[FRIAM] narcissism

[uǝlƃ ☣]

On 4/29/20 12:51 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> https://youtu.be/DlopY4DfFV4

This one didn't seem to say anything about the 2 phenotypes. So it (obviously) can't help distinguish them, which means it can't help unify them. If one doesn't even recognize there could be a difference, then one can't unify them.

On 4/29/20 1:30 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
> https://youtu.be/Ihu3k_j3KQk

Yeomans refers to "thin-skinned" narcissists, which I interpret to be what others call "vulnerable". And it's good that he made at least that distinction. But everything else he said, other authors have described as grandiose phenotype. So, he validates other authors' laments that the majority of work has ignored the vulnerable type.

> https://youtu.be/xoRuzpsLzTU

I watched this one yesterday or the day before. But again, it focuses on the grandiose type and doesn't help distinguish or [re]unify the 2 types. What might be a Freudian slip, though, is that the unification of the 2 types, or the refusal to admit there might be 2 types, might be a "regression to simplicity". >8^D

> https://youtu.be/OwVL-X_TRDo

Here, Yeomans refers to what I started this thread with, he thinks narcissists suffer a lot, enslaved in an isolation. But the research I've seen in journals indicate that grandiose narcissists *don't* suffer much, but the vulnerable narcissists *do*. This is directly inferrable from the *alternative* model of NPD in the DSM 5. And it's reflected to some extent in pretty much any paper you get from a google scholar search.

So, to sum up, none of these bolster your position. But it's useful, to me, because now I'm thinking that the Wink 1991 paper really was a significant inflection point in the study of narcissism. Thanks for sending them along. I'll youtube-reciprocate and say that this guy seems pretty credible:

Wilmington: https://www.wilmu.edu/directory/behavioralscience/lori-vien.aspx
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCC_0vyFTKk1Nlodo4QsiQkw

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