Astrology and Narcissism

MisterPlatypus said:

Re-read what I wrote. What I said is that people over-exaggerate when someone has a bit of an ego. It's actually quite healthy to have a sense of self-love.

Just read any psychology book.

Click to expand...

"Just read any psychology book." Thanks for being condescending and indirectly saying that I know nothing regarding psychology.

Having a sense of self-love is very different from having an over exaggerated ego. You said, that having an over exaggerated ego is healthy. That is, clearly, incorrect. Having self-love is healthy.

But someone with an afflicted sun in leo (or afflicted sun in general), or has Saturn in the 5th or has Saturn in Leo, would then fall on the narcissistic end because that healthy self-love is changed into an addiction to loving the self because there is a lack (saturn) of healthy self-love to begin with. So the person overcompensates with narcissism or an inflated ego. And that is most certainly not healthy, and so I called you out on it. That's why Leo's can be narcissistic compared to other signs. That is not sign bashing.

Mister, you are bringing a different perspective. Different than what OP had intended.

In popular usage, the terms narcissism, narcissist, and narcissistic denote absurd vanity and are applied to people whose ambitions and aspirations are much grander than their evident talents. Sometimes these terms are applied to people who are simply full of themselves -- even when their real achievements are spectacular. Outstanding performers are not always modest, but they aren't grandiose if their self-assessments are realistic; e.g., Muhammad Ali, then Cassius Clay, was notorious for boasting "I am the greatest!" and also pointing out that he was the prettiest, but he was the greatest and the prettiest for a number of years, so his self-assessments weren't grandiose....

Click to expand...

http://www.halcyon.com/jmashmun/npd/dsm-iv.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MisterPlatypus said:

Oh shizzle, that hurts. K.

Click to expand...

Did you just say shizzle?

I feel like there are people on this forum whom I know in real life. lol

What are the chances of this...

kamn said:

I presume that the important planets have to be in very early degrees. the chart ruler for both men and women. and Sun for men, and the moon for women. early degrees ar infant degrees, so the person doesn't mature and stays attached to objects, like parents etc...
This example also has the northnode in 4th, which in vedic astrology means that the person doesn't trust the world and is prone to drama emotional experience.
This example is extreme NPD - i know the person.

Click to expand...

That's really interesting! I never knew that planets with small degrees would point to not wanting to grow up.

Thanks for your insight!

It doesn't mean that in all systems of astrology. Traditionally in western astrology, earlier degrees are usually in terms of better planets, and later degrees are in terms of malefics.

Terms are a form of dignity, and they pertain to the body and physical existence.

Life tends to work out a lot better when you've got earlier degrees.

Hey, this is all about ME! Why are you going on about yourselves?

If I were a Narcissist, I wouldn't be perfect, which is why I know I'm not one.

MisterPlatypus said:

Are you sure this isn't sign bashing? What significance does Leo have to play?

Click to expand...

Hi Mister Platypus:

Each zodiac sign is a mixture of light and dark.
Therefore the energies in the charts can be expressed in a positive or negative way.

Obviously Leo energy can produce some excellent leaders. In fact, one of the greatest current world leaders is a Leo.

But we can also look around at others and see Leo energy being expressed in a pathological way.

Julia

What's the difference between a Narcissist and a Sociopath?

I think this is a valuable and interesting topic.
Good points are being made by everyone, worthy of further discussion.

Human behavior is complex and nuanced as is astrology.
To understand both, we have to get into the deep weeds.
It is best to stay calm, listen, respect in order to emerge with new understanding.

My .02.

Julia

Julia Karmic Astrology said:

There is an agreement in the clinical literature about the definition of Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
This is when the trait becomes pathological and interferes with normal functioning.
Of course, there can be more benign presentations of the trait of narcissism.

Here are the criteria for NPD:

Narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a cluster B personality disorder defined as comprising a pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), a constant need for admiration, and a lack of empathy.

Signs and symptoms
In the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5),[1] NPD is defined as comprising a pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), a constant need for admiration, and a lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by the presence of at least 5 of the following 9 criteria:

• A grandiose sense of self-importance
• A preoccupation with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
• A belief that he or she is special and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people or institutions
• A need for excessive admiration
• A sense of entitlement
• Interpersonally exploitive behavior
• A lack of empathy
• Envy of others or a belief that others are envious of him or her
• A demonstration of arrogant and haughty behaviors or attitudes

Click to expand...

I generally agree with this definition, although even definitions in clinical literature change through time but that was not my point.

I wanted to point out that here on the forum in different threads there are listed completely different features of NDP. And completely different definitions of placements in the natal chart.

This is what people should be concerned about.

