A few thoughts everyone should remember about Sunday

[chef17]

And where did you see "self-importance, egotism, vanity, conceit" from Cam? When he talks about his stats being meaningless because the team lost? When he told Rivera he doesn't want to let his teammates down? If you have already explained it I may have missed it so please show me what Cam has done to show those traits.

My post was never replied to and I honestly am curious as to what Cam has done to display "self-importance, egotism, vanity, conceit"

[frash.exe]

Perhaps you meant identifying a narcissist?

yes because it's perfectly reasonable and authoritative to identify a narcissist by merely looking at a picture of him:jc:

[teeray]

I did? Care to explain for me? Or is this just your opinion?

Sure I'll explain. In your rebuttal to me you provided the definition:

nar·cis·sism

   /ˈnɑrsəˌsɪzɛm/ Show Spelled[nahr-suh-siz-em] Show IPA

noun

1.

inordinate fascination with oneself; excessive self-love; vanity.

But from the beginning you have attempted to say that the definition of narcissism is simply:

Narcissist can be selfish, and they can be un-empathetic, but they are primarily identified as people that think very highly of themselves, and LOVE themselves.

Now, can you tell me the difference between your personal definition and the one you provided for me from an actual source?? I'll give you a hint, the words "inordinate" and "excessive" are very important.

So they are not primarily identified as "people who think very highly of themselves." By the definition you provided for me it infers that you can think very highly of yourself and love yourself and still not be narcissistic. By your definition it would have to be an "inordinate fascination with oneself". In other words it would have to be beyond an ordinary amount of self confidence. Because self confidence by itself is normal.

Now in terms of Cam I haven't seen anything that suggests he has an inordinate fascination with himself. He has a great deal of confidence in his abilities, but that by itself according to your definition isn't enough to classify him as narcissistic. Actually if anything his actions have proven that he understands that he is a part of something bigger than himself and has been humble about his place on the team and in the NFL.

You also felt compelled in your argument with Floppin to highlight 5 times in a post:

Sigmund Freud (1931) defined a narcissistic personality type as an

individual whose main interest is self preservation, is independent and

impossible to intimidate.

Again I would like to see an instance in which you could show that Cam's "primary interest is self preservation". If anything he has proven just the opposite. Instead of deflecting blame from himself, he has shouldered it and has actually been willing to deflect blame off of others and put it upon himself. That is the complete and exact opposite of self preservation in the sense of being an athlete.

The only evidence you have provided that Cam is a narcissist is :

The confidence in his eyes, the smile, the smirk, the stance. It something that's going to come out later, and it WILL probably draw a lot of haters. It's usually seen as a negative...but to me, it's the one thing that all the greatest leaders and athletes of the world have always had: narcissism. Cam, is a full blown narcissist trying to be good at the moment.

So from all the stuff you have posted to this point the only evidence you have provided to make this diagnosis is "The confidence in his eyes, the smile, the smirk, the stance." That just isn't compelling evidence in my opinion to diagnose him as a narcissist.

And just a last little side note. Remember you said:

that may very well be a false statement because I did my best to refrain from using the word all. Once again, nice spin.

Sorry I spun your exact quote that "it's the one thing that all the greatest leaders and athletes of the world have always had" Which again is false in my opinion.

[PantherFanForLife]

yes because it's perfectly reasonable and authoritative to identify a narcissist by merely looking at a picture of him:jc:

Yes because that's all I based it on....a picture:rolleyes:

I'm still waiting on those sources btw for earlier....

Perhaps you need a recap and some help with those sources? Ok, no problem.

Could your sources be ......

there are clearly people in this thread that have studied psychology in a formal setting.

As Fiz pointed out most of the tenets of psychoanalysis have been largely abandoned by most pyschologists.

It isn't hard for me, I know what I am talking about and from what I read, so does floppin. .

Yes I think I see your sources now...undeniable, trusted, modern, non-archaic, respected, Harvard PHD-equipped minds: Fiz, Panthers55 and Flopping. You win!

