The Intersubjective View of Narcissism

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Intersubjective view on the definition and manifestation of narcissism
Origins of narcissism in infancy
Childhood experiences and their role in narcissism
Ambitions and ideals in the narcissistic individual
The goal of therapy
Conclusion
References

Introduction

An intersubjective view is a perspective in which different parties agree about a certain issue. Narcissism has elicited a lot of interest and research from the psychodynamic school of thought. However, there is surprising agreement about the manifestations, origins, development and treatment of narcissism.

One demonstrates intersubjective views on a subject by showing how multiple scholars from different schools of thought agree on various aspects of the subject. This report will highlight the intersubjective view of narcissism by comparing object relations theorists to Freudian or ego theorists, self psychology theorists Jungian theorists as well as personality psychologists.

Intersubjective view on the definition and manifestation of narcissism

Psychologists have a general agreement that a person with narcissistic personality disorder is one who exhibits narcissistic behaviour owing to deep-seated feelings of low self esteem (Millon & Davis, 1996). They often use arrogance as a cover for their shortfalls. The DSM IV criteria of the condition are indicative of intersubjective agreement.

While Millon, a personality theorist, recognised that these behaviours do not come from a place of real confidence and self belief, Forman, a psychodynamic theorist, acknowledges that these individuals often feel empty and unfulfilled (Forman, 1976).

Reich, an ego psychology adherent, also concurs with the above, by stating that narcissistic people have an unrealistic view of themselves, yet they cannot measure up to that view (Reich, 1986). This causes them to persistently aspire for high status.

Masterson, an objects relations theorist, explains that narcissists are self involved and characterised by depictions of grandiosity (Masterson, 1981). Forman (1976) states that most of these patients strive for perfection, even though they have minimal chances of achieving it.

Most scholars also have an intersubjective view of the narcissist’s relationship with others. Reich (1986) explains that these individuals do not have a healthy association with others. They instead depend on them to get approval. Forman (1976) adds that they often look to others to gain esteem and respect. Millon & Davis (1996) affirm that narcissists often degrade the achievement of others in order to make themselves feel better.

Masterson (1981) claims that it is not unusual to witness feelings of intense envy among them because of the emptiness they feel. Reich (1986) adds that their inadequacies cause them to seek attention from others. When in the presence of others, they will boast and exaggerate their achievements. They often look out for other people’s reactions to them, and are too sensitive to disapproval.

In fact, other people’s judgement about them often causes these individuals to experience intense humiliation and sensitivity. Forman (1976) reiterates that a person with the disorder may seek an idealised partner in order to gain affirmation. Masterson (1981) adds that such people will look for perfect partners in order to mirror those idealised qualities for the narcissist.

Scholars also agree on some of the manifestations of this condition. The narcissistic person will demonstrate rage even during minor interactions. Such an individual will be offended when his need for approval is frustrated (Reich, 1986).

Furthermore, the person is immensely self conscious as his esteem comes from other people’s endorsement. In fact, such a person will undergo sporadic periods of high self esteem and excitement, then go through low moments (Forman, 1976) & (Reich, 1986).

Masterson (n.d., para. 50) has good explanations concerning why patients exhibit this kind of behaviour. He states that most patients have intimacy and relationship issues because closeness would penetrate their grandiose facade and get to the flawed self. This would trigger feelings of abandonment and devastate the patient. Therefore, the series of narcissistic relationships are enormous.

Sometimes, the patient may claim that he lacks friends or may look for unavailable partners. In other scenarios, the narcissistic subject may assert that he feels detached in relationships. All these manifestations depict the need to protect the fragile self from exposure.

Additionally, Masterson (n.d., para. 81) explains that persons with this disorder may experience bouts of rage because they have a sense of entitlement, which rarely gets acknowledged.

However, other people may not know about that entitlement, hence explaining why they cannot acknowledge it. Reich (1986) explains that approval-seeking stems from one’s lack of understanding of their true self. It is a futile attempt at developing a high esteem since one cannot look inward to find this confidence.

Wurmser (1981), a Freudian psychologist, explains that subjects will have exhibitionist tendencies because they want to overpower their object. They believe that their words or actions will charm, magnetise and eventually subjugate the other.

Origins of narcissism in infancy

Most psychodynamic literature traces narcissism to one’s infancy. The pioneer of psychodynamic theory, Sigmund Freud, used his ego theory to explain how narcissism comes about. He starts with the term libido, which refers to the energy that exists in humans owing to sexual and survival impulses. The libido is a prime part of the id, which drives human behaviour.

At the infant stage, all humans are born with an innate love for themselves; Freud called this tendency primary narcissism. Usually, the infant’s libido is directed at the self. However, as one grows, then one must learn to redirect this flow of libido to an object. In fact, Freud argued that the goal of therapy should be to replace narcissism with object love (Lee and Martin, 1991).

