emotional response, self control and insight into human behaviour is unfathomable for an individual who regards an infantile display of tears as being a deep emotional response, their own dependence on one another within moral and modest boundaries is what makes the mundane associate their own mundane greed for attention, which is meek and hides behind modesty, with an honest no bullshit individual who actually thinks about his and others behaviour rather than his ego gratification. How do I know? Because I get termed a Narcissist by medical practitioners because I display arrogance to anyone who thinks they can use morals and subliminal suggestion to suggest that self worth has to be moderated. The very same society will raise you to be dependent on 'another half', a 'soul mate', as to make you feel incomplete. This is why mundanes have a mentally ill, and most infantile reaction when their partner who is independent 'cheats' on them. They are assimilated imbeciles moulded to be parasitic within boundaries as moderate Narcissists, or what society will call 'healthy Narcissism'.

In this we see that some of us do not need admiration nor do we seek to gain from others, we simply like to be left alone to do everything ourselves. If others meet arrogance this is because they have defined themselves suitable for such as a controlled reaction. Empathy is something which animals have, humans are animal. There is no way a human can have no sense of empathy unless he is detached from nature by a society that will raise him from birth to spread his love thin across all people, as equal, no matter what his feelings tell him.

I am Narcissistic — more than conceited academics can understand. I am also very much aware of what ego is, and that the ego, and the consciousness itself, is not what defines the individual, nor are these clusters of ordered thought the centre of the individual. What defines the individual is his/her nature. What is a persons nature? Will and empathy both have no image or word in the mind. The drive is natural and not to do with conscious thought nor gratification, the persons nature asserts and harmonises him/her into the world, into nature, and the consciousness is merely the observer the ego can be ruled by the external or rekindled with the dark subconsciousness where the dynamics of darkness may be asserted into new ideas, and even and especially, old ideas.

What defines the mundanes is their own centrepiece of egoism, and thus they demonise all others who go beyond their moralised and modest meekness no matter if the individual happens to have high emotional intelligence or not, he's just a Narcissist and somebody who, as if by a fluke of nature or unexplained mutation of DNA or brain formation, has no human feelings.

Well call be beast-like, I'd rather have natural empathy and be independent, than to convince myself that I'm a 'good' human being through pottering about in the moderate and modest parasitism of Christianised society.

If somebody needs others to feel self worth he's not a Narcissist or a dependent morally assimilated citizen; a parasite is just a parasite.

Be independent and stimulate others around you in reciprocation, with manners, with a well crafted character, you are not indebted nor obliged to acknowledge anyone who leeches for attention, we all have compassion and this ought to be automatic. We ought to expect the same degree of privacy that we give respect to others with. Anyone who is dependent on attention is easy to spot, no matter if they are what is deemed Narcissistic or the 'good person' modest and moralised, they are alike, they are still transparent parasites dependent on others to reflect their self worth.

An independent person does not require such things as acceptance, and goes about his business progressing in life by his own means. If anyone wants to make an issue out of equality pathos then this is indicative that they feel inferior. Thus he who cries 'Narcissist!', is going to be a failed attempt at being one himself. At best, most Narcissists potter on the fence of seeking acceptance and having self worth, they upset themselves by expecting others to acknowledge their achievements which is the real issue of where the individuation process became entangled in cognitive dissonance.

You either independent or dependent, a independent person appreciates others for intrinsic value, he does not need them for ego gratification and self assurance. It all comes down to a persons nature, empathy, awareness, and emotional maturity. Humans are humans, not robots to categorise into sets of personality types of 'normal', or 'healthy'.

Time to go to the gym and exercise my unhealthy Narcissism.

~ Hegesias
_________________________


Top
#50829 - 03/12/11 01:30 PM Re: The psychoanalytic strawman of the Narcissist [Re: Hegesias]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Human society depends upon people displaying those characteristics or that behavior which ranges between certain predefined parameters. Everything that fits into this gray zone is called normal behavior, or having normal characteristics. Those who range beyond the gray zone are called abnormal and preferably are either treated or re-adjusted by medicine, therapy or incarceration for a required period or are removed permanently.

