The Development Psychology of Psychopathology
S >>
Sam Vaknin >> The Development Psychology of Psychopathology
Pages:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 (c) 2002 Copyright Lidija Rangelovska.
The Developmental Psychology of Psychopathology
1st EDITION
Sam Vaknin, Ph.D.
Editing and Design:
Lidija Rangelovska
Lidija Rangelovska
A Narcissus Publications Imprint, Skopje 2003
Not for Sale! Non-commercial edition.
(c) 2002 Copyright Lidija Rangelovska.
All rights reserved. This book, or any part thereof, may not be used or
reproduced in any manner without written permission from:
Lidija Rangelovska - write to:
palma@unet.com.mk or to
vaknin@link.com.mk
Visit the Author Archive of Dr. Sam Vaknin in "Central Europe Review":
http://www.ce-review.org/authorarchives/vaknin_archive/vaknin_main.html
Visit Sam Vaknin's United Press International (UPI) Article Archive
Philosophical Musings and Essays
http://samvak.tripod.com/culture.html
Malignant Self Love - Narcissism Revisited
http://samvak.tripod.com/
Created by: LIDIJA RANGELOVSKA
REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA
C O N T E N T S
I. The Narcissistic Parent
II. The Narcissist's Mother
III. Born Alien
IV. Parenting - The Irrational Vocation
V. The Development of Narcissists and Schizoids
VI. Serial Killers
VII. Sex, or Gender
VIII. The Author
IX. About "After the Rain"
The Narcissistic Parent
By: Dr. Sam Vaknin
Question:
Is there a "typical" relationship between the narcissist and his family?
Answer:
We are all members of a few families in our lifetime: the one that we
are born to and the one(s) that we create. We all transfer hurts,
attitudes, fears, hopes and desires - a whole emotional baggage - from
the former to the latter. The narcissist is no exception.
The narcissist has a dichotomous view of humanity: humans are either
Sources of Narcissistic Supply (and, then, idealised and over-valued)
or do not fulfil this function (and, therefore, are valueless,
devalued). The narcissist gets all the love that he needs from himself.
From the outside he needs approval, affirmation, admiration, adoration,
attention - in other words, externalised Ego boundary functions. He
does not require - nor does he seek - his parents' or his siblings'
love, or to be loved by his children. He casts them as the audience in
the theatre of his inflated grandiosity.
He wishes to impress them, shock them, threaten them, infuse them with
awe, inspire them, attract their attention, subjugate them, or
manipulate them. He emulates and simulates an entire range of emotions
and employs every means to achieve these effects. He lies (narcissists
are pathological liars - their very self is a false one). He plays the
pitiful, or, its opposite, the resilient and reliable. He stuns and
shines with outstanding intellectual, or physical (or anything else
appreciated by the members of the family) capacities and achievements.
When confronted with (younger) siblings or with his own children, the
narcissist is likely to react in three phases:
At first, he perceives his offspring as a threat to his Narcissistic
Supply Sources (his turf, the Pathological Narcissistic Space). He does
his best to belittle them, hurt (also physically) and humiliate them
and then, when these reactions prove ineffective or counter productive,
he retreats into an imaginary world of omnipotence. A period of
emotional absence and detachment ensues. The narcissist indulges
himself in daydreaming, delusions of grandeur, planning of future
coups, nostalgia and hurt (the Lost Paradise Syndrome). The narcissist
reacts this way to the birth of his children or to the introduction of
new foci of attention to the family cell (even to a new pet!). Whatever
the narcissist perceives to be competition for scarce Narcissistic
Supply is relegated to the role of the enemy. Where the uninhibited
expression of the aggression and hostility aroused by this predicament
is considered illegitimate - the narcissist prefers to stay away. He
disconnects, detaches himself emotionally, becomes cold and
disinterested, directs transformed anger at his mate or at his parents
(the more legitimate targets).
Other narcissists see the opportunity in the "mishap". They seek to
manipulate their parents (or their mate) by "taking over" the newcomer.
Such narcissists monopolise their siblings or their newborn children.
This way, indirectly, the narcissist basks in the attention directed at
the infants. An example: by being closely identified with his
offspring, a narcissistic father secures the grateful admiration of the
mother ("What an outstanding father he is"). He also assumes part of or
all the credit for baby's/sibling's achievements. This is a process of
annexation and assimilation of the other, a strategy that the
narcissist makes use of in most of his relationships.
