6 0

Please guys, if non-fiction psychology writing is your thing.... please consider sharing your opinion on this chicken or the egg kind of question! What came first in humanity, the Narcissist or Narcissistic abuse? This question becomes quite complex when you consider personifying environmental circumstances and their impact on human behavior. it is very much so comparable to the chicken or the egg concept as someone can actually develop narcissism through narcissistic abuse, in fact they can develop many other personality disorders as the result of such as well.

Secular_Squirrel 7 Sep 11
You must be a member of this group before commenting. Join Group

Post a comment Reply Add Photo

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

6 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

4

Question: Can narcissistic abuse exist where there is no narcissism?

That would be my theory. As far as I can tell most every psychological torment we pass down amongst ourselves can be boiled down to a cycle of shame and entitlement. Everything from the metaphor of our fall from grace to how kids get scolded for something and become obsessed with it later. We accept shame for something that wasnt our fault, and then if we give in to the tendency to internalize it in unhealthy ways and we take it out on the next generation, the cycle begins anew. The first narcissist to abuse someone else was probably someone who was neglected/isolated/abandoned for a not necessarily narcissistic reason, and developed an unhealthy level of self concern as a defense mechanism if I had to guess.

@Wurlitzer Okay, this I can work with! Problem is that is doesn't challenge my current position and I would like to believe that my current position can be improved as I find it extremely concerning that this isn't the kind of thing studied so much as it is seemingly ignored especially when considering my very limited resources.

@Secular_Squirrel -- It would seem that it does. It also appears that the answer to your question is straightforward. Narcissism came first, otherwise there could be no narcissistic abuse.

@Wurlitzer It's my theory that early man as an individual isolated and placed up against the harshness of nature could easily cause him to develop narcissistic traits. This would then cause him to infect others when he'd join others and abuse them in ways they'd just not be use to and so condemning said person back to isolation might not be a popular solution, further more if their strength gave the other humans reason to want him around, there'd likely be those who'd staunchly defend his presence, and even more so if people felt sorry for him for his isolation. Strength to survive and thrive as an individual appeals to many, however the development of such a strength in modern times is far less possible as it was in early times and so I'd also theorize that early narcissists may have had more to boast about in terms of their capabilities without having to lie while modern day narcissists are an extreme maladaptation that we must rewrite societal/cultural/governmental rules/standards/norms as to force a reversal of said maladaptations all the while our greatest obstacle is that the consequential personality types resulting from said faulty infancy and development of humanity tend to often be in positions of power while our greatest strength against such might be any desire they might express to hide what they are and hence not stand against any legislation that could potentially expose them by them standing against such. In reality such is just a pipe dream that must begin in theory, be heavily criticized for constructive developmental purposes and then refined until such can be considered even remotely possible. First thing first, I feel it is important to remove Donald Trump via usage of the 25th amendment as proposed by that group of psychologists that keep explaining the dangers of his narcissism.

@Secular_Squirrel -- Which simply says that your chicken/egg question answers itself. Narcissism came first. End of problem. QED

@evidentialist Contrary, people can have traits of narcissism without being able to get a diagnosis for narcissism and if you personify a harsh setting or culture and then diagnose such, it might actually be able to fit a diagnosis for narcissism and thus could potentially be able to inflict the same damages that result from narcissistic abuse. The actual chicken or the egg argument is as simple as asking if evolution or creation brought forth the chicken, meanwhile the matter of the narcissist is also a similar matter, did the first narcissist come from nowhere, or was the first narcissist the result of a series of events and circumstances that made them what they are.

@Secular_Squirrel -- I can tell that you're really in love with this idea. Knock yourself out.

@evidentialist No, it's just that no one has taken the steps required to disprove such a conclusion while the same steps to disprove it could go either way in other words either prove or disprove such, I'll crave the answer either way but to prove or disprove such a societal structure would need to be built from the grounds up with no one baring significant cluster B traits being allowed in until the population would reach at least 150 residents and then only after the culture would stabilize through a matter of reinforcement in terms of neuroplasticity and the societal structure would have to be centered around self-actualization and be designed in such a way that would make cluster B personality traits a survival disadvantage. Over the timespan of 50 years, the results should come in and either prove or disprove the most relevant part of my theories on the topic. I believe they can be cured if an environment that is significantly contrary to the one I believe created the first of narcissists gains dominance over them in such a way that even they can't deny would be in their best interest thus make the change significantly voluntary.

