Background

Why Narcissist Distrusts You ( Ontological Insecurity)

Uploaded 9/30/2022, approx. 10 minute read

I am just back from my Cold Therapy Seminar in Touno, Civivin, in Romania, a great seminar with the best audience, the liveliest and the loveliest I have ever had. And I am proceeding from here to Budapest in October. More precisely, I have availability between the 20th and the 23rd of October, should any one of you wish to have a counseling, face-to-face, in-person session. And I am also available in Vienna on the 10th of October for identical purposes.

One of the things that bother me a lot in psychology is that we tend to discard old concepts, concepts whose time have come. We throw out the old and we bring in the new. We have zero institutional memory.

For example, very few people remember the work of Anthony Giddens, G-I-D-D-E-N-S. In the description area, you will find references to his work and to other people who have continued his work. It's an amazing body of studies, essays, contemplation and field research. And it dealt with the issue of ontological insecurity in the reflexive self. These are the topics of today's lecture.

We start with ontological insecurity. It is an existential issue. It is about a person's sense of being in the world.

Ontology. An ontologically insecure person does not accept the reality or the existence of things, of themselves, of others.

And if this reminds you a lot of narcissism, it's for good reasons because narcissists are ontologically insecure. They can't perceive other people as external objects. They interact only with internal objects, interjects within their mind.

And even there, there is a gap, a lacuna, a void, an emptiness the narcissist cannot even perceive himself as some sort of entity.

There is a problem even on this level.

So as far as a narcissist is concerned, existence itself is in doubt. The ontologically secure person has a stable, unquestioned sense of self, has a stable, unquestioned sense of his or her place in the world in relation to other people and objects.

Now the concept of ontological insecurity is very important if we want to understand, if we wish to understand the related concept of identity. It is an existential approach to identity because ontological security is the essential foundation for someone to achieve a stable sense of self identity.

Again, existentially speaking, if a person doesn't believe that he or she exists, if a person doesn't believe that other people are real, if a person even doubts the existence of objects, that person becomes solipsistic.

It does not have the necessary foundation to develop a stable self identity.

Ontological insecurity is at the heart and core of identity disturbance in both borderline and narcissistic personality disorders.

You see, most people accomplish a sense of ontological security. They are sure they're pretty certain that they exist as separate entities. They're pretty certain that other people exist, separate from themselves.

They have accomplished, most people have accomplished separation from mother and then individuation, not so, the narcissist.

And this basic acceptance of the existence of oneself and the existence of others allows people to function in day to day life, allows them to maintain reality testing.

Narcissists are dysfunctional and they have no reality testing or proper reality testing.

But how do you go about accomplishing ontological security? How do we acquire this belief in the continuity, reliability and consistency of oneself, of other people, of things out there in the world? How do you avoid becoming a psychotic on the one end of the spectrum and the narcissist on the other?

Both the psychotic and the narcissist confuse external objects with internal objects and consequently they are not sure that anything exists internally or externally. The lines are blurred and everything becomes fuzzy and fog-ridden.

To develop ontological security, a person must first trust.

Ericsson called it basic trust. The person must learn to trust, develop a generalized sense of trust in the nature and stability of social structures, environments, the world out there and the world in here.

And this type of generalized trust is established in childhood and maintained through experience and routine. It is well documented that good parenting or good enough parenting engenders in children a sense of trust in others and in things out there in the world.

Through consistency in parenting practices, unconditional love coupled with firm boundaries setting and discipline, these kind of practices teach children that other people, especially adults, can be trusted and that through practice they could become almost perfect.

Children through routine obtain a sense of the reliability and stability of social and physical world structures.

And so people who are healthy, people who are relatively normal, have gone through a phase in childhood of separating from the parent and yet the parent had acted as a secure base, fostering secure attachment later in life and people carry this generalized sense of well-being and trust with them into adulthood and it protects them against existential angst, against anxiety.

Establishment of flexible, not rigid, not obsessive, but flexible routines is also important as adults for maintaining a general sense of trust and for reducing anxiety and this is at the core of what we call self-identity, both the establishment of self-identity and the ongoing lifelong task of maintaining your self-identity.

