Talk:Narcissistic personality disorder/Archive 3

message: The most recent comment was 6 weeks old and redundant, most was far older, and is now totally irrelevant, so I have archived the page.--Zeraeph 08:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Archive 2

message: Zeraeph is currently under suspension for Wiki violations and verbally attacking others. As far as I am concerned all her contributions were completely poisonous. I think it is a good idea to keep the previous text archived so we can start afresh with the slate wiped clean. I am working on the Bully and Workplace Bully Wiki entries in particular. Narcissism and psychopathy is closely related to bullying so there is quite a lot of overlap. 
I am not in Sam Vaknin's fan club but I feel that Zeraeph wound him up into a frenzy. Like him or loath him, Sam is one of the key authorities on narcissism. He still runs two support groups for victims of narcissism. --Penbat 11:55, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New discussions please

message: "Zeraeph wound him up into a frenzy"
Don't you know that, like wife beaters, narcissists always pull this stunt to come out smelling like a rose? And it worked on YOU? Oh, what a groaner. Unbelievable. Just unbelievable. I'm oughta here. --User:ken2849
::Sockpuppet alert ! --Penbat 13:24, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Say what? 

message: This entry is generally lacking in scholarly rigour and reads as opinion.  It would be improved by a healthy dose of substantiation and peer-reviewed referencing.(Unsigned comment) 
Yes I agree but more importantly IMO loads of material is completely missing: true self, false self, projection, narcissistic rage, narcissistic supply, narcissistic injury etc are completely missing. They are ideas introduced by the pioneers mentioned on Narcissism_(psychology). I am gradually working towards a more rigourous write up but I am no expert. The only heavyweight expert around who was likely to contribute was Sam Vaknin but the powers that be have banned him. 
::Vaknin is not recognised by peers as an authority - he is widely regarded in the profession as a crank, and a dangerous spreader of misinformation.  I support the "powers that be", just as I would support removal of Intelligent Design arguments in wiki articles on biology.  It's comparable. - Unsigned by User:220.237.81.156 22:48, 10 October 2006 
:::20.237.81.156 is almost certainly a sockpuppet and can be disregarded. --Penbat 13:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey Penbat, regardless of whether it's a sockpuppet or not, comments like that should certainly not be disregarded because this is a talk page, not a !vote tally page, so please be a little more civil (saying "can be disregarded" is only more appropriate for a !vote tally page). In addition, 220.237.81.156, please also watch your civility. It's not constructive criticism to go around saying that so-and-so is a crank. It looks like both sides are getting a little hot. It might be tough, but staying cool when the editing gets hot is necessary, especially when both sides are tossing around things like this. --Deathphoenix ʕ 02:55, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer-reviewed, neutral content needed 

message: Google Scholar for Narcissistic Rage  As far as I can reckon, Kohut coined this term in a book published in 1971. -I am Kiwi 07:40, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great, can you write it up referenced to at least Kohut, and any other formally published, academic/medical sources that meet the standards of WP:SOURCE and WP:RS --Zeraeph 00:40, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Narcissistic Rage in Professional Journals & Books

message: 2000 mentions in scholarly books & journals -I am Kiwi 07:40, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Great, can you write it up referenced soley to any formally published, academic/medical sources that meet the standards of WP:SOURCE and WP:RS? --Zeraeph 00:42, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Narcissistic Injury in Professional Journals & Books

message: Google Scholar - professional books and journals dealing with Sources of Narcissistic Personality  It may have been Vaknin who coined the terms Primary and Secondary.  Not all relevant journals and books are available online, but analysts recognized and described Primary and Secondary sources of supply, even if they didn't use the actual terms. 
-I am Kiwi 07:58, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A vague statement like that is nowhere near enough, it needs backing with formally published, recognised, academic/medical citations that meet WP:SOURCE and WP:RS. --Zeraeph 00:45, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Human Sources of Narcissistic Supply