As the baby/sibling grows older, the narcissist begins to see their
potential to be edifying, reliable and satisfactory Sources of
Narcissistic Supply. His attitude, then, is completely transformed. The
former threats have now become promising potentials. He cultivates
those whom he trusts to be the most rewarding. He encourages them to
idolise him, to adore him, to be awed by him, to admire his deeds and
capabilities, to learn to blindly trust and obey him, in short to
surrender to his charisma and to become submerged in his
folies-de-grandeur. These roles - allocated to them explicitly and
demandingly or implicitly and perniciously by the narcissist - are best
fulfilled by ones whose mind is not fully formed and independent. The
older the siblings or offspring, the more they become critical, even
judgemental, of the narcissist. They are better able to put into
context and perspective his actions, to question his motives, to
anticipate his moves. They refuse to continue to play the mindless
pawns in his chess game.
They hold grudges against him for what he has done to them in the past,
when they were less capable of resistance. They can gauge his true
stature, talents and achievements - which, usually, lag far behind the
claims that he makes.
This brings the narcissist a full cycle back to the first phase. Again,
he perceives his siblings or sons/daughters as threats. He quickly
becomes disillusioned and devaluing. He loses all interest, becomes
emotionally remote, absent and cold, rejects any effort to communicate
with him, citing life pressures and the preciousness and scarceness of
his time. He feels burdened, cornered, besieged, suffocated, and
claustrophobic. He wants to get away, to abandon his commitments to
people who have become totally useless (or even damaging) to him. He
does not understand why he has to support them, to suffer their company
and he believes himself to have been trapped. He rebels either
passively-aggressively (by refusing to act or intentionally sabotaging
the relationships) or actively (by being overly critical, aggressive,
unpleasant, verbally and psychologically abusive and so on). Slowly -
to justify his acts to himself - he gets immersed in conspiracy
theories with clear paranoid hues. To his mind, the members of the
family conspire against him, seek to belittle or humiliate or
subordinate him, do not understand him, stymie his growth. The
narcissist usually finally gets what he wants and the family that he
has created disintegrates to his great sorrow (due to the loss of the
Narcissistic Space) - but also to his great relief and surprise (how
could they have let go someone as unique as he?).
This is the cycle: the narcissist feels threatened by arrival of new
family members - assimilation of siblings or offspring - obtaining
Narcissistic Supply from them - overvaluation of these new sources by
the narcissist - as sources grow older and independent, they adopt anti
narcissistic behaviours - the narcissist devalues them - the narcissist
feels stifled and trapped - the narcissist becomes paranoid - the
narcissist rebels and the family disintegrates. This cycle
characterises not only the family life of the narcissist. It is to be
found in other realms of his life (his career, for instance). At work,
the narcissist, initially, feels threatened (no one knows him, he is a
nobody). Then, he develops a circle of admirers, cronies and friends
which he "nurtures and cultivates" in order to obtain Narcissistic
Supply from them. He overvalues them (they are the brightest, the most
loyal, with the biggest chances to climb the corporate ladder and other
superlatives).
But following some anti-narcissistic behaviours on their part (a
critical remark, a disagreement, a refusal, however polite, all
constitute such behaviours) - the narcissist devalues all these
previously over-valued individuals. Now they are stupid, cowardly, lack
ambition, skills and talents, common (the worst expletive in the
narcissist's vocabulary), with an unspectacular career ahead of them.
The narcissist feels that he is misallocating his resources (for
instance, his time). He feels besieged and suffocated. He rebels and
erupts in a serious of self-defeating and self-destructive behaviours,
which lead to the disintegration of his life.
Doomed to build and ruin, attach and detach, appreciate and depreciate,
the narcissist is predictable in his "death wish". What sets him apart
from other suicidal types is that his wish is granted to him in small,
tormenting doses throughout his anguished life.
The Narcissist's Mother
By: Dr. Sam Vaknin
A. The Loved Enemies - An Introduction
An oft-overlooked fact is that the child is not sure that it exists. It
avidly absorbs cues from its human environment. "Am I present?", "Am I
separate?", "Can I be noticed?" - these are the questions that compete
in his mind with his need to merge, to become a part of his caregivers.