2

There is no chicken and the egg dilemma. The egg came 1st . we know this from evolution.

Krish55 Level 7 Sep 11, 2018

Wouldn't evolution suggest that the "chicken" came first? The splitting of cells would have created the animal and the necessity of reproduction would transfer to egg creation via the inability to replicate. Take viruses and bacteria as an example.

@Fibonacci1618 You are ignoring the known chronology of evolution. Egg laying reptiles existed long before there were any birds. Birds evolved from these reptiles. Chickens evolved from an earlier form of bird. The egg came 1st .

@Krish55 My point isn't about the literal chicken. It's about reproductive organs and the production of an egg. The transition from mitosis to eggs. From ameba to plant like to reptilians which lead to egg laying blah blah blah.

@Fibonacci1618 I agree with your last 3 words !

@Krish55 maybe a picture will help you, since blah blah blah seems to be you understood....

No no no no. The CHICKEN came first. I was there.

1

Your question can be answered by looking at anthropology and history. Hunting gathering, tribal societies don't have narcissists. Narcissism develops with class privilege. The emergence of inequality creates a whole host of psychological And social! problems!

Krish55 Level 7 Sep 11, 2018

People must be able to see reason to accept or create a societal system that exalts an individual or class of people above them. In theory, this exaltation or acceptance of a proposed order would more than likely be in favor of an individual that either excels on their own survivalistically or is able to successfully create the image of doing so, and perhaps by having had come from a setting where they themselves were isolated within the harshness of nature and survived in ways that those who have come to value others and understand the agency of others might view as a sign of worthy leadership through thinking that what that person does for themselves may be able to extent to being for others as well.... would explain such, but forgive me as I see this is a set of run on sentences and frankly early in the morning for me as I just woke up a bit ago and I could use help fixing it.

@Secular_Squirrel Again, in looking at the development of early civilization and class-based societies, we will find the answer.
The Warrior class enforced the acceptance of classes upon those who were exploited. Similarly, but more insidiously, the priestly Class got the downtrodden to accept inequality and injustice in return for supposed rewards after death…
Today, these roles are fulfilled by the police at home and our military abroad. Our televangelists fulfilled a second role…
Going back to the original question, it is no surprise that we find the highest level of narcissists in these groups and in politicians and businessmen.
Narcissism is generally a product of class privilege!

@Krish55 If narcissism was a quality of class privilege then wouldn't everyone in a higher up position be such? I'd have to say that narcissism was a product of the harshness of the natural world in a time before civilization really ever developed early on and later was perpetuated through the cultures that sprang forth afterwards. Let's give you this paradox, I'm going to play devil's advocate here and pretend that I believe what you say to be true....... what would happen if a society was built around putting people with cluster B personality disorder traits at the bottom of the societal hierarchy with those with more of said traits or simply more intense representations of said traits being even closer to the bottom? Research does show cluster B personality disorders to be survival based maladaptations as does many of the ways such are currently treated including borderline personality disorder.

@Secular_Squirrel Your first comment is very simplistic. Violent crime is generally a product of poverty. This doesn't mean that every poor person is a violent criminal. Same with narcissism and privilege. Look, we have the capacity for both selfishness and sharing in our genes. The type of society we live in (competitive vs. cooperative) will determine how those are balanced in what behaviors we exhibit.

@Krish55 Our society here in the U.S. is far too much of a split between dog-eat-dog and servile all the while it leaves no adequate room for self-actualization to reach a state of commonality. While we all do indeed hold the capacity for things like kindness, consideration, teamwork, and sharing....... the flaws of and in our societal structure still breed those with cluster B personality disorders in which are clearly maladaptations. The harshness of the early natural world that the human race first appeared within was not one that would guarantee the development of people with traits belonging to that in which we now call cluster B personality disorders, it only made it inevitable that someone somewhere would develop in such a way and since the abuse that comes from someone with a cluster B personality disorder is known to cause people to develop personality disorders or simply some of the traits of such, the problem has only had time to grow. If you do away with poverty somehow, you will lower violent crimes but not eliminate them.... however if you could snap your fingers and magically make it so that everyone on earth is stripped from any of the traits that belong to cluster B personality disorders, then poverty would fade as poverty only exists through a lack of sincere consideration for others. So much more would happen, heck such would even help the environment as those who ignore what scientists have been saying regarding our environment has been ignored through what one could call an example of narcissistic arrogance, In the end really, the best thing that could happen for all of humanity is for us to lose cluster B personality disorder traits indefinitely as such really is the bane of all humanity, heck even for all the complaints in politics and religion those complaints can easily be boiled down to being a manifestation of cluster B personality disorder traits.