That what is not normal is considered as such because it is either not beneficial for the societal status quo or outright dangerous. Like bacteria triggered the inevitable rise of bacteriophages; humans, especially when they formed large societies, also paved the path for those that actively prey upon its own kind. While from one perspective one can see such a process as a necessity to eliminate the weaker in its own group, from another perspective, one can wonder if the disadvantages don't outweigh the benefits. One can not control a human predator, nor can one always know what the very motivation behind their acts are.

As such, society prefers to use the simple method and treat them all identical, lump them all into one bag. This has the advantage one does not need to ask themselves some difficult questions to which the answers might be quite unsettling. In doing such, it removes that which needs to be removed together with that which might truly be beneficial.

The best way to herd the sheep is to remove all which might endanger that which makes all others go fat and happy.

D.

Top
#50834 - 03/12/11 04:09 PM Re: The psychoanalytic strawman of the Narcissist [Re: Diavolo]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
I have noticed something else the grey ones do. They exaggerate their subjective experiences, from emotional responses to drug experiences. They assume that their personal experiences are superior to that of non reactive persons. This hubris attitude exposes itself through blame and accusations made toward those of us who do not act in theatrical ways as they do, thus diminishing their reality about the whole thing in their minds, out of self deceit, they blame us for being heartless or 'not understanding'.

My sisters dog just died, 10 years old, in not showing my own upset, instead giving advice on how to explain to the children, I consoled my sister better than if I were to show that I am affected. My sisters understand me now they are grown up and appreciate my support sometimes. I was even joking about how evil the little black poodle was. She soon was laughing and it's not because I'm heartless, it's because the dog had character and I was reminding my sister of this when I recognised she'd do well to have positive emotion.

I always saw funerals as some kind of selfish ceremony for the participants to display tears for attention, gratifying their egos and conscience, convincing themselves that they were more close than they really were with the deceased. Obviously this is not the case when emotional trauma is genuine. I'm just saying I have seen some plastic transparent sickos.

My mother is a Christian lady who went mental at me when I explained to the children that pets die just like we do and that they are have the same stuff inside that makes us alive. She wanted to tell them a heaven fantasy complete with family members all being there. I wouldn't let her desensitise them to reality. I just told them they are supposed feel how they do because this is what it feels like when another being we are close to dies.

Some religious people worship death because I have personally seen them wanting to go to this heaven to reunite with loved ones. it's not even an empathy thing of wanting blackness because their loved one is in blackness, instead it's like they really think they can have a comforting existence in heaven with emotions and everything.
_________________________


Top
#50907 - 03/13/11 04:05 PM Re: The psychoanalytic strawman of the Narcissist [Re: Hegesias]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
The gray zone finds it terribly important that people behave according expected patterns. If one should feel a certain way about something, it is required they express this sentiment in public. People that don't behave accordingly are looked upon with distrust. It isn't very important that one really feels what is required as much as that one acts as if. It is this empathic side-show and this externalized display of the correct emotions at the required occasions which they think makes us human.

When the 2004 tsunami hit and media invoked the emotional hype surrounding it, I was sitting in a leftist bar and asked why they were bothered since many more die each year who are given no special thought at all. Instead of it making anyone think about their puppet-like behavior, I was met with shock and awe. Solely making such a remark must imply I am a cold and heartless machine. They might be right.

My grandmother could have been called narcissistic. I prefer to call it totally self-absorbed. Whenever she was in the same room, it felt as if a giant black hole was there. Everything had to obey her gravitational demands. I intensely disliked her but not as much for her egocentrism as for her inability to be responsible. She was dross. Before you get out those napkins or consider me a damaged birdie, let me tell you she didn't traumatized me at all. But she was prime material to learn the difference between a machine and a well-oiled machine.