message: Pennie, here is my take on the list.  You go through it, decide what to keep.  Let's try to keep it to no more than 15??  And subgroup them into "self-help" and "professional publications"   I'll be checking in and we can sort through all these, then delete the entire topic here once the selections have been made.  That way, people won't forever have to wade through all this. -I am Kiwi 09:05, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: List is far too good to break up so I have moved it to it's own List of further reading on narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder an approach that has worked well on other articles swamped by their reading lists. Link added to "see also" --Zeraeph 09:51, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Having a Book Sale at the Library

message: References section is not locked but uses inline citations in accord with WP:CITE.--Zeraeph 20:59, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: References section is NOT locked

message: They are very likely to be disdainful and disparaging towards in response to the notion of psychotherapy.
There appears to be a word missing here. Please clarify. Thanks. Ireneshusband 05:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Which word do you think is missing? --Zeraeph 12:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusing wording 

message: This was posted to several mailing lists last night .
The assertions in the post are entirely incorrect and deliberately inflammatory. As a matter of fact, to the best of my knowledge, all reference to, or text from, this individual's writing has been removed from the articles in question where he had posted it, because of it's unverifiability and inaccuracy.
I have have contacted this individual several times asking him which portions of text he feels infringe his copyright so that they may be deleted, and received no reply.  --Zeraeph 19:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A possible campaign of vandalism

message: Ken2849 22:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: You must have "wound him up into a frenzy" again

message: I would be the first person to admit that this article needs considerable expansion, but only with great care, with citation, from verifiable WP:V and reliable sources WP:RS. So please do not alter this article substantially until you have verifiable and cited information to offer. Thank You. --Zeraeph 02:37, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Expanding this article

message: There should be a section on the contraversy of these types of ridiculous labels.  Many people have recognized that:
These "disorders" fail to seperate philisophical beliefs held by the "afflicted" that mitigate what would be selfish behavior from whatever is actually driving that behavior (which again may be more beliefs!).  The opposing point of view holds this especially important because convincing/punishing such a person into holding the right beleif set may transform that drive into a strong drive to do good in order to earn recognition.  What famous figure couldn't be described as having some of these symptoms?  They are fallacious - many types of famous figures had to "dare" to be great before they could acheieve something great.  
Occam's Razor - the simplest reason a person might be convinced that they are special relative to other people is that THEY ACTUALLY ARE.  For instance if a person is driven to think more rationally and conceptually than others due to traumatic experiences, they might quickly find differences between themselves and other people that could be described as the other people using fallacious reasoning on a regular basis.  Such people didn't ask to be "special" in this respect, and are forced to recognize the difference only because they frequently clash with others.  The problem with trying to denote such behavior as flawed is that the deviant is PROVABLY RIGHT and the others are PROVABLY WRONG in their behavior (this is what defining fallacies seeks to do).  If that wasn't the case, then such people would simply stop acting that way.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.32.188.25 (talk) 12:39, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: On the contrary, people who feel the need to demonstrate their superiority to others tend to not be superior to others, they merely wish to be superior to others. People who are confident tend not to have a need to demonstrate superiority. Genuinely narcissistic people only dig their heels in further when proven wrong.--RLent (talk) 18:51, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV needed...  Bogus "Disorders" 

message: There should be a link to this part of their behaior.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.131.100.45 (talk) 17:01, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Narcissistic Rage 

message: I added a link to this set of webpages: http://www.halcyon.com/jmashmun/npd/index.html because I found it very useful so very VERY much that's thrown up by google searches leads to that Sam Vaknin character.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.100.205.92 (talk) 22:12, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Added a link

message: This is an appeal to whoever monitors or feels confident in their knowledge of the subject to shepherd this page.  I have a difficult time understanding why "Solipsism" and "Victory Disease" have anything to do with the NPD topic. It seems to be a real misunderstanding of the subject to link these in as they are not really lend any insight to each other or the NPD topic.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.102.112.18 (talk) 19:00, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: about "See Also" relevance

message: Most archived material was quite old, the only more recent was almost entirely contentious and not very relevant to topic. Let's have a fresh start for 2007. --Zeraeph 12:06, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Archive 3

