Category Archives: Personality

Narcissistic Personality Disorder In Therapy: A Pointless and Unpleasant Endeavor

Like everyone on Axis 2, the person with Narcissistic Personality Disorder thinks they are fine. Obviously the problem is everybody else. They will just go through their whole life blaming other people. That’s how they ride.

They rarely if ever show up for therapy, and when they do, it is often at the behest of others who are forcing them into therapy because the narcissists is driving these people insane and ruining their lives. Once in therapy, the narcissist plays games, engages in a boatload of manipulation, does no work on themselves because after all there is nothing to be done, and often engages in a lot of ego and narcissistic games with the therapist, including insulting the therapist, thinking he is better than the therapist and telling him so, deciding that the therapist is a lousy therapist, etc.

If you tell them they are narcissists, will generally either reject the diagnosis, ignore it, blow it off with some humorous blustery remark, decide that psychiatry is a pseudoscience, or say, “So what? I like being this way.”

They might take it as an insult, but they usually will not react aggressively. Instead you will see a spark of recognition and alarm in their eyes. The narcissist is not an idiot. Many are highly intelligent and in fact, sadly it goes with the territory. At some level, most if not all narcissists now what is going on. The problems is they don’t care, or they like to be this way.

If you keep reminding the narcissist of what he is, he will stop being flippant about it and start getting aggressive. Expect dirty fighting, devious and crafty manipulation, nasty insults, or walking out of the room. Keep it up, and the narcissist will just end the relationship. The narcissist is not going to sit there and let you call him a narcissist all day. He’s too good for such degrading treatment. If he cannot do that, at some point, he will probably create a nuclear explosion of a fight and try to terrorize you into not bringing up the subject again.

Generally speaking, they are a complete waste of time in the office, therapy with them is often quite unpleasant, and nothing gets done anyway. It’s not uncommon for the therapist to simply fire the narcissist as client, informing him that nothing is getting done. This a relief to the narcissist, as now he has an excuse to quit the degrading therapy. Technically this is client abandonment and an ethics violation, but the decision is always mutual, and nothing was getting done anyway, so why prolong the pointless endeavor?

Theoretically, the narcissist can be cured. Since lions cannot change into tigers, all we can do with personality disorders is turn the bad side of a basic personality type into the good side of that type. The good side of Narcissistic Personality is Confident Personality. These people can be a bit much too, but they are healthy enough that they can function quite well especially in a hyper-competitive capitalist society like ours. The goal of therapy with an NPD is to turn them into a Confident Personality. But good luck with that.

There is so much more to talk about with narcissism and NPD, but let’s leave that for another day.

17 Comments

Filed under Ethics, Mental Illness, Narcissistic, Personality, Personality Disorders, Psychology, Psychopathology, Psychotherapy

“‘Leaders’ and ‘Followers’ among Blacks,” by Phil

In my observations as both a researcher of native Blacks during the time periods of exploration and colonization as well as being a Black individual, I’ve happened to find a similar variation in terms of personality of “leaders” and “followers” when it comes to conformity amongst Blacks.

First, I will start with my thesis supported by my personal anecdotes, compare that with the anecdotes from my research on the pattern within a native environment, then state my concluding thoughts in the qualities of a “Leader” vs a “ Follower” in Black population.

Referring back to a previous article of my where I commented “I didn’t think I was Black,” I meant that I didn’t conform to Black groups or say common Black interest in way of social trends. With that said, while I haven’t met too many Blacks like me, I did notice considerable variation in personalities. Also, in addition, I will describe them in terms of phenotypes to guesstimate their ancestry ratios due to White ancestry possibly being a co-hypothesis in my thesis. Now, some will mention in the case of the Tutsis, that skin color alone isn’t very accurate in terms of determining ancestry. I agree, for my studies have shown that adding the variable of facial features or phenotype will reflect better results.

Number One would be a junior who I’ve met this year in my AP Calculus class named Cole. Cole, in terms of phenotypes, seemed more or less as admixed as I am. His eyes were seemed to have a similar distance from each other, though his lips weren’t as big as mine. His skin hue was overall browner (his being around “Earth 1,” and mine being closer to “Clay 2-3”) than mine, and our jaws were somewhat equally medium prognathous. Based on his head, he didn’t seem to have a receding forehead like other Blacks, which will be shown in other subjects.

In terms of personality and classwork, he was more industrious, calmer, and attentive. Overall, despite not really showing intellectual introvert characteristics like me, he was a better student than I was, thus is why he is still in the class, and I decided to leave. It wasn’t that I couldn’t understand the material, but for me I worked better with word problems because there was more to analyze, and there was a scenario for me to apply. Simple “solve” problems were too boring, and sadly, I became idle in my work.

Number Two will be a 2nd semester Medical Terminology classmate named Tyquan. He was overall darker and more prognathous than or Cole or I are and darker in hue (Earth 3), As far as his personality goes, he is, like Cole, calmer than me and overall a nice guy. His intellectual faculties didn’t come off as very strong, though he did seem like the type who would be obedient towards extra effort.