Granted, the infant (ages 0 to 2) does not engage in a verbal
formulation of these "thoughts" (which are part cognitive, part
instinctual). This nagging uncertainty is more akin to a discomfort,
like being thirsty or wet. The infant is torn between its need to
differentiate and distinguish its SELF - and its no less urgent urge to
assimilate and integrate by being assimilated and integrated.
"Just as we know, from the point of view of the physiologist, that a
child needs to be given certain foods, that he needs to be protected
against extreme temperatures, and that the atmosphere he breathes has
to contain sufficient oxygen, if his body is to become strong and
resilient, so do we also know, from the point of view of the
depth-psychologist, that he requires an empathic environment,
specifically, an environment that responds (a) to his need to have his
presence confirmed by the glow of parental pleasure and (b) to his need
to merge into the reassuring calmness of the powerful adult, if he is
to acquire a firm and resilient self."
(J. D. Levine and Rona H. Weiss. The Dynamics and Treatment of
Alcoholism. Jason Aronson, 1994)
The child's nascent self must first overcome its feelings of
diffusiveness, of being an extension of its caregivers (to include
parents, in this text), or a part of them. Kohut says that parents
perform the functions of the self for their child. More likely, a
battle is joined from the first breath of the child: a battle to gain
autonomy, to usurp the power of the parents, to become a distinct unit.
The child refuses to let the parents serve as its self. It rebels and
seeks to depose them and take over their functions. The better the
parents serve as self-objects (in lieu of the child's self) - the
stronger the child's self becomes, the more vigorously it fights for
its independence. The parents, in this sense, are like a benign,
benevolent and enlightened colonial power, which performs the tasks of
governance on behalf of the uneducated and uninitiated natives. The
more lenient the colonial regime - the more likely it is to be
supplanted by an indigenous government.
"The crucial question then is whether the parents are able to reflect
with approval at least some of the child's proudly exhibited attributes
and functions, whether they are able to respond with genuine enjoyment
to his budding skills, whether they are able to remain in touch with
him throughout his trials and errors. And, furthermore, we must
determine whether they are able to provide the child with a reliable
embodiment of calmness and strength into which he can merge and with a
focus for his need to find a target for his admiration. Or, stated in
the obverse, it will be of crucial importance to ascertain the fact
that a child could find neither confirmation of his own worth-whileness
nor a target for a merger with the idealised strength of the parent and
that he, therefore, remained deprived of the opportunity for the
gradual transformation of these external sources of narcissistic
sustenance into endopsychic resources, that is, specifically into
sustaining self-esteem and into a sustaining relationship to internal
ideals." [Ibid.]
B. The Narcissistic Personality
"When the habitual narcissistic gratifications that come from being
adored, given special treatment, and admiring the self are threatened,
the results may be depression, hypochondriasis, anxiety, shame,
self-destructiveness, or rage directed toward any other person who can
be blamed for the troubled situation. The child can learn to avoid
these painful emotional states by acquiring a narcissistic mode of
information processing. Such learning may be by trial-and-error
methods, or it may be internalised by identification with parental
modes of dealing with stressful information."
(Jon Mardi Horowitz. Stress Response Syndromes: PTSD, Grief and
Adjustment Disorders. Third edition. New York, NY University Press,
1998)
Narcissism is fundamentally an evolved version of the splitting defence
mechanism. The narcissist cannot regard humans, situations, entities
(political parties, countries, races, his workplace) as a compound of
good and bad elements. He is an "all or nothing" primitive "machine" (a
common metaphor among narcissists). He either idealises his object - or
devalues it. The object is either all good or all bad. The bad
attributes are always projected, displaced, or otherwise externalised.
The good ones are internalised in order to support the inflated
("grandiose") self-concepts of the narcissist and his grandiose
fantasies - and to avoid the pain of deflation and disillusionment.
The narcissist's earnestness and his (apparent) sincerity make people
wonder whether he is simply detached from reality, unable to appraise
it properly - or willingly and knowingly distorts reality and
reinterprets it, subjecting it to his self-imposed censorship. I
believe that the narcissist is dimly aware of the implausibility of his
own constructions. He has not lost touch with reality. He is just less
scrupulous in remoulding it and in ignoring the uncomfortable angles.