message: There is an unbelievable volume of subjectivity, partial information and misinformation on this topic on the internet posted by self appointed experts, self styled "victims of narcissists", self styled "persons exceptional" (not a hint of grandiosity in that you understand), you name it. Some of these sources are malicious or mischievous, but most are well intentioned, or at worst self indulgent. There are even "schools of thought" that oppose each other that are equally misinformative on both sides!
It has got to the stage where it really would be unfair to single out any one individual as "The main source of misinformation on NPD". To the contrary, being a source of misinformation on NPD seems quite a fashionable vocation these days (the same applies to a few other Disorders and conditions).
The trouble is it is just TOO EASY fall into the trap of assuming that some of this misinformation is established and valid medical or psychological thought, often without even being aware of the source.
I think it is very important on Wikipedia to dismiss all that misinformation and get back to valid medical and psychological sources.
I personally feel that we owe it to those diagnosed with NPD, and those close to them, to present the diagnosis honestly, fairly, neutrally and accurately, without any kind of subjectivity, for or against.
But there will be an ongoing problem. Those with NPD may be unreliable, if not quite resistant, to objectively discuss NPD or any egosyntonic disorder. Then you have the "victims" that are quite vicious and heavily biased. That said, I believe the victims deserve to be heard. I personally feel a lot of empathy for their experiences. I believe you can find out a lot about NPD by asking someone that was in a relationship with the subject. What bothers me though, is the expectations that may later validate more misinformation, and cruel behavior and attitudes against those with NPD.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.107.230.145 (talk) 21:55, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed wholeheartedly (very much so), except on the learned journals issue - monographs are not more reliable than journal articles, and decent encyclopedias regularly include salient papers on the topic.220.237.81.156 13:26, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wouldn't disagree, but under the circumstance I think it is wise to stick to sources that can be verified online as much as possible. Because a lot of total mumbo jumbo on this topic refers to convincing-sounding, but obscure, (physically) paper-only sources that do not say that which is attributed to them, do not originate from reliable sources, or even, do not exist altogether, and the best way to keep it straight is to avoid that? --Zeraeph 15:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Why we must be careful with verifiability and citations

message: I have removed that edit for now as uncited, because it is a concept that seems to me (for some time) may have only originated in the amateur "online world of NPD". However if I am wrong about that I hope we can find valid, verifiable citations, from reputable academic or medical sources to not only support it but hopefully expand it into a subsection.--Zeraeph 12:06, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Masterson is an important source on this.220.237.81.156 13:27, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember the concept of the "false self" that was originally most related to Borderline Personality Disorder (in which article I do not think he is mentioned???) applied to other disorders(quoth Z, as though the whole thing was always known and had simply slipped mind, which would be untrue, because all I was familiar with was the connection to BPD). He is a really clear and understandable writer too. I have found a great paragraph of his definition of the creation of a false self that could not be improved upon for clarity. Sadly it relates to BPD and will need a second citation relating to NPD to back it up in order to relate the false self to NPD. Tricky, but I will find one. --Zeraeph 14:42, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

text: What is meant by false self in regard to NPD?  Is this about self-image, or is it about covert lives?  The Wiki entries on double life and related phenomena do not delve into motivations for concealment, and this issue deserves attention.  See my further note below on deceptiveness.A.k.a. (talk) 16:55, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Creation of a False Self

message: I made the final section more concise by removing tautology and other repetition.  I also removed some rather unsubstantiated assertions. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.237.81.156 (talk) 13:40, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slight cleanup 

message: remove link to suite101 site, as i got such response from system: "The following text is what triggered our spam filter: http://www_suite101_com" Dr.Gangino 19:53, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, I'm not sure what you mean? I didn't think there was a suite101 link and there doesn't seem to be one now? --Zeraeph 21:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Remove Link 