This thread so far is not so problematic, but some of the threads are, since they are mostly describing the consequences of the abuse and traumatization, not the narcissism itself. Many people who were traumatized and abused don't develope narcisisstic traits, but many times they were abused by narcissists. You shouldn't mix symptoms of abused and traumatized people with NDP. You shouldn't mix PTSD, depression, anxiety, feelings of guilt, shame, feelings of being worthless. lack of confidence, panic attacks, etc. with narcisisstic behaviour. Since narcissism is many times associated with human evil, replacing the victims with their abusers is ethically problematic. It is not the same thing.

Considering definition of healthy narcissism - there is an attituted that we all need certain degree of narcissism in order to survive - you may call it healthy narcissism - certain degree of self respect and feelings of importance. The complete lack of narcissism (lacking any feelings of personal value) can be a problem - and this people become easy prey for narcissists or the result of narcissistic abuse.

I hope you people here can understand the difference.

david starling said:

What's the difference between a Narcissist and a Sociopath?

Click to expand...

Hi David,

Sociopathy (Antisocial Personality Disorder) differs from Narcissism, but certainly a person can have both disorders.

The essential features of narcissism are a pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy. The essential feature of sociopathy is a disregard for and violations of the rights others as indicated by having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from others.

The criteria for Antisocial PD:

Antisocial Personality Disorder
DSM-5 Criteria -

A. There is a pervasive pattern of disregard for and violation of the rights of others occurring since age 15 years, as indicated by three (or more) of the following: having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another.
1. Failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest.
2. Deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure.
3. Impulsivity or failure to plan ahead.
4. Irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults.
5. Reckless disregard for safety of self or others.
6. Consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations.
7. Lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing.
The essential features of a personality disorder are impairments in personality (self and interpersonal) functioning and the presence of pathological personality traits. To diagnose antisocial personality disorder, the following criteria must be met:


Julia

There's a big difference between being "self-located" and being "self-centered", the former being healthy, and the latter being unhealthy. Sagittarius has very little problem being self-located; Leo has to avoid a tendency to be self-centered, in large part because self-centered people get the most attention, even though it's not necessarily a good type of attention.

demetraceres said:

I generally agree with this definition, although even definitions in clinical literature change through time but that was not my point.

I wanted to point out that here on the forum in different threads there are listed completely different features of NDP. And completely different definitions of placements in the natal chart.

This is what people should be concerned about.

This thread so far is not so problematic, but some of the threads are, since they are mostly describing the consequences of the abuse and traumatization, not the narcissism itself. Many people who were traumatized and abused don't develope narcisisstic traits, but many times they were abused by narcissists. You shouldn't mix symptoms of abused and traumatized people with NDP. You shouldn't mix PTSD, depression, anxiety, feelings of guilt, shame, feelings of being worthless. lack of confidence, panic attacks, etc. with narcisisstic behaviour. Since narcissism is many times associated with human evil, replacing the victims with their abusers is ethically problematic. It is not the same thing.

Considering definition of healthy narcissism - there is an attituted that we all need certain degree of narcissism in order to survive - you may call it healthy narcissism - certain degree of self respect and feelings of importance. The complete lack of narcissism (lacking any feelings of personal value) can be a problem - and this people become easy prey for narcissists or the result of narcissistic abuse.

I hope you people here can understand the difference.

Click to expand...

Perhaps I should have given further information about the American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM 5), the source of the post about NPD Diagnosis above.

This is the handbook used by health care professionals in the United States and much of the world as the authoritative guide to the diagnosis of mental disorders. And yes there has been a great deal of change in the manual, it was first published in 1952 and in the past 60 years many advances have been made in the understanding and diagnosis of mental illness.

And yes, most human traits manifest on a continuum from heathy to pathological.
There is a difference between healthy traits and pathological ones. The bottom line is there an improvement or impairment in functional level.

And yes your point is well taken about the need to more clearly define terms. I think that is what you are saying? That there are threads with attempts to correlate various human traits with astrological placements, but with no real operational definition of terms involved. On the one hand, it is interesting to see the threads meander around the topic and go off on tangents. On the other hand, from a research standpoint, it is not an entirely efficient or productive methodology.

As an aside, I have found the forum regulars to be quite intelligent and open minded. And certainly capable of understanding fairly sophisticated concepts. Yes some of the younger members are a bit high spirited, but this can be delightful to observe and does not take away from how bright they are.

Julia

demetraceres said:

I generally agree with this definition, although even definitions in clinical literature change through time but that was not my point.

I wanted to point out that here on the forum in different threads there are listed completely different features of NDP. And completely different definitions of placements in the natal chart.

This is what people should be concerned about.