Number Three will be a first semester AP English student who I sadly didn’t catch the name of. Overall, he seemed as pure as a Black person gets in this country. He resembled a villager in many respects in terms of facial features, muscularity, and skin tone (about Earth 4) and was somewhat shorter than me. He, however, was not only calm like the others but particularly sweet in his manner and speech.

Number Four will be a General Biology classmate named Nehemiah. He had a similar Black phenotype to Tyquan or Number Three, third, yet his head and face were overall taller than theirs. Concerning hue, he was about an Earth 4 or 5. He was an extrovert, and thus was more disruptive and less calm than I am, though if were to compare us on aggressiveness, he was still aggressive than I am.

Number Five will be a boy named Marcus. In appearance he was similar to the previous subjects, particularly Tyquan, although he was notably overweight, and his skin seemed to be an Earth 6. In terms of personality, he projected more extroversion than Nehemiah, though he differed in lacked inhibition, being loud and less obedient. But he had the same humorous character as like Nehemiah.

Now we will move to a phenomenon taking place with West African Natives.

See here.

Here are details of personalities of various slaves, in particular some of whom were noted to have a decent temper.

As far as these types reacting to conformity, here’s what I found.

In the scope of cannibalism, being described as a major vice in the Calabar at the time, one man described his servant as of Eboe (being the slang for Calabar at the time, where true Ibo country was more to the west) origin, and describing the servant’s shame when he admitted to eating flesh during a cannibalistic ceremony.

Another one of similar origin wasn’t as embarrassed in doing this, for he explained that his tribe only did it to war enemies, and when asked, he said he wouldn’t eat his “Massa,” but he would eat his Master’s enemies. John Baker’s Race even shows near-individualist behavior in the Azande of Central Africa, a cannibal group of much fame at the time, where he mentions another man who refused to take part in the practice.

As far as I could tell, these types would meet either of two fates, being successful through conformity, or falling victim of beatings or even slavery due to their gentle nature.

The overall contrast between the Leaders and the Followers in these works seemed to be that the Followers were overall more gentle, sharing similar vices as the other Blacks but on a lesser scale. I don’t think I need to explain who the “Leaders” were. They were the main source of any mayhem or trouble. The Followers, though not all true individualists, were more likely to follow gruesome or horrific customs in lockstep fashion rather than actually embody the nature of them as the Leaders did.

This observation may tie into Robert’s posts about where line between the where the Ghetto Black begins and the “Good Blacks” ends and vice versa, but once we get to a subject like Marcus or perhaps Nehemiah, things get Fuzzy.

6 Comments

Filed under Africa, Anthropology, Blacks, Central Africa, Cultural, Guest Posts, Personality, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, West Africa

Aryan Invasion Again and Why Narcissism Is the Core Indian Personality

Nelly (note fake British female name) an Indian nationalist, writes:

I personally find it so funny that so many people hold onto the Aryan Invasion theory with such tenacity. This theory was made popular by Hitler, which is really funny because he was also the same person who said that the superior people were those with blonde hair and blue eyes, and also went around claiming that Jewish people were evil and should be exterminated.

Today, the majority of people know that those with blonde hair and blue eyes are not superior to any other people nor are Jewish people evil and should be eliminated. That being said, why do so many people still believe the Aryan invasion theory even though it came from a man who did nothing but spread lies in an effort to brainwash people? Why are you guys so selective in what you want to believe as being true? Why does Hitler’s credibility suddenly increase for the entire Aryan theory?

I don’t usually get involved in these debates because I realize that everyone is entitled to his or her opinion and I respect that. But, there is a difference between what is an opinion and what is a fact. And the fact is that the word “Arya” is Sanskrit for “noble.”

Max Mueller, who came up with the idea of two Aryan races, used this discovery as a means of showing the common ancestry between the Indians and Europeans, not as a form of racism (Esleben, 2008, F. Max Müller, Biographies of Words and the Home of the Aryas (1888), Kessinger Publishing reprint, 2004, p.120; Dorothy Matilda Figueira, Aryans, Jews, Brahmins: Theorizing Authority Through Myths of Identity, SUNY Press, 2002, p.45).

There is also a mountain of evidence that debunks the idea of there ever having been an invasion. Archeologists and researchers have never found any indication that an invasion occurred as the skeletons discovered never suggested that an invasion ever occurred  (Gregory L. Possehl, 2002, The Indus Civilization: A Contemporary Perspective, Rowman Altamira, p. 238, ISBN 9780759101722).

The majority of Western scholars don’t refer to it as an “invasion” because they are educated enough to know that it isn’t. Those who still call it an invasion are not viewed as being credible by the rest of Western scholars, but are rather seen as racist. (Witzel, Michael, 2005, “Indocentrism”, in Bryant, Edwin; Patton, Laurie L., The Indo-Aryan Controversy. Evidence and Inference in Indian History (PDF), Routledge).