Intersubjective views of infancy exist among a number of scholars. Heinz Kohut, who is the proponent of self psychology, also agreed with Freud on this matter. He believed that human beings had an innate love for the self, and if left unchecked, then it could develop into a narcissistic personality in adulthood (Kohut, 1966). Therefore, the infant treats the world as revolving around himself.

Nonetheless, Kohut disagreed with Freud concerning the role of therapy in dealing with narcissism. He claimed that therapists cannot and should not attempt to replace all narcissism with object love as the two can work together (Lee and Martin, 1991).

The two scholars differed in terms of therapeutic approaches, but they still had a general consensus about the innate existence of self love in the infant and its modification in adulthood through the introduction of object love.

Childhood experiences and their role in narcissism

Kohut (1966) believed that a person’s childhood has an adverse effect on their understanding of the self. As children grow, they exhibit behaviour that is imperative to proper functioning during adulthood. For instance, some of them may have competitive tendencies. However, since their perceptions of the self have not yet developed, then their ability to cultivate this natural behaviour will depend on other people’s reaction.

If a child’s family members respond negatively to constructive competitive behaviour, then the child’s perception of the self will be damaged. Some families may reject or humiliate the young person because of exhibiting that conduct. Eventually, the child will suppress that behaviour but it will resurface during their adulthood in a distorted from. One such manifestation is narcissistic behaviour.

Almaas (1996) reiterates these sentiments by stating that children are never seen as they are. They depend upon external mirrors in order to solidify their senses. The narcissistic need is a primary need for all children as it confirms what they perceive and even allows them to comprehend it.

Johnson (1987) also demonstrates intersubjectivity with Kohut (1966) by stating that a child’s weak side ought to be reconciled with their magnificent nature. The familial environment has a large role to play in supporting these two polarities (Johnson, 1987). It can then allow the self to manifest freely.

Nonetheless, if the family requires the child to become something that he is not, then chances are that narcissistic injury will occur. Therefore, a general psychoanalyst like Johnson (1987) demonstrates intersubjectivity with Kohut, a self psychologist, concerning the root cause of narcissism in childhood.

A child’s experiences can lead to narcissism owing to the helplessness of their situation. Most of the humiliation, unfair treatment, or rejection that takes place in childhood cannot be controlled (Kohut, 1966). A child almost feels powerless over the situation that causes him distress.

Therefore, such a person may develop a defence mechanism in adulthood where he or she tries to deal with the feeling of helplessness (Wolf, 1988). This narcissist will have a fragile perception of the self in the helpless state, so they may feel compelled to do something to preserve the integrity of the self.

Alternatively, situations in which power or specialness is over rewarded may create a sense of vulnerability in the child (Johnson, 1987). Parents may also cause narcissistic injury when they transfer caretaking roles to their children. A child who takes care of their parents will have authority and trust issues.

Besides, a child whose achievements elicit envious reactions from parents will experience this condition, as well. The reverse may also be true when a parent lives through their child’s accomplishments, this may also wound the child’s self (Johnson, 1987).

Childhood memories of incidences that spark narcissistic rage never disappear. In fact, whenever a person destroys the object that caused him temporary helplessness or shame, another substitute will spark off those feelings again. These experiences in childhood will thus predispose an adult into a pathological state of paranoia (Wolf, 1988).

Therefore, Kohut (1966) suggests that therapists must attempt to find the source of that narcissistic discontentment. The importance of tracing one’s childhood experiences is vital to treatment of narcissistic behaviour disorders, according to the self psychology theorist. Intersubjective agreement on the latter fact exists among object relations theorists, as well.

Masterson (1981) explains that the degree to which a child’s real self is supported and acknowledged by parents makes a lot of difference. The real self, according to this author is a combination of both good and bad things; it is also spontaneous and autonomous. Almaas (1996), an integral theorist, reiterates that the wrong interpretation of what a child is can cause a sense of betrayal and hurt.

Consequently, this leads to confusion about the self. Essentially, the person will grow to become narcissistic. Blanck and Blanck (1974), who are ego theorists, also demonstrate intersubjective agreement by arguing that children loose their self esteem because they get fixated on valuation of the self object.

Masterson (n.d., para. 15) also echoes the above sentiments concerning parenting. He claims that persons with narcissistic disorders tend to come from unsupportive homes. Many of their parents try to mould them into perfect beings without thinking about their emotional needs.

Therefore, a child will try to be perfect in order to meet a parent’s ideal projections. In adulthood the person will develop a grandiose sense of self in order to protect himself from feelings of abandonment or failure by the parent. Additionally, if one or all the parents have narcissistic disorders, then chances are the child’s real self will not be supported, and this will lead to narcissism in the child, as well (Masterson, n.d., para. 38).

