The utility of the term narcissism.

So continuing on from my last post then.

My first post was a broad brushstroke stating that evil exists, and some other relevant quotes in the Law of One. "Evil exists but sometimes it's best not to acknowledge it" perhaps. 

Then, my next post was the case against Narcissism. What is the justification for it sometimes being a kind of made up term that is simply used to excuse normal social behaviour?

This post though is about the case for narcissism. The positive use of the terms used in these communities. 

The information baseline.  

Let's think of a person like Dr Ramani. I think her output is very typical of the kind of person and audience that talks about this material. 

Dr Ramani has a great deal of information out there. A video a day. I learned a lot from her. It was the first place I heard of terms such as 'triangulation'. HOWEVER, there is a distinct pro female leaning to her work. She has said before that she thinks there are more male than female narcissists even though, according to her, the data doesn't support that. She has said that she believes Trump is a narcissist. She also came out with a video once about how right wing people are more likely to be narcissists and got ABSOLUTELY DESTROYED in the comments. Apparently, most people think it is actually liberals that are more narcissistic. She removed that video. This was a good moment. 

I have also seen from her that she kind of has a 'believe all women' approach. She noted that she had a situation with a "narcissist" and it annoyed her that people didn't automatically believe her but exercised some discernment. To me, this is a fact of life. If you have a complaint, you can be sure that someone has lied about the same complaint. There are a lot of false victims about. 

I put something like this as a comment. I said even though I would likely tend to believe her if I knew her, narcissists themselves always play the victim. So a person should not expect to be automatically believed. This comment was deleted and I distinctly wondered at the time if Dr Ramani herself, is actually narcissistic. 

However, there is a lot that can be learned about this type of person by watching her. What are the complaints of this kind of community, and the part of it that is for lack of a better term 'female supremacist'. 

Many of the complaints she seems to bring up are things that I think a more male lead environment would naturally sort out. A lot of tough men are very big on justice types of concerns. I recall she told this story about dealing with an older guy who kept putting his tools in the kitchen. The wife was not allowed to have a single thing out of place. But this old guy put a heavy toolbox in the kitchen that most people couldn't lift. The story concludes with Dr Ramani being super delicate with the guy via asking questions and getting the toolbox moved.

Two tough workmen coming into that house and the situation would be much different, and it wouldn't happen. To be frank. You can imagine these 6ft muscly workmen. "Yo Bart, why you got this big heavy toolbox in the kitchen? What's it doing in there you building a bunker or summink?" Maybe they would just pick it up and move it. 

Just the amount of directness that guys habitually use would sort this kind of issue out. Guys like that direct confrontation. Strategically calculated. And the old guy would be physically slightly intimidated as well.  

I have heard many, many stories about how groups of men, about how the way men do things. Shortcusts a lot of these kind of narcissistic types of problems. Situations that, in my own personal life, did not happen. My group of guy friends when I was young, was not able to handle these sorts of behaviours. I attribute that to the feminisation of absolutely everything. 

Philosophy of these things. 

I think that most people that are destined to do intellectual discovery. Thinking things through, articulating things as to the meaning of life. All have a way of handling things that makes sense to them. That life is pushing them to use to solve, and that when they do, things click into place.

One example of one of these knowledge systems is Stefan Molyneux and Philosophy. One of the types of problems that Dr Ramani's types of groups would fret over is when you are in a bad situation with some kind of abuser. You leave that abuser and go no contact. Then everyone around you gives you ridiculous platitudes and tries to get you to 'forgive' the abuser. This is one of the things that Dr Ramani's types of people would watch multiple videos about and get very emotional about the confrontation. 

The way someone like Stefan Molyneux would handle this is as he has talked about in fdr podcast 5944, "the moral relativism of Neitzsche". He would say to them. This is kind of paraphrased. Not exact wording. But close enough:

11:35: "OK, who was in the right and who was in the wrong? If my friend says Bob was in the right. I would say, why did you not help me understand that earlier?  If he says, Bob was in the wrong, I tried to talk about it with him and I couldn't resolve it. Then how is that, holding a grudge? It's making a decision based upon reasonable, moral absolutes. If they won't take a side, I would say, that's kind of important right? If someone is judging you as being morally deficient for holding a grudge, then have them spell out their moral reasons. 

I have used this kind of thinking before in my own life. There are certain people that just have this assumption they have the moral high ground and if you talk about anything they disapprove of they will just go quiet, with the assumed reality you are kind of childlike. But after a lot of energy put towards it and articulation. I was able to articulate how it is in fact them that are morally deficient.  To challenge them. That felt GOOD. 

The point here as it relates to narcissism. Is that if you can reason out all these things to outmanouever people in general. Morally deficient, passive aggressive people. Then it casts some doubt on whether you need the term narcissism at all no? 

It may be that this kind of thinking is not open to Dr Ramani types of people and followers. Because they might be left wing kind of conformist types of people. But, in terms of how to practically handle these things I think it is an important thing to consider. 

The real use of the term narcissist. 

The term narcissist is not exclusively used by social media influencers with the depth of a puddle. Abuse dynamics and terminology are sometimes used in terms of really vicious unpleasant behaviour. Scrolling down narcissism themes group on the internet will sometimes bring both a girl that complains her boyfriend is a narcissist because he is talking to another girl on his facebook, and another one that says her ex broke her bones in three places and put her in a coma. 

But more reliably devastating is the many people talking about parents that are abusive and narcissistic. 

The essential point is. What is the point of language? The point of language is to communicate concepts. But it can never do that with as much preciseness as we would like. The point of the word narcissism/ psychopath and many others has become to describe evil. Evil is something that exists with us. But that can never properly be described or even comprehended. Evil is just lies upon lies mostly. So we never have a real idea of what we are facing when we face it. 

The terms in the abuse communities are important because they do describe some sort of reality that many of us experience. Without the term narcissism and other linked terms. There is a lot about the dynamics of how manipulators work that would likely remain hidden and would retain it's manipulative power. 

The term 'flying monkey'. Which refers to people that are slavish to the narcissist for no clear reason. Is one that is very useful. Very relevant in how dominance heirarchies form and like I say, needed to understand the situation. 

For me, subjectively, this kind of thinking still has relevance. When I am thinking through the karmic response to peoples own actions, so that I do not try and save them. The concept of a flying monkey is very relevant. Those that ceaselessly enable evildoers. 

Also, for me, a lot comes down to the human design chart. I have identified specific positions. Such as things that relate to my natal Chiron, as highly relevant to this concept. 

It sucks, like I said, the term has now become misused and is often used by the kind of evildoers it should be applied to. But because a bunch of people misapply a term does not mean there is not anything legitimate there, only that it has been articulated badly.