Again, I’m not expressing any opinions in the last three paragraphs. I’m literally just stating facts. That is, information that has been proven to be true by people who are experts in this topic. So, if you choose to attack me, then I don’t know what to say except go hash it out with the experts who, after years and years of research, came up with these theories instead of me.

My remarks: The Aryan Invasion Theory was not created by Hitler. The Indians called themselves Aryans. They didn’t need Mueller or Hitler to make it up. Iran means “Aryan.”

Almost all Western scholars agree that the theory is true. Only a few crackpots and nuts disagree, and they are very isolated and cannot even publish in peer reviewed journals because their theories are so antiscientific. It is not a fringe theory. It is cutting-edge modern social science.

Further, I believe that there is excellent evidence of an actual Aryan Invasion that resulted in a vicious war that left many dead and entire cities in the Indus Valley razed to the ground.

And you won’t get called racist for calling it the Aryan Invasion Theory either. You might be called that by some idiot Indian, but who cares what Indians think about this or much of anything really?

This response is also interesting.

First of all, in order to show how well read they are, this Indian nationalist peppers her comment with a lot of nice references. I admit that the references are nicely done, and I commend the commenter for her scholarship. However, I must painfully point out to this apparently blind commenter that every single one of those quotes that she quoted actually supports the Aryan Invasion Theory instead of opposing it. So her references do not support her thesis; instead they disprove it!

I see so many Indian nationalists and Hindutvadis come here adopting European-sounding names, both first names and surnames.

We even had an extreme Indian nationalist here posting under “Snow is fun.” Snow is white. It’s white and cold, and there’s not much of it in most of inhabited India. To me, giving himself that name meant that he secretly wanted to be Scandinavian. And in fact, he was an Indian expat posting from Sweden.

Others post under names like “Arya” and then proceed to rip the Aryan invasion theory to shreds. And note how many of the wildest Indian nationalists have long bailed out of Shithole India for the hated White Man’s Land, where they paradoxically live so much better than they do in glorious Bharat Mata.

They hate Whites, but they disguise their identities under White first names and last names.

They hate Whites and consider them inferior to superior Indians, yet they left superior India for inferior White man land where they somehow live much better than in Mother India.

They call themselves Arya yet viciously attack the Aryan Invasion Theory.

They hate Whites but post from Sweden.

They hate Whites but call themselves Arya.

They hate Whites but come from a society that worships White skin like a God.

They hate Whites but give themselves names describing white things like snow that are only found in cold climates were Whites are common.

They hate Whites but call themselves “Snow is fun,” which to me means “I love Whiteness.”

In other words, almost all of these Indian nationalists are absolutely crazy. The cognitive dissonance here would deafen you.

Furthermore, obvious psychological complexes such as inferiority complex, envy, reaction formation, projection, denial, narcissism, false confidence, etc. are painfully evident here. The “Indian complex” seems to be characterized by hatred and envy for their “inferiors” who they secretly ape, emulate and live among. The painful recognition that their “inferiors” are actually superior to their falsely “superior” selves is blatantly on display.

Hatred, envy, false and fragile overconfidence, an inferiority complex and especially the subconscious knowledge that their “inferior” rival is actually better than their “superior” selves and the resulting shame and rage that this engenders is almost a textbook definition of the narcissist.

I suggest that narcissism is the base personality of many Indians, especially the nationalists, ultranationalists and Hindutvadis.

24 Comments

Filed under Asia, Asian, East Indians, Hinduism, History, India, Narcissism, Nationalism, Personality, Political Science, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, Religion, South Asia, South Asians, Ultranationalism, Whites

In Praise of Eccentricity

Found on the Net:

Weeks’ aim is to encourage the acceptance and cultivation of eccentricity in society, he said, and where necessary, he also hopes to familiarize mental health workers with eccentricity as a condition distinct from mental illness. This new understanding, he believes, will prevent patients from being wrongfully committed to mental hospitals when they are simply eccentric (an infrequent but not unheard-of scenario, Weeks said).

While eccentrics may exhibit one or two symptoms that are consistent with mental illness, they retain a hold on reality and have insight into their own behavior, he said. The psychologist has identified 20 traits indicating that a person may be eccentric.

A much-needed turnaround. Ever read the psychiatric literature, especially the older stuff from say the 1930’s? I am reading some right now. Check out the case studies. Damn those guys had some rigid ideas about how a healthy person should live their life. I think the mental health field needs to get away from microscopically examining everyone to look for hidden signs of maladaptive or unhealthy behavior, poor adjustment, oddness, or just not doing what you’re supposed to do, whatever the Hell that might be.

We should be looking at people for signs of healthy and adaptive behavior, good adjustment at least in some areas and and overall functionality. If can function pretty well, you can’t be all that nuts. Wouldn’t that be cool? Instead of getting out the DSM whenever anyone shows up, we should have a Mental Health Manual where we go down and check lists of healthy and adaptive behaviors, decent adjustment and especially ability to function decently in society. We could give people mental health diagnoses instead of mental illness diagnoses. That would be so boss!