Freud and Kohut also concur on the relevance of idealisation. When children idealise their parents, they learn about the importance of empathising and caring for others through mirroring (Blanck and Blanck, 1974). This allows them to sooth themselves in situations that demand it.

Therefore, if ideal role models lack in a child’s life, then they will not have someone to mirror the importance of self worth or the usefulness of empathising with others. Consequently, these subjects’ lack of human identification is reflected in the narcissistic condition, where they do not empathise, identify or care for others.

Ambitions and ideals in the narcissistic individual

Agreement amongst various scholars also exists on the relevance of ideals and ambitions in development of narcissism. Kohut (1966) explains that hurt pride and inferiority feeling can be manifested very differently in the narcissist. Failure to reconcile an individual’s ideal with the self can cause immense shame. Usually, a person’s conception of the ideal emanates from their parents or mother (Lee and Martin, 1991).

If their perception of the ideal differs tremendously from the self, then narcissistic tension will arise. Masterson (1981) also demonstrates intersubjective agreement on the same.

He uses the example of authority; a person’s concept of ideal authority emanates from their parent’s manifestation of the same. If a parent was too authoritative or too weak, then chronic problems on ideal authority will arise. The individual may not even trust their own authority.

Freud acknowledged that all human beings have inherent drive. He further asserted that drive could either be directed towards death or life. While a number of future psychologists rejected the aspect of death drive, they still concurred with Freud on the relevance of ambition in life (Wolf, 1988). If applied to narcissism, individuals who fail to use the life drive effectively often experience a sense of inadequacy.

Likewise, Kohut (1966) also explains the relevance of drive and ambition in the disorder. He clearly differentiates between useful ambition and dangerous drive. To Kohut, a person can possess either competitive aggressiveness or narcissistic rage. If objects come in the way of one’s goals, then competitive aggressiveness can arise.

The psychological consequences of this type of anger is almost insignificant because once the goal has been attained, no psychological residues will exist (Wolf, 1988). A healthy person can easily go through one competitive situation to another without bringing up issues of the past. Conversely if self objects threaten the image of self, then narcissistic rage can arise.

The narcissistic individual thinks of others as a means of sustaining the self; if they cease performing this function, and instead do the reverse, then they must be eradicated. Narcissistic rage arises when the person feels helpless about his situation after others have damaged it (Kohut, 1966).

The goal of therapy

Several scholars also agree on reactions of narcissists during therapy. Many adherents to the self psychology theory agree that constraints of time and resources may interfere with the effectiveness of therapy. This is especially because it may lead to irritation in the analysand. Additionally, because the narcissistic individual always focuses on indulging the self, then certain behaviour may be perceived as a threat to the client.

For instance, the person may interpret prolonged silence as an attack against him. Additionally, if a therapist appears to be too rigid and neutral, then this may spark off narcissistic rage (Wolf, 1988). Usually, the severity of the situation is determined by its resemblance to past causes of narcissism. It is at such moments that the concerned therapist can intervene by explaining and interpreting the situation to the client.

Healing may take place through restoration of the self. On the flipside, these irritations in therapy may be so disturbing that they may destroy the therapist’s credibility to the patient. In such circumstances, the patient may terminate his sessions as he cannot reconcile damage to the self and the therapeutic intervention.

Usually, failure will occur if the therapeutic situation is too severe or too much of a trigger for narcissistic rage (Kohut, 1966). In other scenarios, treatment of narcissistic rage may not just occur in persons with narcissistic personality disorders. On occasion, people with borderline personality may also have the condition. In such scenarios, interpretations can be more detrimental than helpful to treatment.

The client may respond to intervention as a threat to the self. In such situations, the counsellor must demonstrate empathy and exercise a lot of patience before tangible results can be seen (Wolf, 1988).

Masterson also represents the object relations view of this perspective by adding that most narcissists find it hard to accept therapeutic help because it involves surrender. In their childhood, most of them had to become helpless and powerless in order to get their family’s attention; consequently, it is understandable when they do not want to put themselves in that vulnerable situation again (Masterson, 1981).

Narcissism marginalises the act of surrender and causes many individuals to respond negatively to psychological intervention. Therefore, one of the goals of therapy should be to explain the usefulness of surrender. Counsellors ought to identify instances of love, generosity and care, which depend on surrender as a core principle.

Masterson (1981) concurs with Kohut (1966) in terms of identifying and explaining instances of misunderstood emotions. Aside from surrender, Masterson (1981) also reiterates that making a therapeutic alliance with narcissistic patients is fragile. He explains that it stems from the developmental fixation that occurred in the patient’s life. As a result, such a person may respond negatively to certain qualities of therapy.

