Tuesday, November 3, 2009

On The Positive and Negative Side of Narcissism (Hedonism, Egotism, Individualism)

I heard a commercial this morning on tv that sparked this brief DGB commentary.

The ad said something like this:

'When a man does something special -- something one of a kind -- he is proud to put his name to it.'

This beckons back to my dad's Ideal Capitalism influence and his introducing me to 'The Fountainhead' by Ayn Rand when I was in my late teens.

Succinctly put, narcissism - and egotism -- and pleasure-seeking -- and searching for the self-fulfillment or self-actualization of one's own Self, one's own Soul -- is not all bad. It is only bad when it gets twisted out of control, and you start moving down a path of one-sidedness, self-absorption to the point of everyone else's needs becoming inferior to your own, down a path of self-destructiveness and/or towards the destructiveness and/or tearing down of others around you. It is only narcissism out of control, narcissism gone wild, narcissism that excludes all others, that eliminates any and/or all feeling of compassion and sensitivity and humanism towards those around you, either close to you or far away -- that is the point where narcissism, hedonism, and egotism all become 'pathological' -- 'psycho-pathological' and 'socio-pathological'.


As for the healthy type of narcissism that I am talking about here, it is well described in this internet (Wikipedia) summary of Ayn Rand's famous book, The Fountainhead (1943).


....................................................................................................................................................

The Fountainhead is a bestselling 1943 novel by Ayn Rand. It was Rand's first major literary success and its royalties and movie rights brought her fame and financial security. More than 5 million copies of the book have been sold worldwide and the work has been translated in several languages. [1]
The Fountainhead's protagonist, Howard Roark, is an individualistic young architect who chooses to struggle in obscurity rather than compromise his artistic and personal vision. The book follows his battle to practice modern architecture, which he believes to be superior, despite an establishment centered on tradition-worship. How others in the novel relate to Roark demonstrates Rand's various archetypes of human character, all of which are variants between Roark, the author's ideal man of independent-mindedness and integrity, and what she described as the "second-handers." The complex relationships between Roark and the various kinds of individuals who assist or hinder his progress, or both, allows the novel to be at once a romantic drama and a philosophical work. By Rand's own admission, Roark is the embodiment of the human spirit and his struggle represents the triumph of individualism over collectivism.

......................................................................................................................................................

Howard Roark -- and my dad's own real-life vision and self-enactment of him -- became one of my own earliest idealistic role models.

However, without character, integrity, fairness, compassion, accountability, humanism, and the ideal of a 'fair deal' -- a 'win-win business deal for both and/or all sides' -- Ethical, Humanistic-Existential Capitalism becomes Unbridled, Narcissistic Corrupt Capitalism where collusion and exploitation and kickbacks and bribery and 'Golden Parachute Contracts and Bonuses' rule the day. Employers exploit employees. And/or unions exploit businesses. Lobbyists exploit Governments. Governments exploit Lobbyists. Sellers exploit buyers. Governments and businesses exploit taxpayers.

And we wonder why we have a recession.

Capitalism has stopped playing by ethical rules. Businesses have stopped looking for 'win-win solutions'.

Everybody who has significant monetary power at the top is looking for their own narcissistic Golden Parachute, their Golden Retirement Package. Plunder the corporation. Plunder the taxpayer.

And we wonder why we have a recession.

-- dgb, Nov. 4th, 2009.

-- David Gordon Bain

-- Democracy Goes Beyond Narcissism

-- Dialectic Gap-Bridging Negotiations...

-- Are Still in Process...

..........................................................................................................................

2 comments:

Nick Pappas said...

Interesting post.

One thing associated with the distinction between proper self-love and narcissism is the difference between types of 'special', 'one of a kind' things that are done. What people are proud of varies. What people consider to be one of a kind varies. There are unique acts worthy of infamy, just as there are common acts worthy of the same. Uniqueness for its own sake is problematic.

Nick Pappas
pappasnick.typepad.com

david gordon bain said...

Thanks again for your excellent feedback, Nick...

I have read it elsewhere -- and tend to agree with this statement -- that the difference between real 'self love' and 'pathological narcissism' is that in pathological narcissism there is a generally (if not always) a definitive absense of 'real self-love' -- and consequently, the need to try to 'overcompensate' with 'pseudo-self-love', i.e., 'narcissism'.

Your comment about 'uniqueness' is also right on the mark. It was a 'takeoff' on an advertisement I saw and heard on NBA (Raptor) TV. It might have been Kobe Bryant narrating...or someone else...I'd have to see the commercial one more time...But again, you are right, 'uniqueness' can describe any level of 'pathological behavior' as well as something a person rightly deserves to be extremely proud of. It is quite probable that the main perpetrators of 9/11 are 'proud' of their 'deed' but neither you or I or any person who would feel any kind of real compassion for his or her fellow man -- and for life on earth regardless of race, religion, colour, or sex -- would share this sentiment. So obviously, we are talking about 'unique deeds' here that promote the 'general and/or specific welfare and positive evolution of mankind', not the opposite...And then there are 'mixed cases' and 'accomplishments' like the deeds of Alexander The Great and Napoleon who were among the world's greatest 'conquerors' which involved a lot of killing but they accomplished some 'good things' to. And what about a case like Albert Einstein who is viewed as one of the greatest scientists and humanitarians of all time but still invented the atomic bomb that killed millions of people and continues to this day to give people nightmares about the possibiltiy of an eventual 'nuclear holocaust'....

No, I was obviously thinking more of what you might call the 'Ayn Rand' type of creative-productive-unique accomplishment - i.e., 'The Fountainhead' or 'Atlas Shrugged', or Howard Rourk's 'one of a kind, architechture' in The Fountainhead. I was thinking of Kant's 'The Critique of Pure Reason', Hegel's 'The Phenomenology of Spirit', Adam Smith's 'The Wealth of Nations', Karl Marx's 'Capital', Alfred Korzybski's 'Science and Sanity'...and on and on we could go...That's what I was thinking when I wrote about 'uniqueness'...

dave