Eccentricity means different things. If a Normie ever calls you eccentric, watch out. They will say it as they shake their head fatalistically or frown dismissively.

They mean you are nuts, and they think that sucks. And that you suck, sort of.

I am not sure if they mean you are really nuts. Normies aren’t all idiots. Normies are assholes, but they’re not necessarily dumb. They might mean that you are not nuts enough to be seriously crazy, and you might still be able to function pretty well in some areas, but you’re definitely not normal at all. You’re weird. You’re odd. You’re strange. And there’s nothing a Normie hates worse.

If any Normie ever insults you like that, just end the damn friendship right there. I am serious. They’re never going to like you. Not ever. It’s dead, Jim. Sure, you can stay friends with them, but they will be frenemies, and the friendship will suck. I have had scores of sucky friendships. The Hell with it. I’d rather be alone. At least when I’m alone, I’m hanging around with someone who likes me.

There are other people who are ok with eccentricity, and they may even cultivate it themselves. I have had some girlfriends tell me that I’m eccentric, but they were crazy in love with me at the time, so it wasn’t an insult. Usually someone who doesn’t mind your eccentricity is at least a little that way themselves. They are often in the arts somehow – artists, writers, dancers, musicians, actors – if only as fans, hangers on or hobbyists. In the arts, eccentricity is often a cultivated and desired state. When an artist calls you eccentric, that’s probably a compliment!

Anyway, I would like to see more tolerance for eccentricity in society and I hope people would quit calling eccentrics crazy. I know they won’t. but one can always hope. And of course clinicians should learn what’s non-pathological eccentricity and what’s pathological mental disorder. And if you’re eccentric, and you can’t seem to figure out how to not be eccentric no matter how hard you try (my boat), you really need to embrace it and quit beating yourself up. Quit calling yourself weird, nuts, crazy, strange, odd or disturbed. You’re none of those things. Accept your eccentricity as you accept any other things about yourself and embrace and incorporate it into your identity in a positive way.

1 Comment

Filed under Mental Illness, Personality, Psychology, Psychopathology, Psychotherapy

Another Way of Looking at IQ: Extra-IQ Factors

RL: Incidentally, two of the brightest commenters on my blog had IQ’s of 113 and 117. The 117 IQ guy was fantastic at philosophy and other forms of abstract thinking. The other fellow was into genetics and anthropology, but he thought in much the same way. A few of these types are so bright that you almost think that their score is wrong. I am not sure what is going on except maybe they are working their brains extra hard, or they have filled their brains up with all sorts of goodies.

Oops I did it again: Myers-Briggs (Jungian) type, life experiences, economic status, degree of neuroticism (“Work their wits hard”), the brain faculty we call “sensitivity”, the other we call “fantasy”, all are factors.

This is so correct. Jim Flynn wrote a book the premise of which was something like “factors above and beyond IQ.” He showed how 1st and 2nd Generation Northeast Asians in the US (mostly Japanese and Chinese) were often working at jobs up that usually required IQ’s 20 points above their level. In other words, a 100 IQ Japanese-American would be functioning on the job at the same level as a typical 120 IQ ordinary American. In other words, the NE Asians might have an IQ of 100, but on his on the job performance was the same as someone with a 120 IQ.

Flynn called these “extra-IQ factors.” In other words, on the job, IQ isn’t everything. I forget what the extra-IQ factors were but they seemed to be things like punctuality, responsibility, resilience, psychological stability, regular attendance, studiousness, reliability, seriousness, conscientiousness, hard working nature, and stick-to-it-iveness or what some are now calling “grit” which boils down to “if at first you don’t succeed, try, try again,” or continuing to hammer away at a problem even after repeated failure – not giving up.

So you see there are personality factors that you can add to your IQ score so you perform at a higher level than your IQ would predict.

I was thinking of this in terms of Blacks, that maybe Blacks could cultivate some extra-IQ factors that would allow them to overcome some of their disadvantage due to lower average IQ. If an 85 IQ Black person could function on the job at the same level as we expect a 105 IQ person to perform at, I think the position of Blacks in the US could improve a lot. Unfortunately the wort of things that were helping the NE Asians were sort of “nerd factors, square factors, uptight factors” that Blacks just don’t seem to do well in, mostly because they look down on this sort of excessive seriousness.

Nevertheless, I am open to the idea of harnessing extra-IQ factors in Blacks to help them to perform better in school and work. Harnessing what seems to be their innate social skills and extroversion might be one of these things.

Myers-Briggs or Jungian personality type: Yes, certain personality types might help one perform above their IQ level.

Life experiences: Correct. Certain types of life experiences and lessons learned and skills gained from them could help push you above your IQ level.

Economic status: Yes, a higher economic status might help you to perform above your IQ level.

Degree of neuroticism or working their wits hard: Correct. Someone who pushes their brain into overdrive and characteristically pushes their mind and intellect to its limits in an almost challenge-testing near-athletic competitive manner could surely perform above their IQ level. I think I have seen some examples of this in my life.