This thread so far is not so problematic, but some of the threads are, since they are mostly describing the consequences of the abuse and traumatization, not the narcissism itself. Many people who were traumatized and abused don't develope narcisisstic traits, but many times they were abused by narcissists. You shouldn't mix symptoms of abused and traumatized people with NDP. You shouldn't mix PTSD, depression, anxiety, feelings of guilt, shame, feelings of being worthless. lack of confidence, panic attacks, etc. with narcisisstic behaviour. Since narcissism is many times associated with human evil, replacing the victims with their abusers is ethically problematic. It is not the same thing.

Considering definition of healthy narcissism - there is an attituted that we all need certain degree of narcissism in order to survive - you may call it healthy narcissism - certain degree of self respect and feelings of importance. The complete lack of narcissism (lacking any feelings of personal value) can be a problem - and this people become easy prey for narcissists or the result of narcissistic abuse.

I hope you people here can understand the difference.

Click to expand...

This is true. However, to state one exhibits similar traits does not mean they suffer from said disorder. A lot of people mistake this, even in practice.

So, the continuum would be from feeling "I don't matter at all" to "I'm the only one who matters". The Golden Mean would suggest the midrange position is best. "If I'm not for myself, who am I? And if I'm only for myself, what am I?" {paraphrasing a famous Rabbi}
This explains the symbiosis between a cult leader and his followers--he supplies identity for them, and they provide him with a social position he wouldn't otherwise have. Might also apply to religious "devotees" and their "Guru".

Julia Karmic Astrology said:

Perhaps I should have given further information about the American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM 5), the source of the post about NPD Diagnosis above.

This is the handbook used by health care professionals in the United States and much of the world as the authoritative guide to the diagnosis of mental disorders. And yes there has been a great deal of change in the manual, it was first published in 1952 and in the past 60 years many advances have been made in the understanding and diagnosis of mental illness.

And yes, most human traits manifest on a continuum from heathy to pathological.
There is a difference between healthy traits and pathological ones. The bottom line is there an improvement or impairment in functional level.

And yes your point is well taken about the need to more clearly define terms. I think that is what you are saying? That there are threads with attempts to correlate various human traits with astrological placements, but with no real operational definition of terms involved. On the one hand, it is interesting to see the threads meander around the topic and go off on tangents. On the other hand, from a research standpoint, it is not an entirely efficient or productive methodology.

As an aside, I have found the forum regulars to be quite intelligent and open minded. And certainly capable of understanding fairly sophisticated concepts. Yes some of the younger members are a bit high spirited, but this can be delightful to observe and does not take away from how bright they are.

Julia

Click to expand...

I am trying to adress several issues at the same time, so maybe my comments seem difficult to read and understand.

My comments on this topic have nothing to do with my perception of the forum and forum regulars here. I share similar experience and joy of reading mostly very intelligent and enlightening discussions.

I have comments on this topic because it is very special and it is opening the question of human evil, besides other questions. It seems that I would like to put all threads about narcissism under the same roof, but it is probably impossible.

I gave in my previous posts example of the older astrological definitions of narcissism and Sun-Venus conjunction is in the first line. In more updated texts I have noticed the primacy of Sun-Pluto aspects and here I have noticed also Venus-Pluto aspects.

The reason is probably in changing focus of the definition itself. Here is the copy of link Alrescha gave in her thread about clinical definition of NDP.

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy.[jma: NPD first appeared in DSM-III in 1980; before that time there had been no formal diagnostic description. Additionally, there is considerable overlap between personality disorders and clinicians tend to diagnose mixes of two or more. (the link from the other thread)

You can see that NPD is relatively new clinical definition and besides there are no clear clinical types in practical life. But the term narcissism is of course very old.

I suppose narcissism was in older times perceived as a personality trait with the focus on self admiration and as an expression of certain level of immaturity (but probably not seeing as a destructive force), while lately it became a synonym for personality disorder (mostly very destructive one) and it seems in astrology is also more connected with its manipulative side and control of others (including Pluto). That is why probably astrological focus changed.

I presume that in modern populare culture people with the term of narcissism have in mind very different personality traits - from being solely obsessed with appearance (for example) to playing destructive games with other people (including many other traits). This is why probably appear so many different astrological descriptions of narcissism.

Alrescha in her other thread really gave some good points and descriptions about social dynamics where narcissism is in play (this is also what I understand as the real clinical problem), while popular perception of narcissism is by my opinion really much broader.

Would the version of the fictional character Sherlock Holmes called "Sherlock", played by Benedict Cumberbatch, be considered a Narcissist, by your definition? Assuming you've seen the show, of course! There seems to be some implied self-admiration for his own self-admitted "sociopathic" personality, but Narcissism has other specific characteristics.