message: @Zeraeph: Look, its a valid contemporary book addressing NPD and is readily available at all major booksellers and libraries.   In response to your reference of WP-EL, there was no external link, just an ISBN # which Wikipedia automatically adds a link to (to its own ISBN search).  And to your reference to WP-RS, this book has a endorsing foreword by James Masterson (the man himself!), and its published by Simon and Shuster.  Sorry if the author is just a lowly LCSW, but again, it was placed under a "Further Reading" section, not references or sources.  So, please reconsider adding this section, which you let stand for at least several weeks until some kid vandalized it, now all of a sudden its not restored because its no longer valid? And no, I am not the author, nor do I have a vested interest in the sales of this book. 24.38.116.118 17:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have nothing against the book or the author, but, as Wikipedia does try to be an actual encyclopaedia, I honestly cannot justify the listing of a popular self help book as "further reading" before formal academic and medical books are listed. --Zeraeph 17:55, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The book does, I think(?), meet the criteria of being a reliable source.  However, I suggest that rather than just mentioning it as a book for further reading, since it is not really a professional book on the subject, that it only be cited if it is used to support a statement...in other words, if it is used as a citation. DPetersontalk 13:42, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that's a great idea...that way the book gets the same treatment and prominence as academic and medical works and we avoid inadvertantly promoting it as a sole source of "Further Reading". --Zeraeph 14:42, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

text: True, but he isn't the "offender" in this instance (nor does he meet criteria for reliable source by any stretch of the imagination!), which referred to Sandy Hotchkiss, author of "Why is it always about you". --Zeraeph 23:56, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is it all about you? 

message: Citations and WP:RS are vitally important to this article, and not just because it's topic concerns a medical diagnosis, affecting many people directly and indirectly, though that should be more than enough reason.
There are people (who, may, possibly, need to get out more) who spend a lot of time insisting that this particular article is full of factual errors, whether it is or not, so, in order to keep such critics firmly in their rightful place, it is vital to ensure the latter, and to ensure that can be reliably verified at all times. ;o) --Zeraeph 18:38, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Importance of Citations and [[WP:RS]]

message: Hey, the second paragraph in the "Clinical Experience" section, the one starting with "In common practice...", is lifted word-for-word from Alan Rappoport's "Co-Narcissism" paper.  I deleted it and noted this in my deletion comment - why did you revert it Zeraeph?  You should make your reasons clear in your edit comment or here.  Steve CarlsonTalk 04:01, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because Alan Rappaport gave me it to me to use here himself. Very simple --Zeraeph 04:03, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Really? OK, but it should be attributed as such, otherwise other people are going to have the same initial reaction as I did.  It should be set off using the blockquote tag and introduced or followed by an attributing statement, or should at least have a citation!  Steve CarlsonTalk 04:08, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually you are probably right there...now I think of it...I'll pop a citation on, that should fix it (there may even have been one once - stuff vanishes at times).--Zeraeph 04:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for doing that, it helps.  Not to keep hammering on this issue, but can you prove that he gave you permission to use this article on Wikipedia?  According to the  plagiarism policy, he needs to either have designated this paper for reuse under the GDFL on his site (he hasn't), or have sent a consenting e-mail to the Wikimedia Foundation.  Steve CarlsonTalk 04:29, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can prove he gave me the text to use all right...but asking for GFDL would be way too much troubling him, actually I thought I had paraphrased it all, leave it with me and paraphrase do it asap. --Zeraeph 04:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plagiarism!!! 

message: See WP:MEDMOS, you can't use opinion pieces, even from the Times, as sources in a medical article! It also contains some seriously weird misinformation. --Zeraeph 19:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NPD @ The Times

message: The article states 'An over-sensitive temperament at birth' as one of the causes of NPD.  What does being 'over-sensitive at birth' mean?  How is this diagnosed or defined?
Needs to be re-defined...Dr. Vaknin notes clinical hypersensitivity as adults...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.211.16.51 (talk) 03:22, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Concept of being 'oversensitive' 

