Narcissism

I approach this topic somewhat gingerly because narcissistic behavior is a part of my own personal history.  

As I understand it, the term derives from the myth of Narcissus, someone who fell in love with their own reflection, and narcissism has a modern day definition of describing some who exhibits an excessive degree of self-esteem or self involvement. The DSM5 defines the characteristics of narcissistic personality disorder as follows:

“a pervasive pattern of grandiosity . . . , need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts” (American Psychiatric Association, 2013, para. 301.81)

The DSM5 goes on to list diagnostic criteria as follows:, grandiosity; preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance or beauty; belief that he or she is special; a requirement for excessive admiration; a sense of entitlement; a tendency to exploit others; an absence of empathy; a preoccupation with envy; and an attitude of arrogance. The point is that all these traits are pejorative; they are a list of unpleasant traits.

This created a sense of emotional dissonance when I began to explore and identify what had an influence on my behavior and I reached an intellectual conclusion that my mother exhibited a number of behaviors (but not all) that fit the diagnostic criteria listed above. At one level, it made complete sense; two of my favorite TV sitcoms are Everybody Loves Raymond and Two and a Half Men and a primary reason is that there's a mother character who displays narcissistic behaviors, and the impact of that behavior on the sons is apparent - even though each son responded to that behavior with different coping mechanisms. But because of the pejoratives associated with the term narcissism I felt like I was somehow judging my mother to be evil. And I can't imagine anyone wanting to feel that way. Another factor that contributed to the emotional dissonance is that I knew how insecure my mother was about a lot of things; she once confided to me that it took her years to talk to certain members of our church because of how well educated they were.

An article came to my attention where the author had done research with various patients exhibiting the diagnostic criteria of narcissism and concluded that there was a link between shame and narcissism. Shame deserves its own post (and I'm pretty sure I've touched on the concept already in a few posts), but for those of you unfamiliar with the concept, shame is a sense that there is something inherently wrong with one's self. This is different from guilt where one may feel that they have done something wrong. Guilt is from doing, shame is from simply being. The overall point was to consider the idea that narcissistic behavior is a symptom of shame.

Asian cultures typically rely on shaming messages as a means of prompting desired behavior, and as a result, the vast majority of those raised in an asian culture experience shame at a fairly deep level. It's not limited to parenting - it's common to use shame to motivate subordinates at work. A common result is that a shamed person often overachieves, motivated by the idea that one of their achievements might result in pleasing the authority figure in question. 

It makes a lot of sense to me that many who experience a deep sense of shame/inadequacy would resort to narcissistic behavior as a coping mechanism. This understanding should prove beneficial at at least two levels:

1) Those who exhibit narcissistic traits - understanding that there are not character flaws but rather a coping mechanism to deal with their pain might avoid a defensive response when identifying their behaviors;

2) Those who encounter people exhibiting these traits can perhaps sympathize or even empathize with the sense of shame/inadequacy instead of being angered by it;

It's been observed that narcissistic parents produce narcissistic children. This led to more emotional dissonance for me; if I had to accept that my mom was in some way narcissistic, then I also had to accept the idea that I was in some ways narcissistic as well - potentially adding to my sense of shame.

It's also been observed that you can't get a narcissist to accept any potential criticism - which makes it difficult to get people to recognize their behaviors for what they are. But once someone recognizes their shame, they can then more easily embrace the identification of coping behaviors. 

Hence, this understanding helps me on at least two levels. 

I confess that I'm somewhat surprised this never occurred to me before despite having read M. Scott Peck's People of the Lie decades ago. In this work, he has posited that it's an inability to recognize or accept displeasing things about themselves that result in people routinely lying about things. But the lies are not designed to fool others as much as they are designed to fool themselves. There's an irony in that the self-deceit associated with narcissistic behavior is a result of believing a LIE about one's own inadequacy.

This takes me back to a quote by C.S. Lewis:

“If you look for truth, you may find comfort in the end; if you look for comfort you will not get either comfort or truth only soft soap and wishful thinking to begin, and in the end, despair.”

This describes perfectly the plight of those seeking comfort by using narcissistic behavior as a coping mechanism for their shame, which a lie about their self-worth.

Connecting

I started this post in another blog five years ago with the next two paragraphs.

-----------------
I've come to expect/accept that I seem to operate at some different fundamental frequency than most folks. A lot of the stuff that seems to be what typical folks want to talk about are completely trivial to me.

Perhaps it's more accurate to say that the things that typically excite me don't have the same effect of most of the people I seem to encounter. I'm sure that how my brain works has a lot to do with it. But it's not just that. I just don't seem to care to do what I consider superficial, even though I acknowledge that there's value to that, and in some cases, necessary.

