Talk:Malignant narcissism

Archives (Index)

2024/March 2024/June

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

	This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Psychology Low‑importance Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Dancing around the present

The present represents a crisis around the (proper and intended) dispassionate measure of this site.

The present and significant President of the United States (note: written when Donald Trump was President, so applies to him) is clearly of this sort. We cannot pretend to be a rational impartial judge if we hold no standard. Otherwise science ceases to exist.

Which puts this field to test. My judgement in the 1980s was the present individual was a "bullshit artist". Nothing to do with his then-unknown politics, and everything to do with his perceived sort. Everything he has done since is entirely predictable.

An assertion: "malignant narcissist" fits a present individual very well. As Psychology is far from a precise science, professionals in that field are properly reluctant to offer labels.

At the same time, an ongoing train looks like an ongoing train, regardless of the exact rationale. There is clearly an oncoming train. We do not want to die. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pbannister (talk • contribs) 04:56, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is dedicated to the discussion of the psychological construct known as "Malignant narcissism", as defined by relevant research and authors. Neither this article, nor in fact Wikipedia, is dedicated to original research or armchair diagnosis. Please see Wikipedia:No original research for further clarification on this matter. This means that you may not conduct research in order to determine someone to be a "malignant narcissist" and publish it in a Wikipedia article; for such claims, you need to find a source in accordance with what is stated in Wikipedia:Reliable sources. It is also not enough to synthesise material, even if it is top-grade reliability-wise. This, in turn, means that even if you find an article defining, in this case, malignant narcissism, and another describing a person, you may not us the two to determine someone to be a "malignant narcissist". As Wikipedia is not for original research, we do not try to research how not to die, even if it were to be the case that "we do not want to die". Scientists are free to conduct research on what an oncoming train is, and how it can be avoided; once published, said research may be cited in an appropriate place and manner on Wikipedia. Even though a message may feel very important to convey to the presumed readers, keep in mind that (1) Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought, and (2) Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. Vasaras kruīzi Tallink (talk) 20:05, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All these are valid arguments, but the complete absence of any reference to Trump in this article is odd. Numerous WP:RS have suggested that Trump *may* be suffering from this condition or syndrome - it's not black propaganda or a fanciful conspiracy theory. --Ef80 (talk) 14:54, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For this article, I would be quite inclined to have very good sources, such as academic or medical ones. Feel free to provide the sources, but consider whether or not these might be more hype than ambition to truthfulness. Regrettably, there is an ongoing moral panic around narcissism, and a lot of controversy regarding Trump. I am thus not surprised that there is a strong inclination of trying to use this moral panic to target Trump, which is rather misguided in my opinion, as moral panics are often not justified and at least very much overemphasized. To begin with, politicians should be scrutinized for their actions and policies rather than by throwing around buzzwords like satanism, narcissism, cultural marxist, and so on.

Malignant narcissism is also something I have seen in real life as being used by people who identify as victims, in order to claim bigger victimhood status than those who have supposedly had unpleasant interactions with "narcissists" (whatever that means -- pwNPD or something else). Also, I might as well point out that other articles about personality disorders do not seem to need anyone as a posterchild, although Trump has also been claimed to be eligible for NPD, and others have been suggested to have had other conditions. There is also the case of whether something is WP:DUE or not. There is also the question about whether or not Trump is a good way to represent malignant narcissism, even if he were to somehow have it as a diagnosis. For example, you could take a look at the ongoing discussion at Talk:Autism and see what people think about representing autism in images; a specimen may be correct but not representative. BlockArranger (talk) 21:10, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Intro to Psychology

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 January 2025 and 6 May 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jek8840 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Jek8840 (talk) 15:22, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concerns About the Current Image of Narcissus

I’d like to raise some concerns about the current lead image on the Malignant narcissism page—Jan Cossiers' painting of Narcissus. While Narcissus is an obvious reference point for narcissistic traits, malignant narcissism is conceptually distinct from the mythological figure, incorporating antisocial behavior, egosyntonic sadism, and paranoia. The Narcissus image primarily conveys self-absorption rather than the more destructive, antagonistic elements of malignant narcissism.

A more suitable illustration would ideally capture themes such as manipulativeness, cruelty, or paranoia. If anyone has suggestions for public domain artwork or historical depictions that better represent the construct, please reply to this tread.

I’d appreciate thoughts on whether a change is warranted and what potential replacements might work better.

(And yes, I wrote this using ChatGPT due to laziness, but come on, I mean what is written.) Vasaras kruīzi Tallink (talk) 23:52, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vasaras kruīzi Tallink, you make a good point, but I have no idea what other work of art would be more suitable. Do you have any suggestions? Lova Falk (talk) 09:43, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I would possibly go as far as to suggesting that the image be removed from the article. I believe that Narcissus is a very suitable motive for the Narcissism article, as the phenomenon fits very well as a description of the traits of its namesake Narcissus. I would even go as far as to wondering whether or not he is a great example for Narcissistic personality disorder, which is a distinct (from narcissism) phenomenon which has deep levels of psychodynamic layers underlying it. (But I digress...) Consider also, for a moment, that while narcissism is named after Narcissus for quite obvious reasons, I believe it is very unlikely that had history turned out differently, people would have decided to use Narcissus as the archetype for the phenomenon of MN, which has arguably been known to mankind far before scholars turned into a formal construct. Some people have argued, even in more formal writings, that certain characters from classical stories represent MN rather well, but the issues at hand are for me that I believe there should be consensus for that, and also, many such images are copyrighted.

Thanks for your reply, and keep up the good work you are doing in improving and building upon psychology Wikipedia! BlockArranger (talk) 13:06, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is gone! Lova Falk (talk) 13:34, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PS BlockArranger First you got me confused. Who did you thank, was it Vasaras kruīzi Tallink or did you thank me? But now I see that Vasaras kruīzi Tallink and you are the same person? Anyway, thank you for thanking me! Lova Falk (talk) 13:39, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed I am the same person. I created my account long ago when I was much younger and thus probably didn't worry much about trademark infringement. You may - as you state on your page that you live in Sweden - be familiar with the Tallink corporation which runs ships between Sweden, Finland and the Baltics (I really like cruises). I just don't want to seem like an advertiser or a die-hard fanboy, as well as following the law! BlockArranger (talk) 14:15, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good to know! Yes, I have travelled with them, but I have never been on a cruise. :) Lova Falk (talk) 15:21, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]