message: While the term may have first been recorded in print in 1972 by Kohut, after his decades of doing psychoanalytic work with narcissists, the term has not stood in isolation and it is a well-recognized term because what the rage INDICATES - the inner emotional state.
See PubMed - 
Items 1 - 19 of 19One page. 
1: Related Articles, LinksJosephs L.
The impulse to infidelity and oedipal splitting.
Int J Psychoanal. 2006 Apr;87(Pt 2):423-37. 
PMID: 16581584 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]2: Related Articles, LinksWalter M, Dammann G, Küchenhoff J, Frommer J, Schoeneich F, Danzer G, Klapp BF.
Psychosocial situation of living donors: moods, complaints, and self-image before and after liver transplantation.
Med Sci Monit. 2005 Nov;11(11):CR503-9. 
PMID: 16258393 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]3: Related Articles, LinksGutheil TG, Simon RI.
Narcissistic dimensions of expert witness practice.
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2005;33(1):55-8. 
PMID: 15809240 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]4: Related Articles, LinksArlow JA, Baudry FD.
Flaubert's Madame Bovary: a study in envy and revenge.
Psychoanal Q. 2002 Apr;71(2):213-33. 
PMID: 11962099 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]5: Related Articles, LinksMeloy JR.
Spousal homicide and the subsequent staging of a sexual homicide at a distant location.
J Forensic Sci. 2002 Mar;47(2):395-8. 
PMID: 11908617 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]6: Related Articles, LinksRhodewalt F, Morf CC.
On self-aggrandizement and anger: a temporal analysis of narcissism and affective reactions to success and failure.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998 Mar;74(3):672-85. 
PMID: 9523411 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]7: Related Articles, LinksWaska RT.
Precursors to masochistic and dependent character development.
Am J Psychoanal. 1997 Sep;57(3):253-67. 
PMID: 9335941 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]8: Related Articles, LinksLansky MR.
Shame and suicide in Sophocles' Ajax.
Psychoanal Q. 1996 Oct;65(4):761-86. 
PMID: 8933616 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]9: Related Articles, LinksChessick RD.
The psychoanalytic treatment of ulcerative colitis revisited.
J Am Acad Psychoanal. 1995 Summer;23(2):243-61. 
PMID: 8675448 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]10: Related Articles, LinksGrosch WN.
Narcissism: shame, rage and addiction.
Psychiatr Q. 1994 Spring;65(1):49-63. 
PMID: 8165267 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]11: Related Articles, LinksFeldmann TB, Johnson PW.
The selfobject function of weapons: a self psychology examination.
J Am Acad Psychoanal. 1992 Winter;20(4):561-76. 
PMID: 1291544 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]12: Related Articles, LinksDodes LM.
Addiction, helplessness, and narcissistic rage.
Psychoanal Q. 1990 Jul;59(3):398-419. 
PMID: 2399288 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]13: Related Articles, LinksGomez EA.
The Narcissus legend, the white whale, and Ahab's narcissistic rage: a self-psychological perspective.
J Am Acad Psychoanal. 1990 Winter;18(4):644-53. No abstract available. 
PMID: 2283343 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]14: Related Articles, LinksFaller H.
[Emotional processing of perceived stresses by myocardial infarct rehabilitation patients: a speech content analytic study of affect in narrative interviews]
Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol. 1989 May;39(5):151-60. German. 
PMID: 2734430 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]15: Related Articles, LinksHorowitz MJ, Arthur RJ.
Narcissistic rage in leaders: the intersection of individual dynamics and group process.
Int J Soc Psychiatry. 1988 Summer;34(2):135-41. 
PMID: 3410659 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]16: Related Articles, LinksRudolph J.
Aggression in the service of the ego and the self.
J Am Psychoanal Assoc. 1981;29(3):559-79. 
PMID: 7299031 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]17: Related Articles, LinksMiller A.
The drama of the gifted child and the psycho-analyst's narcissistic disturbance.
Int J Psychoanal. 1979;60(1):47-58. 
PMID: 457342 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]18: Related Articles, LinksFox RP.
Narcissistic rage and the problem of combat aggression.
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1974 Dec;31(6):807-11. No abstract available. 
PMID: 4441248 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]19: Related Articles, LinksKohut H.
[Narcissism and narcissistic rage]
Psyche (Stuttg). 1973 Jun;27(6):513-54. German. No abstract available. 
PMID: 4731068 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
and per Google Scholar, minus any mention of Vaknin - 1880 incidences...
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?num=100&hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22narcissistic+rage%22+-vaknin
::Now, Regarding the DSM.  There have been entire very thick psychiatric textbooks that cost over $300 with tax written on the Narcissistic Personality Disorder.  Specialties from the US government, to business management to courtroom law to social work to psychology to psychiatry to nursing have taken to using the term for it is a precise term indicating a precise state of mind, of the terror of loss of control. It is not reasonable to expect the DSM to fully explains or describes the disorder within a mere few pages, no matter how small the font.  The DSM is a simplified pocket-sized reference manual, not a treatise on any of the mental illnesses or disorders described within.   We can't start going around Wiki and reducing everything to "it's not mentioned in the DSM."  The FAC Asperger article would be gutted beyond all recognition, for instance.  Spotted Owl (talk) 07:22, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Narcissistic Rage and comments on the DSM 

