By the way, you say ...that grandiose narcissists *don't* suffer much, but the vulnerable narcissists *do*...
Grandiosity is a defense against vulnerability in these people. They're the same people. I find Kernberg to be more masterful and credible that Yeomans. Of course, the former is the teacher of the latter. On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 2:59 PM Frank Wimberly <[email protected]> wrote: > But it's useful, to me, ... > > Well, that matters. > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 2:57 PM uǝlƃ ☣ <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 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 >> >> .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... >> .... . ... >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam >> unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >> FRIAM-COMIC <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/FRIAM-COMIC> >> http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >> > > > -- > Frank Wimberly > 140 Calle Ojo Feliz > Santa Fe, NM 87505 > 505 670-9918 > -- Frank Wimberly 140 Calle Ojo Feliz Santa Fe, NM 87505 505 670-9918
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... .... . ... FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