Sensitivity as a brain factor: I could see how this would help you perform above your IQ level, but I am wondering just what this factor is.

Fantasy as a brain factor: If this means something like creativeness or open mindedness or the tendency to think outside the box, I could see how this would help you.

7 Comments

Filed under Asians, Blacks, Chinese (Ethnic), Intelligence, Japanese, Northeast Asians, Personality, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity

Is There Such a Thing as Very High IQ Behavior?

Rowlii writes:

Thanks for your answer. Is there a “High IQ” behaviour?

Sort of, but not really. My mother and and all of my siblings have very high IQ’s (140+), and we are all quite different. However, three of us are quite shy and are probably introverts. The other one is more introverted than he lets on.

It is hard for me to answer this question because I have not known the IQ’s of most of the people I have known in my life. I know the IQ’s of my family members, but I never learned the IQ’s of many of my friends or even the vast majority of my girlfriends. This is not to mention the more casual acquaintances I have run into. So I have only really known maybe ~13 people in my whole life who had very high IQ’s. Obviously I have run into a lot more high IQ people than that, but in the course of life, you usually never learn the IQ’s of most of the people you meet and hang out with.

Of those 13 people, they were sometimes a bit different from each other. I wish I could say that there was something stringing them together, but I cannot.

It also depends on what you mean by high IQ. Very high IQ is usually defined as 140+ (top 1%). High IQ might be defined as 130+ (top 3.5%) or maybe even lower. It depends on where you set the bar.

Some of us are a lot more extroverted than others. I am shocked at how extroverted many very high IQ women are. Very high IQ men tend not to be so extroverted, but some of them are quite capable extroverts. Many seem quite normal, even shockingly normal. One of the sanest men I have ever met had an IQ of 160. He is also the highest IQ person that I have ever known. On the other hand, there also seems to be a tendency towards mental illness, in particular depression and manic depression. Somehow there is a connection between very high IQ and mood disorders.

I do not know any very high IQ people who have Aspergers. This is largely a myth. We are a lot better at socializing than you might think. I don’t know any very high IQ people who are social retards. I know some who are assholes, but social retards, no. Social skills and figuring your way around human interaction is an intellectual skill, and it can be learned. Most of the very high IQ people I have known seem to have learned that skill quite well.

There are a lot of questions along these lines on Quora under the IQ topic, and a lot of very high IQ people are answering those questions. The questions are along the lines of “What is it like to have an IQ of 140/150?”, etc. Then a lot of very high IQ people answer the questions. People who are interested in the topic may want to head over there are read what those people say. There are of very smart, interesting, wise and eloquent people writing over there, and you can learn quite a few things from the handy to the esoteric.

One of the answers that you see over and over is that very high IQ people say they see patterns everywhere. Many say that they are always observing all the time and looking for underlying patterns in everything they see and everywhere they go. They’re always trying to put it all together, see the big picture, or view the world in a holistic way.

To answer a question in a holistic way is to see things in a larger pattern of the whole question, so to speak, taking into account everything. It’s another way of saying seeing the whole picture. We try not see the trees and miss the forest, if you catch my drift. Sure, we look at individual trees and groups of trees and even try to figure out what they mean or relationships between them, but at the end of the day, we still want to put all of those individual trees together into some sort of a forest.

I would say that very high IQ people are a lot smarter than you think they are. You might think that they are out to lunch, but most of them are very much on the ball. I had a girlfriend with an IQ of 140, and she immediately got all of my jokes and funny little comments. It was like instantly, bam! Also I did not have to explain many things to her. She just got most things BOOM like that as fast as you could blink your eyes.

I got to know a woman with a 156 IQ recently, and she was fast as lightning. She understood everything you said and was also very curious. If she didn’t understand anything you were saying, she would ask you to explain it. Then I would explain it to her and even if it was something that she did not know much about, and when I explained it to her, she caught on very fast.

There was none of this, “I don’t know what you are talking about.” One thing that amazed me about her was how I could be talking about a subject that she obviously knew little about, and she would ask me to explain the concept. And she would pick up this previously unknown concept very quickly, faster than almost anyone I have met. When I was talking with her it was just BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM like that.

I like to play games with speech and toss in esoteric comments, analogies, references to movies, books, songs, famous people and events, sayings, famous lines and riddles. A lot of these might be odd little puns of worldplay. If you have ever read James Joyce, I am doing something like that, just playing games with language and also with knowledge. A lot of the time people don’t have the faintest idea what I am doing, so I try not to do this too much, but when I am on the ball, I can do this like crazy.

Most people think I am insane or very weird but some smart people can catch all the little jokes and references. I am not crazy at all. I am talking like that on purpose.

Sometimes I speak on multiple levels. I might say something easily understandable to anyone, but if you listen closely I am also throwing in things on a higher level so the message really has two levels, a simple lower level with the basic meaning and a higher level where I am often playing games.