Now generalized trust is acquired in early childhood but it has to be reaffirmed. It has to be confirmed by repeated experiences with other people, time and again lifelong throughout the lifespan. It is not ensured, it is not immutable or unchanging, it could be lost at any minute as many victims of abuse would demonstrate.

Research has shown that accidents, unexpected life events, traumas can undermine this basic trust and threaten the person's ontological security and what I'm trying to say is that you can easily switch from being ontologically secure to being ontologically insecure.

Anthony Giddens' theory of self-identity is based on this premise of ontological security.

We will discuss his reflexive self-concept a bit later in this lecture.

Giddens argues that the processes of late modernity and post-modernity have eroded many of the traditions that have underpinned trust in the nature and stability of the social and material world.

He says that modern life is inherently ontologically insecure because it had dispensed with all the traditions which were the foundations, constituted the foundations of our ontological security in pre-modern societies.

This is very reminiscent of many of the claims made by Jordan Peterson. Whereas pre-modern societies are characterized by tradition, religion, routine and therefore meaning, it's easy to make sense of pre-modern societies.

Modern societies are characterized by rapid cycling, enormous change, uncertainty and indeterminacy in every field of life, economy, employment, culture, family, institutions, beliefs, values, you name it, everything is in flux, pantabé.

There are many psychological and psychosocial threats in modern life. There's an inbuilt instability.

Growth in essence is change and our whole way of life is founded on consumerism which is intended to guarantee growth.

But I repeat, growth is change. Growth is instability in work, in family life, in employment, you name it, in education.

A person needs to develop the ability to take for granted something, some everyday happenings, other people, material goods, the need to take for granted is another way of describing ontological security.

People who do not become caught in a perpetual state of anxiety about the future are people who are ontologically secure.

So the desire and the need to manage potential threats, to avoid risks, this desire and need have become the cornerstones of our modern existence.

We are battling off anxiety and risk and threats all the time and this raises fundamental issues of can we trust others, can we trust institutions, can we trust the world and if we can't, if the answer is no, we cannot, what does our identity consist of?

Our identity consists of our interactions with other people. Our identity is relational, it's social, it's interpersonal but modern individuals cannot have an identity by definition because there's no one out there to rely on and to trust and to manage this overwhelming insecurity, to manage this dysregulating indeterminacy and in a way unpredictability and capriciousness embedded in day-to-day living, we develop all kinds of dysfunctional strategies to achieve and to maintain a status or a state of ontological security and ironically it is exactly by deploying these strategies that we reduce the certainty in our lives and increase ontological insecurity.

In other words our strategies are self-defeating and self-destructive.

One of the processes identified by Anthony Giddens is reflexivity.

Individuals respond to social change and to the resulting insecurity by engaging with expert systems and by using information to assess their positions in the social and material worlds that they inhabit.

In other words individuals rely on information to position themselves and this process of positioning endows them with some kind of awe.

I know where I stand, I can feel safe.

By placing themselves in their own fields of view and by assessing their positions in social and material worlds which they inhabit, individuals can be assured of their own existence and manage the risks associated with modern life according to the Encyclopedia of Identity.


But if we take this to extreme, which most of us are forced to do because the rate of change is so ginormous that we are forced to implement these strategies habitually, automatically, recurrently, it's out of control.

So if this is taken to extreme the process of reflection itself can and does generate anxiety.

An ontologically secure person does not need to engage in a process of reflection. If you are ontologically secure, healthy and normal you don't reflect on the question whether other people exist. You don't reflect on yourself within your field of view. You don't need to position yourself. You just are. Being and becoming have become belabored processes requiring investment, commitment, reflection and mirroring.

This is abnormal. This is abnormal. We should be able to trust and accept things as they are without having to go through a layer of cognition.

This is again at the core of narcissism because the narcissism is one cognitive layer removed from himself and from the world. He has to think about things in order to conceptualize self-reflexivity and the ability to engage in the process of self-reflexivity.

These are partly structurally determined by the environment but they vary depending on class, gender, ethnicity and mental health or lack thereof.