How could the likes of outdated Freud ever compete with those minds or with the likes of.....Paul Babiak. Wait a second, that's right, because they don't have to. Because both Paul Babial, myself and everyone else from wiki to the likes of Freud to encyclopedias, agree on the basic definition of a narcissist:

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

Which was more or less my simple definition of it, and the main argument, which gave Floppin a brain freeze from all the spinning around in circles he's been doing trying to deny that all day long, and saying it's not the "common definition"...yet Floppin's own source that was actually posted by Panthers55, says it's the common definition. But then how can I be wrong, when your own source that you used to argue against me, says that what I am saying is correct?

I honestly can't possibly compete with this kind of BRILLIANT logic. It's just too undeniable.

But maybe I can give it one more shot. And this time let's use some translation for us dumb folk.

You have no idea what you are talking about. You are making nonsensical statements not rooted in psychological constructs.

Narcissists don't bask in the pain of others (sadists and antisocial personalities do), narcissists minimize the pain of others by believing they are histrionic and rationalize that their own feelings are more important than those of the other person.

Big words! Translation is: Pantherfanforlife doesn't know what he's talking about and making no sense: Narcissists are not sadists, says panther55

Followed by, once again:

It isn't hard for me, I know what I am talking about and from what I read, so does floppin.

Translation: I know my stuff yo, and so does my boy Flopping. You got my back, right Floppin?

Followed by:

That the very acts of sadism generate Narcissistic Supply to be consumed by the narcissist ("I inflict pain, therefore I am superior"), or

That the victims of his sadism are still his only or major Sources of Narcissistic Supply but are perceived by him to be intentionally frustrating and withholding. Sadistic acts are his way of punishing them for not being docile, obedient, admiring and adoring as he expects them to be in view of his uniqueness, cosmic significance, and special entitlement.

The narcissist is not a full-fledged sadist, masochist, or paranoiac. He does not enjoy hurting his victims. He does not believe firmly that he is the focal point of persecution and the target of conspiracies.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/richpub/syltguides/fullview/R1IYO9K44JPF91

Translation: Narcissists can in fact be sadistic. Sadists are quite narcissistic. Floppin, Fiz, and Panthers55 really are lost and grasping straws but running out and Panthers55 still doesn't get that a narcissist can also be a sadist.

Wait...dammit....no..what just happened.....Floppin's brain freeze posted the wrong source. That shouldn't be there. That shouldn't say that, because narcissists, can't be sadists, remember? OOOOOOOPS!

But wait.....there's is still one more thing...because just when you think they were out....here comes the hero of the day:

supported by unreliable or archaic sources that you refuse to admit is poo and abandon

Phew.....there we go. That made it all better.

PS: I don't think there is a LOL big enough.

[SgtJoo]

Holy fuging derail batman.

[PantherFanForLife]

Sure I'll explain. In your rebuttal to me you provided the definition:

But from the beginning you have attempted to say that the definition of narcissism is simply:

Now, can you tell me the difference between your personal definition and the one you provided for me from an actual source?? I'll give you a hint, the words "inordinate" and "excessive" are very important.

So they are not primarily identified as "people who think very highly of themselves." By the definition you provided for me it infers that you can think very highly of yourself and love yourself and still not be narcissistic. By your definition it would have to be an "inordinate fascination with oneself". In other words it would have to be beyond an ordinary amount of self confidence. Because self confidence by itself is normal.

Now in terms of Cam I haven't seen anything that suggests he has an inordinate fascination with himself. He has a great deal of confidence in his abilities, but that by itself according to your definition isn't enough to classify him as narcissistic. Actually if anything his actions have proven that he understands that he is a part of something bigger than himself and has been humble about his place on the team and in the NFL.

You also felt compelled in your argument with Floppin to highlight 5 times in a post:

Again I would like to see an instance in which you could show that Cam's "primary interest is self preservation". If anything he has proven just the opposite. Instead of deflecting blame from himself, he has shouldered it and has actually been willing to deflect blame off of others and put it upon himself. That is the complete and exact opposite of self preservation in the sense of being an athlete.

The only evidence you have provided that Cam is a narcissist is :

So from all the stuff you have posted to this point the only evidence you have provided to make this diagnosis is "The confidence in his eyes, the smile, the smirk, the stance." That just isn't compelling evidence in my opinion to diagnose him as a narcissist.

And just a last little side note. Remember you said:

Sorry I spun your exact quote that "it's the one thing that all the greatest leaders and athletes of the world have always had" Which again is false in my opinion.