"The disguises are accomplished by shifting meanings and using
exaggeration and minimisation of bits of reality as a nidus for fantasy
elaboration. The narcissistic personality is especially vulnerable to
regression to damaged or defective self-concepts on the occasions of
loss of those who have functioned as self-objects. When the individual
is faced with such stress events as criticism, withdrawal of praise, or
humiliation, the information involved may be denied, disavowed,
negated, or shifted in meaning to prevent a reactive state of rage,
depression, or shame." [Ibid.]
The second mechanism which the narcissist employees is the active
pursuit of Narcissistic Supply. The narcissist actively seeks to
furnish himself with an endless supply of admiration, adulation,
affirmation and attention. As opposed to common opinion (which
infiltrated literature) - the narcissist is content to have ANY kind of
attention. If fame cannot be had - notoriety would do. The narcissist
is obsessed with the obtaining of Narcissistic Supply, he is addicted
to it. His behaviour in its pursuit is impulsive and compulsive.
"The hazard is not simply guilt because ideals have not been met.
Rather, any loss of a good and coherent self-feeling is associated with
intensely experienced emotions such as shame and depression, plus an
anguished sense of helplessness and disorientation. To prevent this
state, the narcissistic personality slides the meanings of events in
order to place the self in a better light. What is good is labelled as
being of the self (internalised) Those qualities that are undesirable
are excluded from the self by denial of their existence, disavowal of
related attitudes, externalisation, and negation of recent
self-expressions. Persons who function as accessories to the self may
also be idealised by exaggeration of their attributes. Those who
counter the self are depreciated; ambiguous attributions of blame and a
tendency to self-righteous rage states are a conspicuous aspect of this
pattern.
Such fluid shifts in meanings permit the narcissistic personality to
maintain apparent logical consistency while minimising evil or weakness
and exaggerating innocence or control. As part of these manoeuvres, the
narcissistic personality may assume attitudes of contemptuous
superiority toward others, emotional coldness, or even desperately
charming approaches to idealised figures." [Ibid.]
Freud versus Jung
Freud must be credited with the promulgation and presentation of a
first coherent theory of narcissism. He described transitions from
subject-directed libido to object-directed libido through the
intermediation and agency of the parents. To be healthy and functional,
the transitions must be smooth and unperturbed. Neuroses are the
results of such perturbations.
Freud conceived of each stage as the default (or fallback) of the next
one. Thus, if a child reaches out to his objects of desire and fails to
attract their love and attention - it regresses to the previous phase,
to the narcissistic phase. The first occurrence of narcissism is
adaptive. It "trains" the child to love an object, albeit merely his
self. It secures gratification through the availability, predictability
and permanence of the loved object (=oneself). But regressing to
"secondary narcissism" is mal-adaptive. It is an indication of failure
to direct the libido to the "right" targets (to objects, such as his
parents).
If this pattern of regression persists and prevails, a narcissistic
neurosis is formed. The narcissist stimulates his self habitually in
order to derive pleasure and gratification. He prefers this mode of
deriving gratification to others. He is "lazy" because he takes the
"easy" route of resorting to his self and reinvesting his libidinal
resources "in-house" rather than making an effort (and risking failure)
to seek out libidinal objects other than his self. The narcissist
prefers fantasyland to reality, grandiose self-conception to realistic
appraisal, masturbation and fantasies to mature adult sex and
daydreaming to real life achievements.
Jung had a mental picture of the psyche as a giant warehouse of
archetypes (the conscious representations of adaptive behaviours).
Fantasies to him are just a way of accessing these archetypes and
releasing them. Almost ex definitio, regression cannot be entertained
by Jungian psychology. Any reversion to earlier phases of mental life,
to earlier coping strategies, to earlier choices - in other words, any
default - is interpreted as simply the psyche's way of using yet
another, hitherto untapped, adaptation strategy. Regressions are
compensatory processes intended to enhance adaptation and not methods
of obtaining or securing a steady flow of gratification.
It would seem, though, that there is only a semantic difference between
Freud and his disciple turned-heretic. When libido investment in
objects (esp. the Primary Object) fails to produce gratification,
maladaptation results. This is dangerous. A default option is
activated: secondary narcissism. This default enhances adaptation, it
is functional and adaptive and triggers adaptive behaviours. As a
by-product, it secures gratification. We are gratified when we exert
reasonable control over our environment, i.e., when our behaviours are
adaptive. The compensatory process has TWO results: enhanced adaptation
and inevitable gratification.