I will throw in some line out of a book, a reference to an actor or a band or this or that in there. Most people don’t get the weird little word games, but it doesn’t matter because there is a basic message on the lower level in there that can be easily read and comprehended and the word games don’t mean anything anyway as I am just playing games with language and knowledge. It all depends on which levels you want to read the speech on.

Some very high IQ people are very fast. I have been told that I am fast too. Some people say that sometimes I have these funny little micro-movements around my face, mostly around my eyes but sometimes in my mouth too. One  person called them micro-emotions or micro-reactions. They say it doesn’t really look nervous but instead it almost looks there’s a fast computer in back of my face and all those little movements are the thing processing data.

A lot of the time I answer a question almost as soon as it has been asked. Sometimes I even start to answer it or I start nodding my head halfway through the sentence because I already know what the person is going to say in the rest of the sentence. Sometimes I finish people’s sentences for them.

Nothing much gets past me. I hear everything you say, and I am probably watching everything you do. I’m usually not confused. Life is not very confusing. This can work well for social skills because if you get that supercomputer working socially, you can respond to all of the little subtle changes in the conversation as it slowly changes as you are engaging in it.

Conversations are changing all the time, and you are supposed to be reacting to most everything the other person is saying or doing. They make a little movement, and you try to interpret and make some movement back. You respond emotionally to their remarks and even to their little micro-emotional changes. In a good, on the ball conservation there might be maybe 10 or more reactions and counter-reactions in a minute.

I am not sure if this is really a good thing because instead of seeing me as some with-it super smart social genius or saying,”Wow look at that guy, he seems like he has a Cray computer in back of his face – he’s so fast,” instead most people seem to think that I am weird. I am not sure why that is. Sometimes I think they are on a different wavelength than I am. I think they just don’t get it. They don’t get me.

A lot of very high IQ people will tell you that they feel that they are misunderstood. People misjudge them, misunderstand what they are saying, and either don’t understand them or read their comments in a completely different way than how they were intended. They read funny and sometimes false motives into our speech and behaviors that we did not intend to put out. This is because they are not understanding what we are trying to convey with our speech and behaviors. Once again, I think most people are just on some other wavelength than people like me and that’s why they seem to misunderstand us so much.

Very high IQ people will often say that they are good at making decisions and that they tend to make intelligent decisions because they weigh all of the possible answers to the question very carefully. On the other hand, I know some very high IQ people who live their lives idiotically and make the stupidest decisions. But that’s not because they are stupid, that’s more because of personality issues, in particularly massive psychological defenses that get in the way of rational behavior.

Just because you have a very high IQ is not guarantee against being crazy or building crazy, disordered and excessive defense systems that lead to characterological problems. Most of the poor life decisions I see very high IQ people making are not due to doing dumb things but instead there is some mental disorder going on there that is messing up their behavior.  Very high IQ people can definitely have characterological problems where their defensive structures have gotten so bizarre and excessive that they start to cause a lot of crazy and irrational behaviors.

I am not sure about people from 130-139 (high IQ or near genius), but I think they function better than a lot of us very high IQ types. With us very high IQ types, our IQ’s are so high that they are starting to get in the way of our lives, and they might even be making us strange or mentally disordered. The high IQ type is very, very smart, but an IQ in the 130’s is not going to have that correlation with mental illness and weirdness that you start seeing in some people above 140.

I have seen people in the 130’s who were very smart, and they were also superb social actors, very extroverted, etc. I spent a lot of time with two men. One had an IQ of 139, and another had a 135 IQ. It would be quite hard to say that I was smarter than either of them, and they were both whip-fast sharp, especially the 139 IQ guy, who is a relative. He is just BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM BAM. He has also been an alcoholic for decades which has wrecked his life, but he is still whip-fast smart despite the decades of booze.

Once you get into the high IQ range (130-150), I don’t see a lot of differences between me and someone with an IQ of say 129-139. They seem like they are about as smart as I am. Past a certain point, I do not think the scores mean all that much. You end up with really smart people and there’s probably not a lot of observable difference between really smart people even if one is smarter than the other. You’re probably not going to be able to see how the higher IQ person is smarter because the differences all seem to wash out at high IQ levels.

Frankly I do not think that most of you want to be as smart as I am. Yes, there is huge upside, but there is also a massive downside at least for me. The downside is probably avoidable, but you still might get it. Sometimes I think it is better not to be this smart. I am so smart that it almost gets in the way of life, and most of you might not want to live like that.

42 Comments

Filed under Intelligence, Mental Illness, Mood Disorders, Personality, Psychology, Psychopathology

List of Famous Sociopaths

Enoch writes:

Robert, you seem to be very knowledgeable on sociopathy/psychopathy.

What famous people (excluding serial killers) do you think are true psychopaths?

Are or were?

Here is my list. Feel free to comment.