She was smart enough to get things done her way but was never intelligent enough to learn the societal empathic language. Knowing how to speak this language only makes things go smoother and often creates opportunities available only to those speaking it. Seeing her speak it was like listening to a stammerer recite a poem. All one could think was “aargh just quit trying”. I remember one occasion where I had a quite serious work related accident and someone must have told her it was the correct thing to do to visit and show some concern. Her concern was related to bringing me some chocolate candy. Later that evening when some friends came along, I offered those and when they ate some and suddenly displayed some strange facial expressions, I knew something was wrong. The expiration date ended two years before and indeed, some were showing signs of growth. It amused me greatly to experience such a clumsy display of empathy. She wasn't even smart enough to realize that to play the game convincingly it takes more than just grabbing something out the darkest part of your closet. Needless to say she wasn't that popular and her funeral was the most jolly one I have ever been.

But due to her incompetence she was a great teacher, especially since I carry the same genes and as such, the same defects. She did show me the disadvantages of being seen as a machine and the importance of learning to speak the empathic language. It gave me the ability to become a well-oiled machine.

D.

Top
#50967 - 03/14/11 12:19 PM Re: The psychoanalytic strawman of the Narcissist [Re: Diavolo]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
I very much like your post. I have noticed that many people demand reciprocation in the form of immediate emotional response or display of affection after they force upon me their unwanted interactions or 'gifts'.

I am a broken robot in many situations, the programming was always faulty and I was the saboteur. What I mean is that I'm not playing, I never was, and I'm sarcastic simply to get intrinsic meaning from the hollow interactions some others regard as genuine. So in this I have come to the conclusion that I may act out of a deeply rooted sarcasm. What do I mean?

Ok, I was walking by the city shops and it was raining, I almost passed a heap on the floor on the other side of the street but I stopped and saw it was a person and there was blood, others were literally walking around her not giving the slightest bit of attention. I thought for a moment as I walked over, I thought 'humans are disgusting'. I picked up this old lady, must have been 45ish, she was heavier than she looked. I seated her on the bench right by. By this time people were still walking by but one man stopped by, and I presumed he was waiting for his taxi, we were in a taxi lane, anyway he was on his mobile phone and I thought he was calling 999 to help the lady who was bleeding from above her eye where her glasses had broken from the fall. Instead he put his phone away and didn't say a word, he caught my eye because I was looking at him for those few moments. I just said to him to phone a fucking ambulance and also called him a cunt. The lady was bleeding all over her face and her clothes and was drenched from laying on the floor for a long time in the rain.

When the paramedics came I just walked away from the lady who was trying to thank me, I was too disgusted with humans to even care, I just felt I had to help her, but then she could just fuck off like the rest of people once she was ok.

Half of me was helping her out of empathy but me being who I am, the other half was stone faced and disgusted with the whole situation that I was the only person who cared, me being considered a heartless and cruel person by many, what does this make them?

I think everything is bullshit, I find no intrinsic meaning in being kind to others, it's just something that happens, what I do get intrinsic meaning in is being cruel to those who are cowardly or vulgar alike. Does this make me evil, indeed it does in the eyes of others and this is fine by me. I never go out of my way to help others, never, sometimes I just can't help it, different to revenge, revenge is meaningful and stimulating, helping others is an unwanted consequence of my human condition.
_________________________


Top
#50969 - 03/14/11 01:56 PM Re: The psychoanalytic strawman of the Narcissist [Re: Hegesias]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
It reminds me of one midsummer night when I was trying to read a Swedish newspaper while sitting in a park at Stockholm. At one point, I see some guy tottering along. I didn't pay much attention but the next time I looked up, he was gone. I remember finding it strange he disappeared that suddenly since he didn't give the impression at all possessing an ability called speed.

Not long after I hear someone call help. It made me curious and I put my newspaper down and walked to the river some feet further. When I look down, I see this guy desperately clinging to some piece of iron while trying to keep above surface. I reached down and pulled him up to the dry. At that moment, other people came running towards us and some called the emergency. I just walked back to my bench and continued reading.