Ok so basically you have now resulted at picking at one sentence, taken out of context, out of the zillion times I kept repeating myself where I defined narcissism using very loose terminology, the dictionary.com one and an incomplete Freud's definition, leaving out all the ones in the middle.

Alright. Very well. Yes I defined it much too loosely in your first example at that point but I'm pretty sure it would make more sense if it was in the context originally found in.

So let's see what I really said:

A narcissist doesn't just = selfish. Narcissist can be selfish, and they can be un-empathetic, but they are primarily identified as people that think very highly of themselves, and LOVE themselves. Elitists. So if Cam was the opposite he would think of himself as if he was a nobody, a worthless, no good human being.

Ok so you did leave out "elitist", which is a term that means above others, better than others....etc, right? And if you will notice, the point of that was that I was responding to someone else who said Cam was the opposite of a narcissist(because he believed it simply meant selfish)...which is why I emphasized that they love themselves. Because the opposite of a narcissist, or a person who excessively love themselves meant Cam would have to be someone that loathes themselves".

So yeah taking that out of context, I would call it spinning but don't worry. I'm going to play your game, and I will give you my explanation, but before we get into that argument, let's go ahead and first list the most complete and popular definitions of narcissism, once and for all, that we can all agree on. The first two that pop up on Google and anyone can pull up:

Narcissism is a term with a wide range of meanings, depending on whether it is used to describe a central concept of psychoanalytic theory, a mental illness, a social or cultural problem, or simply a personality trait. Except in the sense of primary narcissism or healthy self-love, "narcissism" usually is used to describe some kind of problem in a person or group's relationships with self and others. In everyday speech, "narcissism" often means inflated self-importance, egotism, vanity, conceit, or simple selfishness. Applied to a social group, it is sometimes used to denote elitism or an indifference to the plight of others. In psychology, the term is used to describe both normal self-love and unhealthy self-absorption due to a disturbance in the sense of self.

nar·cis·sism

   /ˈnɑrsəˌsɪzɛm/ Show Spelled[nahr-suh-siz-em] Show IPA

noun

1.

inordinate fascination with oneself; excessive self-love; vanity.

2.

Psychoanalysis . erotic gratification derived from admiration of one's own physical or mental attributes, being a normal condition at the infantile level of personality development.

And let's go ahead and add Freud's, but not just excerpt that I quoted repeatedly to Panthers55 and you are so cleverly using....how about the FULL thing which was posted at the top of my reply to him:

Sigmund Freud (1931) defined a narcissistic personality type as an

individual whose main interest is self preservation, is independent and

impossible to intimidate. Freud (1931) suggested that individuals

belonging to this type of personality group impress others as being strong

personalities, and are especially suited to act as bastions for others,

essentially in leadership roles. It is apparent that this definition is

congruent with the ancient origins of the term1 and interpreted, it refers

to a personality type that has an extreme innate need for esteem; in the

form of status, attention or admiration, a strong need for power, weak

self-control, and indifference about the needs and well being of others

So before I respond to you, as far as why I think Cam's a narcissist, I need to know that we are on the same page as far as what a narcissist is defined as.

You DO agree with these definitions? Correct?

These are in fact, "accepted definitions", correct?

We do agree on the fact that the common denominator is:

inordinate fascination with oneself; excessive self-love; vanity

We do agree on this, correct?

And by now you should also understand a narcissist displays multiple narcissist traits which may or may not include the following:

inflated self-importance, egotism, vanity, conceit, simple selfishness, elitism, indifference to the plight of others(lack of empathy), and according to Freud: self preservation, independence, impossible to intimidate, as well as impress others for being strong personalities(show-off, confident), bastions for others(leader), even older definitions like need for esteem: in the form of status, attention or admiration, a strong need for power, weak self-control, and indifference about the needs and well being of others.

Correct?

So to restate it completely, we do agree that narcissism has a wide range of meanings, like wikipedia says, and that in addition to it's most simplistic, current definition: inordinate fascination with oneself; excessive self-love, vanity, a narcissist is likely to display any combination or even ALL of the above traits?

And you have also noticed how some of those are actually one and the same, or synonyms of each other? Like for example self preservation is also a form of egotism. Right?

Are we good so far?