  1. Hitler (diagnosed)
  2. LBJ
  3. Max Hardcore (surely)
  4. Kenneth Lay (definitely)
  5. Tom Cruise (also very narcissistic)
  6. Robert Blake
  7. Suge Knight
  8. Bris Brown
  9. 50 Cent
  10. Harvey Weinstein
  11. Phil Spector
  12. Christian Bale
  13. Courtney Love (also a narcissist with Borderline Personality Disorder)
  14. Khan Tusion
  15. Steve Jobs
  16. Ted Cruz
  17. Ray Sharkey
  18. Naomi Campbell
  19. Saddam Hussein
  20. Dick Cheney
  21. Rupert Murdoch
  22. Ayn Rand
  23. L. Ron Hubbard
  24. Fred Phelps
  25. Mitch McConnell
  26. Grover Norquist
  27. Rush Limbaugh (also a narcissist)
  28. Bill O’Reilly (also narcissist)
  29. Dick Fuld
  30. Chris Brown
  31. Mitt Romney
  32. Bernie Madoff (certainly)
  33. Jeff Skilling
  34. Aretha Franklin
  35. Joe Jackson
  36. Eddie Nash
  37. Alan Dershowitz
  38. Mark Wahlberg
  39. Jimmy Saville (very much so)
  40. Al Dunlap (surely)

15 Comments

Filed under Celebrities, Mental Illness, Narcissism, Personality, Personality Disorders, Psychology, Psychopathology, Sociopathy

Introverts, Extroverts, Pure Introverts and Frustrated Extroverts

Gregory Chelli writes:

I think introverts generally have a lower social intelligence than extroverts.

Autistics are true introverts, they don’t like to be with others because they don’t understand them well. They are like naturally bad at maths people who don’t like maths as a result of their incapacity. There are probably no bad at maths people who fantasizing about equation and maths problems, as there are no autistics fantasizing about being in a conversation with people.

The frustrated extroverts or extroverted loners you are talking about are generally persons with high social intelligence who can’t fully use their gift in real life because of some emotional problem, like timidity for example. So, as you said, they end up created imaginary social situations in their mind to relax themselves. An analogy would be a math genius who is prevented to do maths for some reason, like being in jail. He would be thinking about imaginary maths problem most of the time without being able to do real math stuff on a blackboard or in a notebook.

There are probably true introverts with high social intelligence and true extroverts with low social intelligence. But these ones are exceptions. People generally like to do what they are good at.

NB: people with extremely high social intelligence may not be interested in people, because the general population would look autistic, and thus not interesting to them.

What do you think of this comment?

I suppose it depends on the definitions of introvert and extrovert. Supposedly 80% of the population are extroverts, whatever that word means. True introverts are only 20% of the population, whatever that word means. I suppose extroverts really like to be around people. Introverts like to be around people a little of the time but not a lot of the time. They need their space. I know introverts will talk at a dinner table for a bit and then retreat to their bedroom with a book. Or you will talk to them at a table for a bit, but then they want to stop talking and read the paper.

Introverts absolutely do not sit around fantasizing about being around people all the time when they are alone. Forget it. And anyone who does that is not an introvert. Forget it. They’re just not. Normies would probably insist that this person is an introvert or a “loner” just because they are alone all the time. But Normies are retarded.

I would say that just because you are alone all the time doesn’t mean you are a loner! How about that?

Now we need to define the word loner. Normie retards say that loners are people who are alone all the time, but that’s not the definition of a loner. A true loner or real loner is someone who really has need or use for other people and simply prefers to be alone all the time because that is what makes them happy. If they are forced to be around people, they probably try to leave after a while because they start to feel uncomfortable.

If you are alone all the time but you don’t enjoy it or you hate it and you dream of being around people, you are not a real loner. Really you are not a loner at all. We might call you a “fake loner.” In this case, we are looking at the difference between real loners and fake loners.

I think introverts like being alone, but they don’t want to be alone all the time, although there are some who do.

I do not think shy people are necessarily introverts. Nor are social phobics for that matter. Normies say they are, but Normies are idiots. For instance a shy person who does not really like to be alone a lot but ends up being alone due to shyness is not an introvert. Forget it. Especially so if the shy person is fantasizing about being around people all the time.

I would gather that that person has probably not been shy their whole lives. Perhaps there was a time when they mingled with people much easier, but then something happened to them, and they turned shy. The reason they are fantasizing being around people all the time is because at one point in their life, they were doing this, it was going well, and they were having a lot of fun. In other words, they want the old times back again.

Or perhaps they may have an anxiety disorder. Quite a few extroverts develop anxiety disorders. If a person develops an anxiety disorder, it doesn’t really matter how good their social skills are because they will not be able to use them well. They may well know all the rules and have all the skills, but when the anxiety comes out, it’s all for naught because 100% of the people around them are going to reject them in one way or another. They may well even be extroverts who like the idea of being around people, but the anxiety kills off all the fun by making everyone reject them and makes being around people a great big drag. Eventually they might just stop trying.