I wouldn't call my action as much empathic as it was instinctive. And after it was done, I retreated, not desiring at all to be subjected to the emotional drama triggered. I don't want to be considered a good guy for such an act because it is entirely possible that if the guy had spoken to me for ten minutes, I would have regretted not putting my foot on his head instead.

There are things we do and even when those appear like good deeds, they often are nothing but deeds.

D.

Top
#50973 - 03/14/11 03:29 PM Re: The psychoanalytic strawman of the Narcissist [Re: Diavolo]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
Honesty. Grim and bare honesty that spoke more truth than any portrayal of modesty. I think it's a persons innate nature that defines them more than their ego. Ego can help to colour our character but really we are all human beings and it's the ones who feel they have to try to be humane that end up failing and missing the point. Women especially can see through false behaviour because they are more naturally empathic than us males, and it's foolish to ever think of not being honest with your partner. Because that's what they ought to be, a partner not a possession to please ones ego. My partner, she loves me to lavish her ego, I really don't mind because she's young, being aware of what's going on is something that alters things vastly.
_________________________


Top
#54530 - 05/16/11 12:38 PM Re: The psychoanalytic strawman of the Narcissist [Re: Hegesias]
Thule Offline
temp banned
pledge


Registered: 04/30/11
Posts: 68
It's all part of the same propaganda. We are told to be humiliated ashamed little weaklings and if we don't- then something is wrong with us.

Self confidence and a sense of self worth is not a psychological disorder- it is the only healthy way to be.

It also uses a manipulation technique by putting two unlike things together "narcissists don't care about others... their opinions have no proof to back it."

That's something different. People who don't care about others are sociopaths.

So it is saying all people who are self confident and have a sense of self superiority are sociopaths. A total lie.

It has taken a long time for me to realize this brainwashing. It's something I like to speak against whenever I can.

Do not feel guilty for doing better than others.
Do not feel guilty for being smarter or working harder (or richer)
Don't feel guilty for success

Do not feel ashamed when you allow other people to fail from their own actions (i.e. how can you eat that when people are starving in Africa!-- how can you make money when people are poor!)

You don't need to be a sheep or slave.

There is nothing wrong with you if you reject the guilt and slavery. Break the magick spell.


Edited by Thule (05/16/11 12:39 PM)
_________________________
http://www.hraftzer.weebly.com

Top
#55015 - 05/24/11 10:54 AM Re: The psychoanalytic strawman of the Narcissist [Re: Thule]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
So, you noticed the misosophical slave morality and misosophical moral word association which is in and about what would be academic psychoanalysis' of "persons unruly".

Yes, it's that time again folks. I find it comical to present a retaliatory satire of "normal" people and this is not without merit.

Without any formal credentials, we must summarise that I am compartmentalising without what passes as modern psychology, bringing a aggressive bias into things. Nevertheless, I would like to add more of my conjecture.

These following words may be considered "inhumane" and so please do feel free to ignore what is intrinsic for all purposes toward soothing moral cognitive dissonance.

So, to begin, I have observed a blurring of the lines between, Narcissist, sociopath, and psychopath, which seems to be down to the fact that the analyst, academic etc. would declare "egoism!" without any thought as to what kind of ego except to make morally contextual word associations i.e. "self-centredness" misrepresentationally paralleling "shallow emotional intelligence" insofar as any expression of ego and tenacity to assert ones will over guilt imposed is seen as "remorselessness" in the context that remorse ought to be something that lingers rather than to be overcome.

I can rebuke by asserting that psychopaths have high emotional intelligence with this claim having iMRI proof as well as proof that sadism is functioning empathy. Whether a needless abuse of this empathy is seen as immoral is irrelevant insofar as morality having no place in Nature and natural human functioning. I say this because there seems to be a moral bias about morality having a major impact on what is empathy when clearly empathy is a faculty of nature having no need for formalising the spectrum of response recognition, in this we see that slave morality is not part of Nature and natural human functioning.