[Floppin]

Hahahh, PFFL was so worked up about being wrong that he couldn't sleep and had to get one last weak ass attempt to prove...well nothing, in at 4am.

[Fiz]

going through his post history is funny

You cannot, I repeat - CANNOT - judge any athlete or even a team, on any level, of any sport by one or two games.

It's retarded. Just stop. The very minimum you should look at is 3-4 games. I swear it's like the concept of a "trend" or "good sample" just doesn't exist around here.

I don't mean to be a dick, but it really IS STUPID!

http://www.carolinahuddle.com/forum/carolina-panthers/48164-ok-this-forum-needs-to-stop-this-poo-right-now.html

[teeray]

Ok so basically you have now resulted at picking at one sentence, taken out of context, out of the zillion times I kept repeating myself where I defined narcissism using very loose terminology, the dictionary.com one and an incomplete Freud's definition, leaving out all the ones in the middle.

Alright. Very well. Yes I defined it much too loosely in your first example at that point but I'm pretty sure it would make more sense if it was in the context originally found in.

So let's see what I really said:

Ok so you did leave out "elitist", which is a term that means above others, better than others....etc, right? And if you will notice, the point of that was that I was responding to someone else who said Cam was the opposite of a narcissist(because he believed it simply meant selfish)...which is why I emphasized that they love themselves. Because the opposite of a narcissist, or a person who excessively love themselves meant Cam would have to be someone that loathes themselves".

So yeah taking that out of context, I would call it spinning but don't worry. I'm going to play your game, and I will give you my explanation, but before we get into that argument, let's go ahead and first list the most complete and popular definitions of narcissism, once and for all, that we can all agree on. The first two that pop up on Google and anyone can pull up:

And let's go ahead and add Freud's, but not just excerpt that I quoted repeatedly to Panthers55 and you are so cleverly using....how about the FULL thing which was posted at the top of my reply to him:

So before I respond to you, as far as why I think Cam's a narcissist, I need to know that we are on the same page as far as what a narcissist is defined as.

You DO agree with these definitions? Correct?

These are in fact, "accepted definitions", correct?

We do agree on the fact that the common denominator is:

inordinate fascination with oneself; excessive self-love; vanity

We do agree on this, correct?

And by now you should also understand a narcissist displays multiple narcissist traits which may or may not include the following:

inflated self-importance, egotism, vanity, conceit, simple selfishness, elitism, indifference to the plight of others(lack of empathy), and according to Freud: self preservation, independence, impossible to intimidate, as well as impress others for being strong personalities(show-off, confident), bastions for others(leader), even older definitions like need for esteem: in the form of status, attention or admiration, a strong need for power, weak self-control, and indifference about the needs and well being of others.

Correct?

So to restate it completely, we do agree that narcissism has a wide range of meanings, like wikipedia says, and that in addition to it's most simplistic, current definition: inordinate fascination with oneself; excessive self-love, vanity, a narcissist is likely to display any combination or even ALL of the above traits?

And you have also noticed how some of those are actually one and the same, or synonyms of each other? Like for example self preservation is also a form of egotism. Right?

Are we good so far?

Self preservation is not a form of egotism. It is a characteristic of narcissism. They are not synonyms.

Also Freud's definition claims all three must be present, He defined a narcissistic personality type as an individual whose main interest is self preservation, is independent and impossible to intimidate.

So you trying to throw Freud's definition into a bundle with other traits and symptoms and saying that a narcissist only has to display one or some of these symptoms is false (according to Freud). It is like reading law, an individual whose main interest is self preservation, is independent and(not or) impossible to intimidate. Notice he doesn't say "may display". Freud is saying that those things must be present. And in Cam's case they are not present. So in my opinion, by Freud's definition Cam is not a narcissist.

You in your first post on this said "Cam is a full blown narcissist" but then to back up your claim you are now trying to use the term narcissist in it's broadest sense. That is contradictory in my opinion. Is he a full blown narcissist or does he just have a high self esteem and exhibit some narcissistic traits??

But even in the definitions you provided I don't see any evidence that Cam is a narcissist. And you haven't presented any evidence other than his smile, smirk, and stance. Not very compelling IMO.

[panthers55]

How could the likes of outdated Freud ever compete with those minds or with the likes of.....Paul Babiak.