Normie idiots think only introverts get anxiety disorders, but that’s just not so. I have even heard of cases where wild, hypersocial, life of the party types in their teens developed social phobia at age 18 to the point of hardly being able to leave their houses. There has been no actual personality change here, and true personality change is not common anyway. The person has simply become ill. Theoretically, if you could cure that illness, the shyness would go away, and they would be their old hypersocial selves again because that is who they are deep down inside.

I do not believe that the deep down inside person really changes in most cases. Normie morons insist, “Anyone can change their personality,” but that’s just wrong. You are what you are. Your personality is your personality. You’re stuck with it. Get used to it. It’s yours. All yours. That said, no one is stuck with a lousy personality.

One theory is that there are good and bad sides to all personality types. The good side of Antisocial personality is Aggressive Personality. The good side of Narcissistic Personality is Confident Personality. The good side of Borderline Personality is Sensitive Personality. I believe the good side of Dependent Personality is Devoted Personality, and the good side of Paranoid Personality is Cautious Personality.

8 Comments

Filed under Antisocial, Anxiety Disorders, Autism, Borderline, Dependent, Mental Illness, Narcissistic, Personality, Personality Disorders, Psychology, Psychopathology

Are “Extroverted Loners” Really Loners?

Found on the Net:

Extroverted loner – An extroverted loner would prefer to mingle with others for relaxation but for some reason ends up spending most of their time alone.

– Stuart K. Hayashi. Life in the Market Ecosystem. Lexington Books. 2014.

An extroverted loner is someone who longs to be around people but for whatever reason ends up being alone a lot of the time. To me, these people are just not real true loners at all. An extroverted loner, for instance, would spend a good part of his time when alone fantasizing that he was with other people. I have worked with people who spent most of their time alone, but they told me that most of the time they were alone they were fantasizing that they were with other people. I told these people that there was no way that they were real loners, and I did not even feel that they were true introverts. This sort of person might be thought of as a “frustrated extrovert.”

The reason I think these folks are not introverts is because real introverts do not spend most of their time when alone fantasizing that they were with other people. When real introverts are alone, they are perfectly happy, and they are not fantasizing that they are with other people. Perhaps they are quite happy to be away from people for a bit.

I am dubious if all shy people are really introverted. Probably many shy people are true introverts and are quite happy to be away from others. Yet some shy people are frustrated extroverts. I have met people who told me that they were very shy, and they spent a lot of time alone, but when alone, they spent most of their time fantasizing that they were with others.

I would say that it all boils down to your fantasies. Your fantasies tell you who you are. If you want to figure out who you really are, examine your fantasies. There is the secret key to your psyche.

So this indicates that a shy person can also be a frustrated extrovert. Perhaps they are afraid to approach others or fear being rejected.

If you go up to people, even those you see regularly even at say work, and try to make friends with them, there is no guarantee at all that that person will make friends with you. I understand this quite well. I am quite sure that there were a number of people I worked with who probably did not want to be friends with me at all. That’s normal and expected, but it shows you what happens if you walk up to people, even people you know fairly well, and try to make friends with them. You may well be blown off.

I have been blown off in this way hundreds to thousands of times in my life, and I have also had probably hundreds of friends down through the years. Most people probably just don’t want to be your friend. Quite possibly a few folks want to be your friend, but it’s not so easy to figure out who they are, and they might not approach you.

Most people are retarded Normies, and Normie retards do not understand what “loner” means. A loner means someone who dislikes people, has no use for them and is perfectly happy to be alone all the time. However, Normie morons think that everyone who is alone all the time is a loner! Not true! If they are very unhappy being alone all the time and long to be with others, then they are not loners at all! But all Normies are retarded, so they just can’t seem to figure that out. I forgot to add that there is no human being that a Normie hates more than a “loner,” even though they don’t even understand what the word means.

5 Comments

Filed under Personality, Psychology

“Brooding” People

What do you all think of “brooding” people? I had a girlfriend a while back who noted once when I as in her bedroom one night that I had a “brooding” look about me. She compared me to a former boyfriend who was a brilliant writer and former university professor who had turned into an alcoholic. He also wrote fiction. Apparently he was a brooder too.

I had no idea that I was a brooding fellow, but then we can’t see ourselves very well, and maybe it’s better that way.

You would think women would hate brooding types, but she seemed to be intrigued, fascinated and maybe even a little turned on by a dark, brooding sort of man. Sort of like he was mysterious and vaguely frightening.

She also told me that she wanted to dump another boyfriend in favor of me because he was boring. She told me that I was scary, but “scary is hot” and scary guys turned her on a lot. So one more argument in favor of running Bad Boy Game I suppose. Apparently women like scary men? Do they?

I looked up “brooding” on the Net, and this is what I came up with:

Thinking gloomily about something, ruminating anxiously or regretfully about something. A tortured soul. Thoughtful or morbidly obsessed, deeply or seriously thoughtful, persistent morbid meditation on a problem, turning something over in the mind moodily and at length, feeling sad, worried, or angry for a long time, making you feel uncomfortable or worried as if something bad is going to happen, deep in thought.

Leave a comment

Filed under Personality, Psychology, Romantic Relationships