message: While this is not MY experience with those with NPD (even finding the condition worsening), I HAVE seen the studies confirming this about AsPDs (who, of course, are an artificial construct not necessarily identical to psychopaths or other extreme classifications.  I have not seen any studies for NPDs, tho I have heard this about NPDs, too, except in therapists' reports about their own patients.   Can anyone find a clinical study confirming this?  Otherwise, it's not likely to last long. Spotted Owl (talk) 07:33, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Need citation "NPD symptomotology can/may diminish with age

message: This article is full of nonsense. Nearly all of the "facts" provided in it point to mere anti-social behavior. If you were to apply this to the current generation of our teenage population, we could argue that all of them have naricissitic personality disorders based on what was provided here. Haruyasha (talk) 09:08, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not understanding your point.  NPD does in fact lead to social isolation. Dmarquard (talk) 14:16, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs to be re-written 

message: What about famous people? Many of them are narcissistic.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.130.136.199 (talk) 14:20, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: We'd have to have some reliable source, such as them disclosing their psychiatrist had told them that was their diagnosis or something similar - we can't speculate about something like this, really. Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:49, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, but many of the celebs meet some off the DSM criteria like:
# has a grandiose sense of self-importance
# is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
# believes that he or she is "special". (sources in interviews can be found easily ;))
# requires excessive admiration
# shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
I agree that sources should be found about the connection between narcissism and fame 78.130.136.199 (talk) 00:20, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

text: Diagnoses are not based on occupation (e.g. movie star) or life status characteristics (famous, criminal, beautiful). And diagnoses are made only by qualified professionals. Otherwise, there are more than enough people willing to diagnose every famous person! Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 00:33, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with preceding - also you have to think of the whole culture that a person is a part of - eg Hollywood, Wrestling etc, where excessive self promotion and hype are order of the day, combined with either an obsequious attitude from the press (further perpetuating the stereotype) or seige mentality from paparazzi, and thus a haughty-seeming attitude is just running for cover(!). But above all, making a psychiatric diagnosis is a very serious issue with many possible implications, and so the sourcing has to be very robust and reliable. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:56, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Keep in mind as well that there's a difference between pathological narcissism and narcissism in general. While many celebrities may exhibit narcissistic traits, that is not the same as a disorder, which largely prevents any normal interaction between the sufferer and others. Wcp07 (talk) 06:38, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

text: But then again, who says that narcissism (self-love) is evil and worse than the love to others? 78.130.136.199 (talk) 14:27, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: *This article is about Narcissistic personality disorder, not the word "narcissism" in general. No moral statements are being made in the article about the word "narcissism".  No one is saying that Narcissistic personality disorder is evil. It is a mental disorder.  —Mattisse (Talk) 15:56, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Something is wrong in a world where almost every aspect of personality is being labled as a disorder. 78.130.136.199 (talk) 15:53, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Famous people 

