The Empiricist

Psychology today has an utterly inane article on narcissistic personality disorder, and Glenn Reynolds has fallen for it, linking to it without comment (and therefore endorsing it).

Just why is being ‘narcissistic’ a disorder? Who is being harmed? Whatever happened to plain old “character flaws?”

I’m not disputing that some people are narcissistic, nor that such people can be manipulative, shallow, annoying, pains in the neck. But if narcissism is a trait, it is more likely to be a spectrum across the population, rather than a distinct class of individuals. Who hasn’t been arrogant on occasion, or shallow? Does watching “Survivor” indicate an underlying disorder?

To see the absurdity of it all, check out the “advice” Psychology Today gives for dealing with narcissists:

1. Butter him up
2. Let her be the center of attention
3. Be clear on the quid pro quo
4. Don’t cross him
5. Keep a sense of humor

Two things spring to mind.
First, won’t this strategy work with pretty much anyone, not just those suffering from the supposed disorder? For example, isn’t “keeping a sense of humor” always a worthwhile thing to do when dealing with other people?
And second, isn’t this advice extremely manipulative, deceptive and shallow? Isn’t it rather…. narcissistic?
Really, how many people – other than narcissists – could actually behave this way, buttering people up, flattering them with no other purpose but to control them, making someone the center of attention for their own hidden purposes? I sure couldn’t keep it up. It makes me wonder about value system and personality of the author of the article.

The whole thing just adds to my skepticism about personality disorders.