The narcissist has challenges with maintenance of boundaries and difficulties in handling frustration. Therefore, therapists must be wary of these challenges and expect periodic breakdowns. It is the effective management of these breakdowns that lead to success in management f the condition (Masterson, n.d.).

Freud also demonstrated intersubjective agreement regarding the goal of treatment. He believed that one must trace the source of the patient’s triggers. Oedipal dynamics come into play here (Blanck & Blanck, 1974).

A therapist ought to identify the stage in the patient’s development where the libido (or the psychic energy) got fixed. Sometimes these memories may be repressed and the client may not know that the source of his narcissistic behaviour stems from a certain stage. The therapist must work with the patient in order to identify those aspects. To do this, one must determine the issues that cause the patient to become highly sensitive.

For instance, the person may complain about a business partner who let him down or a spouse who did the same. A theme of betrayal may emerge from these interventions. Consequently, one should trace the instances of betrayal in the patient’s childhood that may have led to this hypersensitivity or betrayal.

To Freud, and other ego psychologists, therapists must reconstruct measures conducted by the ego (the safeguard of a person’s innate desires and passions) calculatingly. Since the ego represses things or carries out its actions invisibly, then one must identify the missing elements in one’s psychology and work around it thoroughly.

Freud and other scholars like Kohut also agreed on the reparenting roles in therapy. Both psychologists argue that transference can take place between the patient and the therapist. In essence, the patient starts thinking of the counsellor as an idealised parent. The professional can then give them some of the things that they think they missed. Masterson (1981) also talks about the relevance of transference in treatment.

The psychologist explains that transference ought not to be perceived as an object relationship; instead, the therapy should be merely regarded as a temporary board in which the patient can direct his conflicts. However, he adds that effective transference only takes place when the patient views the therapist in a realistic light; that is, as an imperfect person.

In Jungian theory, scholars also echo the above sentiments about the goal of therapy. These adherents claim that psychologists should strive to get to the self, where the self is one of a number of Jungian archetypes. Jung believed that the self is at the core of the personality. If a person can unite all the aspects of the self, then he can become whole again. Therapists handling narcissistic patients should strive for integration.

Conclusion

Intersubjective agreement exists on the definition and manifestation of narcissism. Object relations, Freudian, and self psychologist theorists all agree that narcissistic subjects have an illusionary self confidence and feeling of superiority. However, these depictions disguise feelings of inadequacy.

Additionally, intersubjective agreements also exist in regard to the origin of narcissism in infancy. Scholars in the self psychology school as well as the Freudian school agree that narcissistic disorders start from infancy, where a child’s love for himself is narcissistic.

Intersubjective views on the development of narcissism in childhood revolve around the supportive role of the family and finding the real self. Psychologists representing divergent psychodynamic theories believe that parental projections in children can hamper the development of the true self and thus cause narcissist injury.

Objects relations theorists emphasise fixation on the self object while Freudians dwell on oedipal fixation; self psychologists talk about the inferior sense of self. All these scholars agree on psychological injury in one’s childhood.

Lastly, agreement also exists on the goal of therapy among various psychodynamic theorists. At the heart of their arguments is the need to identify the source of incompleteness in one’s self.

Self psychologists suggest the use of empathy and transference; Freudians also talks about transference while object relations theorists emphasise reconciliation of the self with the self object. Additionally, all scholars also agree on the fragility of therapeutic setting with these kinds of subjects.

References

Almaas, A. (1996). The point of existence. Boston: Shambhala Press.

Blanck, Gertrude, & Blanck, Rubin. (1974). Ego psychology: Theory and practice. New York: Columbia University Press.

Forman, M. (1976). Narcissistic disorders and the oedipal fixations. In J. Feldstein (Ed.), The Annual of Psychoanalysis (pp. 65-92). New York: International Universities.

Johnson, S. (1987). Humanizing the narcissistic style. New York: Norton

Kohut, H. (1966). Forms and Transformations of Narcissism. In C. Strozier (Ed.), self psychology and the humanities (pp. 97-123). New York: Norton.

Lee, R. and Martin, C. (1991). Psychotherapy After Kohut: A Textbook of Self Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: The Analytic Press.

Masterson, J. (n.d.). Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy of the Narcissistic Personality Disorder (Closet): A Developmental Self and Object Relations Approach. Web.

Masterson, J. (1981). The narcissistic and borderline disorders. New York: Brunner/Mazel.

Millon, T. and Davis, R. (1996). Disorders of Personality: DSM-IV and Beyond. New York: Wiley.

Reich, A. (1986). Pathological forms of self-esteem regulation. In A. P. Morrison (Ed.), Essential papers on narcissism (pp. 44-60). NY: McMillan.

Wolf, E. (1988). Treating the Self: Elements of Clinical Self Psychology. New York: The Guilford Press.

Wurmser, L. (1981). The Mask of Shame. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP.

Click Here To Order Now!