-----------------

And over the past five years, I've come to understand that indulging with others in what seems to be mundane details is a large part of how community is built. So it occurs to me that my sense of isolation is in many situations self-imposed when it comes to socializing. 

On the flip side, almost every student I've tutored at the center where I've worked for the past five years seem to acknowledge my presence by greeting me or at least making eye contact when they show up even if I'm not assigned to tutor them that day. I see that as a consequence of allowing them to share about things not necessarily associated with their homework, things that I imagine a typical adult might find to be trivial. And I follow up by asking them about these things the next time I see them. 

It occurs to me that the building of relationship is not about knowing the (mundane) details of another person's life, but rather more about the other person knowing that someone else knows what those details are. I elect to be interested in my students because it helps me build rapport to allow me to be more effective as a tutor. As a result my students listen to me because they know I am listening to them. And of course, my overgoal (hidden agenda) in feeding the homeless is building community. But I know that I can't possibly hear everyone else's stories, so I've striven to create the family dinner environment so that people living outside can form community amongst themselves.

Clearly the dynamics are different in typical social settings. As a tutor I'm being compensated financially (though to be honest, I derive no small level of satisfaction in knowing that I have connected in a way that seems meaningful for my students) whereas in social settings, people appreciate when I listen, but they seem to have little desire in reciprocating that interest, and I quickly got tired of it being a one way street.  I find this ironic as most of my interests involve activities that require a fair amount of collaboration to achieve best results: ensemble music groups, volleyball, social dancing, etc. But then everyone has their own set of reasons for pursuing any particular interest - and collaboration may not be included in any one person's set of reasons, but rather narcissism.  

The Good Doctor

 I don't watch much TV, but the quarantine resulting from the pandemic prompted me to start binging series that had received reviews that intrigued me. Most of the series have been developed by cable TV, but there are a couple of network series that I will continue to follow even when all requirements for quarantine have been lifted. 

One of the shows is the series "Blue Bloods" starring Tom Selleck, whose character is the patriarch (despite having a father he lives with) of a family clan who are active in various areas of law enforcement. One series review described how the show is distinguished by the interaction that goes on at the weekly family dinners. For most part, no subject is taboo, and all family members are required to answer honestly when a controversial question is posed. Despite the verbal skirmishes that occur, they're all still family first. This appeals to me as I now realize this is a goal of the weekly dinners I've been doing for over a decade; to get people to come, break bread together and experience the equivalent of a (relatively functional) family meal together. I now realize that this subtopic deserves its own post, and I need to move back to the originally intended topic of this post.

The other network show I've now adopted into my list of TV series that I follow is "The Good Doctor" which is actually an adaption of a South Korean TV show with the same name about a doctor who is a high functioning autistic with savant syndrome as well. Even though the main character's mix of autism and savant syndrome does not necessarily represent the range of behaviors and symptoms of high functioning autists, the depiction of the character has influenced how I interact with my autistic students and has helped me connect with them effectively; last month the center director told me relayed to me comments from the mother of one of my autistic students about he apparently talks about me all the time at home. That same student gave me Chick-Fil-A gift card for Xmas. In the interests of full disclosure, that same student began to initiate physical contact by reaching out and poking me and touching my arm, etc. and I had to set some boundaries about what constituted appropriate behavior and it seems like he's interpreted that as a rebuff of sorts, so I'm still learning and negotiating connecting appropriately and I clearly have a ways to go.

I'm also enjoying how the main character has explored his emotional side and his struggles putting rational expectations on emotional responses only to discover that those expectations turn out to be unrealistic, and despite his intellect, his major decisions are driven by emotional responses. I suspect that the mixed reviews of the series are a response from who rationalize their emotions, particularly those who want to impose their emotionally driven world views onto others (which seems to be a primary motivation for those in that media). Interestingly, I find myself in agreement with some reviews which suggest that the show is advancing the idea that autists have value only when they are savants which would be an injustice, even though these same reviewers would see no cognitive disconnect in using quality/value of life arguments to justify abortion. But I would be derelict if I didn't acknowledge how observing some of his struggles have helped me look back at some of my own struggles with a more appropriate perspective. 

I would also be remiss if I didn't acknowledge that some of the attraction for the show involves the number of asian characters that have been on the show (though many have been written out), and a asian male character who begins a 'friends with benefits' relationship with a caucasian co-worker. That ends when the male's desire for a romantic relationship is not reciprocated. In time, it's the caucasian female who realizes that she's also drawn to him romantically as well and the relationship resumes but at a romantic level. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised about the inclusion of this story line since Daniel Dae Kim is an executive producer who actually purchased the rights to the show.

There are more thoughts on this, but I've save those for another post.