So, the sociopath appears distinct from the psychopath insofar as the sociopath has intimacy issues and cannot handle emotional control and so dismisses direct interaction whilst posing a front of compulsive lies upon recognising the emotions in others which he only feels are uncomfortable, and so he does anything to avoid intimacy with his sadism being detached and more about ego gratification, power exchange which does not look for anything but the weakest to prey on, with lively self delusional gloating. I have observed a few of these people, they are not particularly attractive but constantly look in the mirror eyeing themselves and even though their lies are with solemn face they are with bad memory and compulsively transparent, often needless horse shit exaggerations, for any kind of attention.

Though with an abundance of emotion – deep seated rage – the psychopath is cool headed and recognises the emotional subtleties of others intimately, intensely, it is stressful to be human but he does so anyway, he is able to direct his and others reactions masterfully, he may be considered morally insane yet this is because he is not driven by the attention of others in the same way as the sociopath, the psychopath is adept at "self truth" and therefore, adept at understanding others, he is beyond good and evil, he may compartmentalise beyond morality's limitations, whereas the sociopath only makes best with what he can use of morality, seeing others as fools gleefully, pleased that his weak true self which he does not like is hidden rather than seeing others as fools indifferently like the psychopath does. In a simple way the sociopath is a compromising utilitarian, unsophisticated.

The psychopath is autonomously tactile, this may seem somewhat the same yet there is no self deceit, this is the difference, the psychopath often seeks to achieve highly and is driven by natural human functioning that unfortunately exceeds moral boundaries and may often act violently due to repression hence the bias picture painted by Hollywood presenting psychopaths as raving loonies. The sociopath makes do with what is easiest to exist with and bases his life around needlessly attempting to "fool" those who would exceed him in intelligence until successfully "fooling" those who are gullible enough to entertain his parasitism.

The above descriptions are only black and white depictions of my conjecture. There are too many faculties of ego to define "egoism" as something undesirable altogether, but society would have us think otherwise for convenience. Although the mental process of conscience control within the mind of sociopaths and a psychopaths is observed by outsiders as a similar, the particular individual determining which behavioural expression he/she engages in defining an individual either sociopathic or psychopathic being much the same thing. This is not a valid distinction because what is going on internally is a very different dynamic esoteric processing.


Sociopath with an unorganised demeanour and I have personally observed a rather shambling gait in sociopathic individuals, not so obvious to the untrained eye, but overly exaggerated as though self consciously negative, nervous and easily manipulated into nervous emotive response. A sociopath is more likely to act out without thinking through the consequences whilst a psychopath makes short work of introspection.

Academics assert that psychopath's "outer personality" is often charismatic and charming, hiding the real person beneath in the context that it is not acceptable or wise for a wolf to go around baring his teeth to sheep. It is also customary to be misrepresentational of psychopaths insofar as claiming they do not feel for others, that they mimic behaviours that make them "appear" normal. The fallacy of this assumption is that there is an assumed "intellectual" understanding of emotions which overrides a "genuine" or "direct" recognition of emotions, so in the eyes of the oblivious, emotionally unintelligent, psychopaths "seem" to feel no emotional bonds with others.

There is a tendency to trust a psychopath completely as he represents totally natural human functioning, whilst a sociopath can be convincing at a cursury glance he quickly becomes pathetically transparent.

Because "normal" people i.e. slave moralists, themselves having an infantile emotional intelligence and infantile emotional control and infantile self understanding, those responding to an infantile display of tears with overwhelming pity they are easily overwhelmed by what they do not understand and will regard an infantile emotional response as "superior" to the "unfeeling" psychopaths emotions (fallacy). In the same way as the sociopath, "normal" people lack empathy insofar as they compartmentalise empathy to be only compassion and pity and feel guilt for anything empathic outside of that unnatural moral boundary, the sociopath dislikes himself deep down and so he is obliviously compensatory egoistic.

