A few thoughts everyone should remember about Sunday

[frash.exe]

guys here's my analysis of narcissism and cam newton being one

/then a painstakingly long worded layman's take

what are my sources? scholarly journals? Nope, but i've got dictionary.com, wikipedia and sigmund freud

[4Corners]

Every college class I've had with college D1 athletes is awful.

They are rude, talk during lecture, fall asleep in class, and generally an have heir of entitlement to them.

My family & I busted my ass to get me through college and these morons with an IQ of 7 walk around like they own the fuging place and get whatever they want for free.

[PantherFanForLife]

You sure are slow.

So that's it? That's your argument? That's your source? Ok, you showed me!

:rolleyes:

Oh wait....one second..... before I bow to you in defeat, just for the record.... since that is your source and I'm sure you didn't actually even take the time to read it.....are you ready for self-ownage again?

The common understanding is that narcissists are 'in love with' themselves and see the world as revolving around their thoughts and needs.

To narcissists, the world is their audience, and everyone they meet—and everything that happens—is centered on them. Thus, we describe narcissists as self-centered, selfish, demanding and self-absorbed; yet, they can also be quite charming as well, having learned how to please their audience.

Hey look! Your source agrees with the same definition from ALL the sources I posted as well as what I originally said. That's UMPOSSIBLE!

DORK!:D

[Kevin Greene]

..... walk around like they own the fuging place and get whatever they want for free.

They do.

All the pussy as well.

[Fiz]

guys cam newton is a massive narcissist.

my source? he's tapping into the mind of CERTAIN NARCISSIST Alexander the Great when he sleeps. He's sucking his life energy through the dream world and assimilating it into his own.

Don't believe me? Heh. maybe you should read some Jung, or, I dunno, check this good post from forums.mylittlepony.com

[Floppin]

So that's it? That's your argument? That's your source? Ok, you showed me!

:rolleyes:

Oh wait....one second..... before I bow to you in defeat, just for the record.... since that is your source and I'm sure you didn't actually even take the time to read it.....are you ready for self-ownage again?

Hey look! Your source agrees with the same definition from ALL the sources I posted as well as what I originally said. That's UMPOSSIBLE!

DORK!:D

You just don't get it do you? You really are this dense?

[frash.exe]

oh great pffl is self-imploding again just like last year

[panthers55]

Oh yeah buddy you showed me. You just posted what I have been saying all along from the first post,.....and you STILL managed to get it wrong by finding the one source on the internet, a worthless SPAM site, might I add.....that manages to do the same thing you did....confuse the term narcissism with narcissistic personality disorder.

If you're going to use wikipedia as a source....why don't you post their definition of it?

and once again....their definition of narcissism:

And yes they are interchangeable, as I stated it from the very beginning. It's a matter of how MUCH of it one has. It can either lead to great things or bad poo.

This will be my last post on the subject as I know you will keep arguing to get in the last word as if somehow that makes you right. I doubt it will make a difference but here goes.

Narcissism and Narcissistic personality disorder are commonly used interchangeably and not in a positive manner. Terms such as confident, empathetic, etc are used instead of narsissism to describe the positive end of the spectrum.

As Fiz pointed out most of the tenets of psychoanalysis have been largely abandoned by most pyschologists. Freud was a good observer of behavior but ascribed most tendencies toward repressed sexual feeling which mirrors the general sexual repression of the era in which he lived and practiced at the turn of the century. The things still deemed valuable such as defense mechanisms were actually ascribed to his daughter Anna not Sigmund himself.

Even you have used aspects of them interchangeably demonstrating either your lack of understanding or more likely that they in fact describing the same psychological construct.

For my part I told you pages ago that if you want to define them in the broadest terms they can seen as positive or negative but in the connotation you used in your initial post, you were mixing them up as good and bad elements which was confusing normal narcissism with NPD.

And it isn't simply a matter of how much you have but the psychological manifestations or symptoms present and the reason for the need to be narcissistic, ie. the extent to which you have a healthy and normal ego versus an impaired and dysfunctional self image.

So feel free to pontificate endlessly but do so knowing that it will sway no one and no matter your ongoing debate, you are not rooted in sound psychological theory or practice.

[Fiz]

hey btw guys that academic study i posted basically claims that while athletes will score slightly higher on a Narcissist Personality Index text than non athletes, non athletes responding as they imagine an athlete would respond score high as fug so um maybe pf4l needs to read that an reevaluate some things.

[4Corners]

This will be my last post on the subject as I know you will keep arguing to get in the last word as if somehow that makes you right. I doubt it will make a difference but here goes.

Narcissism and Narcissistic personality disorder are commonly used interchangeably and not in a positive manner. Terms such as confident, empathetic, etc are used instead of narsissism to describe the positive end of the spectrum.

As Fiz pointed out most of the tenets of psychoanalysis have been largely abandoned by most pyschologists. Freud was a good observer of behavior but ascribed most tendencies toward repressed sexual feeling which mirrors the general sexual repression of the era in which he lived and practiced at the turn of the century. The things still deemed valuable such as defense mechanisms were actually ascribed to his daughter Anna not Sigmund himself.

Even you have used aspects of them interchangeably demonstrating either your lack of understanding or more likely that they in fact describing the same psychological construct.

For my part I told you pages ago that if you want to define them in the broadest terms they can seen as positive or negative but in the connotation you used in your initial post, you were mixing them up as good and bad elements which was confusing normal narcissism with NPD.

And it isn't simply a matter of how much you have but the psychological manifestations or symptoms present and the reason for the need to be narcissistic, ie. the extent to which you have a healthy and normal ego versus an impaired and dysfunctional self image.

So feel free to pontificate endlessly but do so knowing that it will sway no one and no matter your ongoing debate, you are not rooted in sound psychological theory or practice.

tl;dr

[frash.exe]

hey btw guys that academic study i posted basically claims that while athletes will score slightly higher on a Narcissist Personality Index text than non athletes, non athletes responding as they imagine an athlete would respond score high as fug so um maybe pf4l needs to read that an reevaluate some things.

jesus that's expecting a little much out of him

he probably wishes he can cook his own dinner someday

[Fiz]

has pantherfan4life been run off or is he desperately searching conservapedia for new definitions

[Floppin]

has pantherfan4life been run off or is he desperately searching conservapedia for new definitions

One can only hope.

[4Corners]

this dude is that bad huh?