Perhaps the more serious disagreement between Freud and Jung is with
regards to introversion. Freud regards introversion as an instrument in
the service of a pathology (introversion is indispensable to
narcissism, as opposed to extroversion which is a necessary condition
for libidinal object-orientation).
As opposed to Freud, Jung regards introversion as a useful tool in the
service of the psychic quest for adaptation strategies (narcissism
being one of them). The Jungian adaptation repertoire does not
discriminate against narcissism. To Jung it is as legitimate a choice
as any. But even Jung acknowledged that the very need to look for a new
adaptation strategy means that adaptation has failed. In other words,
the search itself is indicative of a pathological state of affairs. It
does seem that introversion per se IS NOT pathological (because no
psychological mechanism is pathological PER SE). Only the use made of
it CAN be pathological. One would tend to agree with Freud, though,
that when introversion becomes a permanent feature of the psychic
landscape of a person - it facilitates pathological narcissism.
Jung distinguished introverts (who habitually concentrate on their
selves rather than on outside objects) from extroverts (the converse
preference). According to him, not only is introversion a totally
normal and natural function, it remains normal and natural even if it
predominates the mental life.
This is where, to my mind, Jung missed the proverbial "narcissistic
train". The habitual and predominant focussing of attention upon one's
self, to the exclusion of others is THE definition of pathological
narcissism. What differentiates the pathological from the normal and
even the welcome is, of course, degree. Pathological narcissism is
ex-clusive and all-pervasive. Other forms of narcissism are not. So,
although there is no healthy state of habitual, predominant
introversion, it remains a question of form and degree of introversion.
Often a healthy, adaptive mechanism goes awry. When it does, as Jung
himself recognised, neuroses form.
Freud regards narcissism as a POINT while Jung regards it as a
CONTINUUM (from health to sickness).
Kohut's Approach
In a way, Kohut took Jung a step further. He said that pathological
narcissism is not the result of excessive narcissism, libido or
aggression. It is the result of defective, deformed or incomplete
narcissistic (self) structures. Kohut postulated the existence of core
constructs which he named: the "grandiose exhibitionistic self" and the
"idealised parent imago" [see below]. Children entertain notions of
greatness (primitive or naive grandiosity) mingled with magical
thinking, feelings of omnipotence and omniscience and a belief in their
immunity to the consequences of their actions. These elements and the
child's feelings regarding its parents (who are also painted by it with
a brush of omnipotence and grandiosity) - coagulate and form these
constructs.
The child's feelings towards its parents are reactions to their
responses (affirmation, buffering, modulation or disapproval,
punishment, even abuse). These responses help maintain the
self-structures. Without the appropriate responses, grandiosity, for
instance, cannot be transformed into adult ambitions and ideals.
So, to Kohut, grandiosity and idealisation are positive childhood
development mechanisms. Even their reappearance in transference should
not be considered a pathological narcissistic regression.
"You see, the actual issue is really a simple one ... a simple change
in classical [Freudian] theory, which states that autoeroticism
develops into narcissism and that narcissism develops into object love
... there is a contrast and opposition between narcissism and object
love. The (forward) movement toward maturation was toward object love.
The movement from object love toward narcissism is a (backward)
regressive movement toward a fixation point. To my mind (this)
viewpoint is a theory built into a non-scientific value judgement ...
that has nothing to do with developmental psychology."
(H. Kohut. The Chicago Institute Lectures 1972-1976. Marian and Paul
Tolpin (Eds.). Analytic Press, 1998)
Kohut's contention is nothing less than revolutionary. He says that
narcissism (subject-love) and object-love coexist and interact
throughout life. True, they wear different guises with age and
maturation - but they always cohabitate.
Kohut: "It is not that the self-experiences are given up and replaced
by ... a more mature or developmentally more advanced experience of
objects." [Ibid.]
This dichotomy inevitably led to a dichotomy of disorders. Kohut agreed
with Freud that neuroses are conglomerates of defence mechanisms,
formations, symptoms, and unconscious conflicts. He even did not object
to identifying unresolved Oedipal conflicts (ungratified unconscious
wishes and their objects) as the root of neuroses. But he identified a
whole new class of disorders: the self-disorders. These were the result
of the perturbed development of narcissism.
Pages:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7