Most journalists are narcissists. They almost have to be to stand up in front of a camera and talk to people. That even includes youtube commentators. Wouldn't you agree?
This is a short-sighted and shallow take, as most sweeping generalizations tend to be. I have to wonder, how much do you actually know and understand about narcissism? There appears to be room for interpretation and debate on what constitutes narcissism, based on what I know from the literature, which leads to very interesting discourse. To assume that most people who engage in certain lines of work are narcissists, however, is severely lacking in scope and rationality.
If you're committed to this line of thinking, why would you stop at journalism or commentators? I believe it was Robert Greene who argues that the act of writing, in itself, is a narcissistic endeavor. It was an idea that I had never considered before, mostly due to the obvious negative connotations that pretty much everyone associates with the term narcissism, but when you consider the fact that all children have elevated levels of narcissism, and this is normal and healthy for a child, the one-dimensional perception and interpretation of narcissism dissolves by itself.
Greene's idea that writing is inherently a narcissistic activity is something I can definitely understand and, perhaps, agree. Moreover, in his interpretation of narcissism a psychologically healthy person is someone who maintains a balance with their "inner narcissist." According to Greene, the ones who tend to be labeled narcissists are those who have excessively high or low levels of narcissism, because it's generally only with those people that we can observe narcissism coming out. This would, at least, align with the definitions of vulnerable and grandiose narcissism. Greene is certainly no psychologist and neither am I, but I'm sure he has done his due diligence in researching at least some of the literature before conceiving his own theories. That's why I wouldn't claim that his theories are authoritative on the matter.
My question is: do you claim to know any authoritative source on narcissism that validates your take? And if not, does that not make you at least a little bit narcissistic?
Most journalists are narcissists. They almost have to be to stand up in front of a camera and talk to people. That even includes youtube commentators. Wouldn't you agree?
No, I would not.
This is a short-sighted and shallow take, as most sweeping generalizations tend to be. I have to wonder, how much do you actually know and understand about narcissism? There appears to be room for interpretation and debate on what constitutes narcissism, based on what I know from the literature, which leads to very interesting discourse. To assume that most people who engage in certain lines of work are narcissists, however, is severely lacking in scope and rationality.
If you're committed to this line of thinking, why would you stop at journalism or commentators? I believe it was Robert Greene who argues that the act of writing, in itself, is a narcissistic endeavor. It was an idea that I had never considered before, mostly due to the obvious negative connotations that pretty much everyone associates with the term narcissism, but when you consider the fact that all children have elevated levels of narcissism, and this is normal and healthy for a child, the one-dimensional perception and interpretation of narcissism dissolves by itself.
Greene's idea that writing is inherently a narcissistic activity is something I can definitely understand and, perhaps, agree. Moreover, in his interpretation of narcissism a psychologically healthy person is someone who maintains a balance with their "inner narcissist." According to Greene, the ones who tend to be labeled narcissists are those who have excessively high or low levels of narcissism, because it's generally only with those people that we can observe narcissism coming out. This would, at least, align with the definitions of vulnerable and grandiose narcissism. Greene is certainly no psychologist and neither am I, but I'm sure he has done his due diligence in researching at least some of the literature before conceiving his own theories. That's why I wouldn't claim that his theories are authoritative on the matter.
My question is: do you claim to know any authoritative source on narcissism that validates your take? And if not, does that not make you at least a little bit narcissistic?