Big words! Translation is: Pantherfanforlife doesn't know what he's talking about and making no sense: Narcissists are not sadists, says panther55

Followed by, once again:

Translation: I know my stuff yo, and so does my boy Flopping. You got my back, right Floppin?

Translation: Narcissists can in fact be sadistic. Sadists are quite narcissistic. Floppin, Fiz, and Panthers55 really are lost and grasping straws but running out and Panthers55 still doesn't get that a narcissist can also be a sadist.

Ok so basically you have now resulted at picking at one sentence, taken out of context, out of the zillion times I kept repeating myself where I defined narcissism using very loose terminology, the dictionary.com one and an incomplete Freud's definition, leaving out all the ones in the middle.

Alright. Very well. Yes I defined it much too loosely in your first example at that point but I'm pretty sure it would make more sense if it was in the context originally found in.

So before I respond to you, as far as why I think Cam's a narcissist, I need to know that we are on the same page as far as what a narcissist is defined as.

inordinate fascination with oneself; excessive self-love; vanity

We do agree on this, correct?

And by now you should also understand a narcissist displays multiple narcissist traits which may or may not include the following:

inflated self-importance, egotism, vanity, conceit, simple selfishness, elitism, indifference to the plight of others(lack of empathy), and according to Freud: self preservation, independence, impossible to intimidate, as well as impress others for being strong personalities(show-off, confident), bastions for others(leader), even older definitions like need for esteem: in the form of status, attention or admiration, a strong need for power, weak self-control, and indifference about the needs and well being of others.

Since I seem to be quoted repeatedly for pages after i quit the fight I will again get things back on track.

PFFL a few things.

Freud is not considered a very good psychological reference for modern day psychology. His theories have largely been discredited. He is the father of psychology due to his keen observations and use of them to infer psychological intent. He was the first to do that despite the fact that his attributions and definitions were too rooted in sexual context which reflected the times in which he lived. A common psychological theme is that things repressed in society frequently exhibit themselves in various psychopathology. Freud was also credited with coining the terms ego, Id and superego and discussing the unconscious. But to repeatedly quote him as a definitive source shows your lack of understanding about current thought in psychology. His theories were flawed as were his conclusions. Which necessarily makes your line of thinking discredited as well. So my reference was more current and in line with current thinking. Secondly you miss what the point of my conversation which was to pick a random reference to show in the modern use of the word, narcissist is widely used synonymously with negative characteristics associated with NPD. It was not to compare him with Freud. If I wanted to compare theorists I could have picked a number of more emminent ones to discuss. But like usual you skew a passage and totally take it out of context to make some obscure point not germaine to the discussion.

Next you use nonsequitor logic in discussing sadists and narcissists as if they are connected and they are not except tangentially. For example we already discussed that some sociopaths are narcissistic. Many sadists are narcissistic but healthy narcissists are not. Some narcissists are murderers but most are not. Some narcissists are Romanian but most are not. So using your logic it could be inferred that some narcissists could be Romanian murdering sadistic sociopaths but we surely wouldn't connect the two just like if some narcissists were short we wouldn't logically infer that height and narcissism are connected. In addition the type of narcissism connected with sociopoathic sadistic behavior is not the narcissism we are connecting in a healthy fashion but the NPT variety. When we discussed sadistic behavior not being connected to narcisism we were talking about it being incompatible with empathy not the lack of it.

So general thinking in psychology is that narcissism and particularly the positive attributes you claim to ascribe to it are not related to sadism at all. Psychopaths are usually sadists and most are narcissistic but that is incompatible with what you were describing as the positive elements.

Lets review here. You went on for pages saying narcissism and NPD were not the same. You go on to say that narcissism can be lots of things good or bad but you talk about the good and bad parts as if narcissists have elements of both. If that is true then to have both you have to have elements of NPD and you are not a normal healthy narcissist

And then it ignores the elephant in the room which is that after if you define narcissism as NPD, it has no relevance to Newton being a narcissist by your own definition. And if you say he only has the healthy elements then who cares and why the cautionary tale in the OP. Why are we arguing??