I would be retaliatory and assert that "normal" people are merely the weak willed counterpart of sociopaths, overwhelmed by their emotions in the same way, but instead of excessively distracting themselves like the sociopath "normal" people feel superior through falling apart, regarding themselves as having finely tuned compassion through pretentiously modest selflessness, passive aggressive equality pathos, representational of the Christ's needless crucifixion, a passive aggressive trait indicative of egoistic invincible ignorance.

This is purely my conjecture and without credentials but I take my humour seriously.
_________________________


Top
#90124 - 06/26/14 05:42 PM Re: The psychoanalytic strawman of the Narcissist [Re: Hegesias]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6786
Loc: Virginia
 Quote:
I have observed a blurring of the lines between, Narcissist, sociopath, and psychopath, which seems to be down to the fact that the analyst, academic etc. would declare "egoism!" without any thought as to what kind of ego except to make morally contextual word associations i.e. "self-centredness" misrepresentationally paralleling "shallow emotional intelligence" insofar as any expression of ego and tenacity to assert ones will over guilt imposed is seen as "remorselessness" in the context that remorse ought to be something that lingers rather than to be overcome.


Even ego has been apprehended in such a way that it's abhorrent in a civilized society to be ego-driven. Every single person is self-concerned and self-centered.

Metaphysically, ego is simply 'I'.

When you say: "I, am hungry..." Then go off and pursue food, this stems from a self-concern. If you are penniless, you will do what is necessary to feed yourself, regardless of societal ethics.

A vegan may find your hunger for meat, immoral. As one example.

A shop-keeper my find you a thief, if you steal to feed yourself.

The list goes on and on. As a caveat, you'll be labeled socio-path, psycho-path, etc. if you go about it in such a way that is shocking to others. Say, for instance a shake-down.

During a Hurricane a few years back my area was without power for over a month. In my neighborhood, people were kicking in doors to take what was available to eat. Guns were just used as intimidation tools, no one was shot but the perps were labeled psychopaths. I disagree. They were just really hungry.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#90154 - 06/27/14 09:16 AM Re: The psychoanalytic strawman of the Narcissist [Re: SIN3]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
I often read the term "psychopath" used in lieu of "sociopath". Both terms have lost their meaning. They are used, as you say, when a given methodology "shocks the conscience of the public." Conversely, they are used to add to that very sensationalism.

Narcissism has become more of a societal construct. Recent books include titles like "The Culture of Narcissism." References are often made to "selfies" sprayed across social networks. Hyperconsumerism. Etc.

Egoism seems to beg for a subjective definition. If we're to go with psychoanalysis, it is the intermediary between the id and superego. Yet, this definition seems somewhat ridiculous. I'd view it more in terms of Max Stirner's "The Ego and Its Own". Do you have a specific definition you would posit?
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#90155 - 06/27/14 10:07 AM Re: The psychoanalytic strawman of the Narcissist [Re: Le Deluge]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6786
Loc: Virginia
Simply drive. Wants and needs drive us to take specific actions. Depending on your individual circumstances (your pathology) you may go about it differently than another person.

An entitled person may just ring the Butler for something to eat, where as your average joe is driven to earn capital or other means to get what is needed and wanted.

Besides, when you talk about 'I' which 'I'? The 'I' has many facets when one identifies. If say, I identify with 'self', what the hell is that anyway the voice in my head?
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#90157 - 06/27/14 10:16 AM Re: The psychoanalytic strawman of the Narcissist [Re: SIN3]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
Would you consider yourself an ethical egoist ie a person should act in their rational self-interest or a psychological egoist ie a person inherently will act in their own self-interest?

Self is a nebulous concept that would almost require its own definition. It would indeed be insufficient in describing the totality of the human experience.