message: Am I the only one who finds the beginning of the page to present a blatant contradiction (words in caps are the contradiction)?:
"the diagnostic classification system used in the United States, as 'a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, NEED FOR ADMIRATION, and a lack of empathy.' 
The narcissist is described as TURNING INWARD FOR GRATIFICATION RATHER THAN DEPENDING ON OTHERS"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.6.248.176 (talk) 09:20, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yep I agree - a narcissist needs narcissistic supply as external gratification not internal --Penbat (talk) 10:29, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I can understand the second sentence in the context of the narcissist's selfishness and lack of empathy, but I agree that it must be rewritten because on face value it's contradicting the preceding sentence. Wcp07 (talk) 10:40, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It sounds like a contradiction, but it's not.  It goes both ways.  I unfortunately have NPD, so I know this to be true. Dmarquard (talk) 00:36, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction 

message: I am currently enrolled in my graduating year in Psychology, in my Abnormal Psychology class my professor a psychotherapist, specializing in NPD and Borderline personality disorder for the past 40 years, stated that etiology of the disorder is actually, and I paraphrase, "There is a stage in the life of everyone where a person has grandiose tendencies or is a narcassist, if during this stage in early childhood development, their parents do not constantly praise and admire their child, the person will develop what I call grandiose-type narcissistic personality disorder. The person will become fixated in that stage of their life and continue to seek others that will praise or admire them. They may enter the field of say Astronomy, and quickly rise to the top, receiving awards and praise from their peers, but they will then fall, because they were not in the field because they loved Astronomy, they wanted the praise of being at the top. I, for instance, practice psychology because I love it, I also want to do well in treating my patients and make money, but if I had narcissistic personality disorder I would do it only to climb to the top and receive praise. The participant will require mirroring transference, they seek from their therapist, someone who will praise them and value them like their parents didn't do enough. The other type of narcissistic personality disorder is enfeebled type, this is not talked about by the DSM, but it has similar symptoms. Enfeebled personality disorders occurs when the person in a stage of their early childhood development does not have someone who they believe is infallible and omniscient. It is normal for a child for much of their life to look at mom or dad as someone that knows everything, they're always strong and know whats right or wrong. As the child matures they will become more and more aware that their parent is intelligent but not infallible-- and this is healthy this is normal. If a child however, sees too often that their parent doesn't know something or cries or is too weak, then they will remain, in Freudian terms, fixated in this stage and seek out important celebrities or top professors to latch on to so they can idealize them. These patients, in therapy seek someone who will be perfect and omnipotent. They show idealizing transference. Often, particularly with young therapists, the therapist will say "oh stop I'm not actually perfect, its okay to be flawed" and the enfeebled narcissist will say "oh look not only are you perfect, you're modest too." These are the patients that their therapist might burp and they will say "wow how insightful." As you may have been able to discern this professor is eclectic but applies modern psychodynamic theory, as well as humanist theory, especially to his therapy.Nonymous-raz (talk) 15:30, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: eclectic, but failed to pay attention in English class when paragraphs were taught? ;-) 68.83.72.162 (talk) 17:29, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding etiology 

message: Bitsnpieces, you removed: 
:James F. Masterson outlines a prominent approach to healing NPD, while discussing a continuum of severity and the kinds of therapy most effective in different cases.
And you added:
:Narcissistic Personality Disorder is currently considered to be incurable, and prognosis is very poor. 
Can you provide more information? Were the references you removed bad in some way? Can you provide references for the new material? And what exactly is meant by "prognosis is very poor?" "Poor" as in it's incurable, or as in the person will have a terrible quality of life, or what? Axlrosen (talk) 12:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent Changes 

message: Is there a reason why Savior complex redirects here? The folk definition of that term indicates someone who (falsely) believes that they can save or help someone else. That doesn't seem to quite meet the level of "a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and a lack of empathy."
Is savior complex, then, also a clinical term synonymous with NPD, and/or just used incorrectly in common usage? 67.182.218.55 (talk) 22:31, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A redirect to Messiah_complex or Grandiose delusions would be better.--Penbat (talk) 22:53, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Savior complex?