Over time you have totally proved our premise which Newton is not a narcissist in a negative way and you could have used the term leader, self confident, etc instead. If you want to call him a narcissist and describe it as a positive thing then do so by all means. But understand that the majority opinion of the definition of the word is negative and doesn't apply to Cam. Stop going down bunny trails on Freud and narcissism definitions and go back and show how that now we agree that narcissism is seen in a negative connotation it applies to Newton

So Newton either is a normal person who like most athletes has the positive aspects of narcissism with no NPD and therefore no dark side or if he has a dark side he has NPD. If he has no dark side then this whole discussion and your whole original premise has been as discredited as Freud has been in the last 30 years.

[chef17]

And then it ignores the elephant in the room which is that after if you define narcissism as NPD, it has no relevance to Newton being a narcissist by your own definition. And if you say he only has the healthy elements then who cares and why the cautionary tale in the OP. Why are we arguing??

I asked this on page 2.

[chef17]

And then it ignores the elephant in the room which is that after if you define narcissism as NPD, it has no relevance to Newton being a narcissist by your own definition. And if you say he only has the healthy elements then who cares and why the cautionary tale in the OP. Why are we arguing??

I asked this 3 pages ago.

[SteveSmith89]

I've seen like 4 different threads discussing narcissists, what the hell is going on around here?

[PantherFanForLife]

Self preservation is not a form of egotism. It is a characteristic of narcissism. They are not synonyms.

Also Freud's definition claims all three must be present, He defined a narcissistic personality type as an individual whose main interest is self preservation, is independent and impossible to intimidate.

So you trying to throw Freud's definition into a bundle with other traits and symptoms and saying that a narcissist only has to display one or some of these symptoms is false (according to Freud). It is like reading law, an individual whose main interest is self preservation, is independent and(not or) impossible to intimidate. Notice he doesn't say "may display". Freud is saying that those things must be present. And in Cam's case they are not present. So in my opinion, by Freud's definition Cam is not a narcissist.

You in your first post on this said "Cam is a full blown narcissist" but then to back up your claim you are now trying to use the term narcissist in it's broadest sense. That is contradictory in my opinion. Is he a full blown narcissist or does he just have a high self esteem and exhibit some narcissistic traits??

But even in the definitions you provided I don't see any evidence that Cam is a narcissist. And you haven't presented any evidence other than his smile, smirk, and stance. Not very compelling, IMO.

Uhm....Self preservation is not a form of egotism? Caring only about one's self and caring only to preserve one's self? A person who is only interested in his own survival is not selfish? Light blue is not a shade of blue? Freud's saying he's a guy that's only concern with his own survival. And yes, that is egoistical!

And I didn't look up Freud's definition, before I made that post, and tried to see if Cam fits that bill from Freud's psychological perspective. This is not what I went of off.

You took the concept of a narcissist, and quoted a portion of a definition from Sigmund Freud, and then you went through the process of inverse elimination and said...."well I didn't see this "specific trait", so it can't be true". Awesome!

And you continue on spinning. Freud said all three MUST be present? Read it again:

Sigmund Freud (1931) defined a narcissistic personality type as an

individual whose main interest is self preservation, is independent and

impossible to intimidate. Freud (1931) suggested that individuals

belonging to this type of personality group impress others as being strong

personalities, and are especially suited to act as bastions for others,

essentially in leadership roles. It is apparent that this definition is

congruent with the ancient origins of the term1 and interpreted, it refers

to a personality type that has an extreme innate need for esteem; in the

form of status, attention or admiration, a strong need for power, weak

self-control, and indifference about the needs and well being of others

Freud said they must have those exact 3 things?

Read that again. Even the writer of that excerpt is saying the same thing: Freud's definition, goes hand in hand with the origins of the term narcissism which also goes hand in hand with the most recent definition of narcissism which is on wikipedia. They're all describing the same concept, using different wording.

If I say I'm selfish or I'm egoistical or I only care about myself: it's the same thing! I can also say: I don't care about others, I'm not concerned with others well being, I don't care if others perish. It's the same THING! Same concept. Same idea. They all describe the same thing: selfishness.

Again, there's no point in going on and on as long as you keep spinning things, leaving things out, or just simply continuing to post things that are broken in logic. Like for example, the last part.

When I said, a "full blown narcissist" it does pretty much say in the broadest of sense doesn't it....... How the heck is that contradictory?

If I have to also define words such as "contradictory" for you, in order for us to be able to have a discussion, this is going to last an eternity.