Edited by Le Deluge (06/27/14 10:16 AM)
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#90168 - 06/27/14 10:42 AM Re: The psychoanalytic strawman of the Narcissist [Re: Le Deluge]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6786
Loc: Virginia
I can't say that I'm always driven by rational self-interest. A lot of the time, it's quite irrational but satisfies a need or a want at the time.

In the past, I had been a shop-a-holic. Not to the point of going broke or anything but I was a neat hoarder of 'stuff'. Impulse buys and the like. Nothing needed, just sparkly stuff. Like a Magpie, there I am buying it up.

Just recently I cleared out my studio of a metric ton of that stuff. All stored away in rubbermade containers. Maybe the day I bought it was like "Ohhhh yay toys and stuff!' Then I get to a point where I'm like "WTF do I need all this useless stuff?" Some of it gets thrown away, items of value get re-sold on craigslist or something.

I'm not like that any more, I came to my senses. The point is, it was a shameless pleasure. It later became a burden when I had to do something with all that crap. What person needs over 300 pairs of shoes? Ridiculous right? Incidentally, when I was clearing out a corner of my garage, I found another container with nothing but boots. I haven't seen them in years. 60 pairs of boots. I sent them to a women's shelter, I get the tax write off.

I guess eventually, inherently you know when enough is enough and tend to police yourself. I guess that qualifies as a set of ethics. I'm up and down the scale. Personal Mantra: I do what I want!
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#109200 - 09/29/16 07:27 PM Re: The psychoanalytic strawman of the Narcissist [Re: SIN3]
ShadowLover Offline
member


Registered: 05/26/16
Posts: 265
Loc: Gold Coast, Australia
When I was about 34/35yo I used to purposely date and/or fuck narcissistic/sociopathic men. It didn't start out that way but I found we kind of attracted each other. I liked what they could do, and they liked that I not only allowed them to do it but that I was somewhat conscious of what they were doing - they had to work a little harder. It raised the stakes.

You see, I had certain personalities or pathologies that I used to like stroked and these types of men are good at that. Because they are into control and self-gratification, and are often intelligent, they naturally weave themselves in between all of your layers so they can manipulate you and get what they want from you. The trick was, to let them stroke you but then get away before it became time to pay the piper.

The most dangerous one was also a psychologist and he so quickly found his way into parts of my persona that I didn't even fully understand. I had spoken to him multiple times and my instinct told me to give him a wide birth, but he was so good at what he did and I overruled my instincts (which I had never done before) and met him.

The second I set eyes on him I knew it was a mistake - he had cold dead eyes and was a cold person in general. ...Make the hair stand up on the back of your neck! I did everything he said that day.

Because he used my nature against me, to get away I had to go against my own nature and not flinch, and let me tell you, that was a huge fucking dopamine rush. Then to stop him from pursuing me I had to concoct a believable story - one involving my personalities that he could swallow. And still while he was ringing me I found myself sometimes slipping into his game and I had to manipulate my own mind to resist him. Very dangerous man... I know his ex had moved to Britain - I think it was to get away from him.

Anyway, after that I consciously took myself off the market. When you start indulging in edge play with sociopaths and the best way to challenge yourself was to find a badder sociopath, it time to get out. So I had a boyfriend within a couple of months and a husband with in 9mths. And then an ex husband 7yrs later. Lol

Afterwards I was more mature, and when I found myself getting in contact with some of my old friends (not the worst one), I finished ripping apart that part of my psyche and healing and/or obliterating the personalities causing those needs.

Trouble is, now I find it hard to date. If ordinary men try to manipulate me I just roll my eyes in disgust. If they don't try to play with me, I can sleep with them. But I am finding it difficult to find a meaningful connection. I do like the company of special forces, ex-special forces and ex-mercenary types... Sometimes they are a bit fucked up but they are normal fucked up (and a little fucked up is interesting). I guess I like hardcore people - just have to find the right balance that is right for me. (Same as everybody else has to.)
_________________________
Curiosity killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.

Top
Page 1 of 2 12>


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.033 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.