@Secular_Squirrel And how on Earth is this to be done ?

@Krish55 There are only theories really, however it is impossible for someone with a cluster B personality disorder to self-actualize unless they lose said personality disorder, so there's hope in such. There is no magical answer, but so far I believe that a construct that can vaguely be described as a communal guild for self actualization and community service might be the ideal base on which such can be effective. Place a narcissist in a debate against someone who can easily defeat them and their arrogance becomes so stand-outish that it can potentially expose them, and so the culture created for that communal setting you must make debates as culturally popular as football baseball, and basketball combined in the U.S. somehow. Wrongfully marginalized people have their marginalization begin through a matter of Mob mentality, but prior to that the mob influencer/influencers always tend to state an assumption that they speak on as if fact..... habitual assumption/accusation making and the lack of inquiry is a very common problem and such represents not only a lack of consideration for those in which said assumptions/accusations are made about, but also representative of a kind of arrogance both in which are traits associated with cluster B personality disorders and so the culture would need to be one where inquiry is the accepted default and that of habitual assumption/accusation making where said assumption/accusation is treated as if fact without evidence and inquiry confirming such would be greatly discouraged and if done enough may get you pushed to a lower status in the societal setting until you would prove yourself to have improved away from such. Stability in a civil setting is dependant on many factors and thus often hard to ensure and so I'd say that the population setting for said structure would need to be capped at 150 initially and be made to expand up to 250 people max (see Dunbar's number). Community service can keep us connected and aware to the needs and struggles of others, and actions speak louder than words in terms of sincerity in said efforts and such is why I believe community service in said setting should be a big deal, in fact each resident's rent would be replaced with a mandatory minimum 45-65 hours a month in community service while their rent replacement would also cover anything on the bottom two tiers of Maslow's Extended Hierarchy Of Human Needs. After the 150 person mark, you should intentionally invite someone with a cluster B personality disorder to see how they adapt to said setting, and rinse and repeat using others who have been diagnosed with such. Of course there are other aspects of this construct idea that I've not mentioned but, by around this time next year I intend to have written it all down and gotten it reviewed, critiqued, correct any errors in reason, critiqued again, rinse and repeat until no further critue can hold water, edited and published. Dunbar's number, spiral dynamics, and Maslow's Extended Hierarchy Of Human needs will all be essential sociological models for constructing said structure while I also learned something about the stanford prison experiment regarding conformity that I believe I may be able to engineer a positive effect from rather than be stuck with a negative one, this effect would be essential in launching the culture. Of course there has to be a strict screening process for the first 150 residents, this screening would be one that takes around three months to select the applicants, and no less than six months to test the chosen applicants in a dorm like setting where their character and interactions with others would be the basis for determining whether or not they qualify for residency. The final month they would take classes to learn about the culture they are expected to adapt to, this part is rather tricky though because describing and designing a culture from scratch does not guarantee it will stick, while it sticking is of great importance. All of this can actually be done through a non-profit environment, however non-profit does not mean that it can't generate funds to keep itself running and functioning, a matter of fact that's the one thing it can generate funds to do while remaining tax exempt.......... and if the mission statement states that such would need to be reproduced in multiple locations around the world, then the funds it is allowed to build up tax free can also cover the duplication factor.

@Secular_Squirrel How about we just work for a more just society?

@Krish55 Can't have a more just society without resolving the problems with cluster B personality disorder traits as said traits are the reason we lack a more just society.

1

Please write as long as you feel to, I don't tend to deal in too long didn't read claims.

0

My answer to your question has to stem from survival tendencies. Prior to tribes, being self serving or narcissistic was the only way to be. So I'd have to assume that based on evolutionary traits that help us survive, the narcissist came first. With that understood, cultural validation to that behavior are the catalyst to creating the modern narcissist. In other words learning by mistreatment that the only way to survive is to mistreat others is one catalyst but so is over indulgence of dopamine. Meaning that if I do "x" I feel happy or more specifically, pleasure. So to abtain "x" regardless of injury to others equals pleasure. Narcissist before the narcissistic behavior, in my opinion.

0

Interesting question. I'm gonna thinking about it and reply later

Write Comment