And so the concept of ontological security is important because it suggests that people need more than just material needs.

So in order to feel happy or even functional, in order to have fulfilled lives or self-actualized lives to borrow Abraham Maslow's term, you need to be ontologically secure because if you are insecure, you are not able to develop and maintain a stable sense of self-identity.

You have trouble negotiating and feeding in society and other aspects of the world that you reside in could be material aspects, could be other people.

This ontological insecurity, this has a profound impact, your inability to trust the universe so to speak. That affects your well-being.

There's research that indicates that ontological insecurity is associated with poor physical and mental health, with offending behavior, with housing instability and insecurity, with national conflict, with mental health disorders such as narcissism, schizoid, paranoid and borderline personality disorder.

So this is the concept of ontological insecurity.

In the description you will find literature about this concept.

The next video will be dedicated to another one of Anthony Giddens' revolutionary concepts at the time and that is the reflexive self.

It is such a pity that we discard yesterday's concepts and ideas as so much youth laundry because there's such vast richness in the last hundred years of psychology that we no longer have access to.

We have excluded from curricula and syllabi all over the world and our youth, our young ones, they are no longer exposed to these riches, these treasures and I'm doing my best to reintroduce them through my videos with the limited appeal that they have.

Thank you for listening and proceed now to the next lecture about the reflexive self.

If you enjoyed this article, you might like the following:

Dead Parents Clone Narcissists (and Codependents And Borderlines)

Professor Sam Vaknin discusses the three types of trauma: self-inflicted, reality-inflicted, and parental-inflicted. He emphasizes the critical role of mothers in personal development and the impact of trauma on growth. Vaknin also explores the concept of nothingness as a healthy narrative and expresses skepticism about the likelihood of a shift away from narcissistic narratives in society.


UNEDITED Why We Prefer Narcissism or Psychosis to Mental Health? (RAW WA Real Convo)

Professor Sam Vaknin discusses various topics related to psychology, including the trauma of selfhood, the role of the mother in shaping the self, the importance of narratives, and the concept of collective unconscious and archetypes. He argues that humanity has chosen narcissistic narratives, which have their roots in the enlightenment, and that narcissism is becoming a religion that deifies individuals. Vaknin warns that this trend towards narcissism and psychosis poses a risk to the survival of the species.


YOU are Narcissist’s Tradition, His Reflexive Self

Professor Sam Vaknin discusses the concept of the reflexive self, which is the idea that individuals form their identities through constant self-reflection and self-awareness. He explains that in traditional societies, self-reflection was limited by the boundaries set by traditions, which provided a sense of stability and ontological security. However, in post-traditional societies, the collapse of traditions has led to an extension of reflexivity, which can be both empowering and anxiety-inducing. While Giddens' work on reflexivity has been criticized for oversimplifying the relationship between social structures and individual agency, it remains an important concept in understanding the formation of identity in contemporary society.


Is Personal Growth Always Positive? (with Clinical Psychologist Daria Zukowska)

Professor Sam Vaknin discusses the concept of personal growth and development, emphasizing its cultural and psychological aspects. He delves into the theories of Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, and Clayton Alderfer, highlighting the cultural determinants of growth and the cyclical nature of the process. Vaknin also challenges the notion of a unitary, integrated self, advocating for a more fragmented and dynamic understanding of human identity. He touches on the role of therapy in integrating fragmented aspects of the self.


Self-Identity: Myth or Reality? Just WHO are YOU?

Professor Sam Vaknin discusses the concept of identity and its relation to memory, introspection, and the unconscious mind. He argues that having a memory is not a necessary or sufficient condition for possessing a self-identity, as one's unconscious mind plays a significant role in shaping one's identity. Vaknin suggests that self-identity is a dynamic, ever-changing construct influenced by various factors, including genetics, upbringing, and social interactions. He concludes that while a person may have a self-identity, it may not be their own, as it can change dramatically over time.


Reality Or Shared Fantasy Your Choice (from Best Offer To The Matrix)

Professor Sam Vaknin discusses the concept of reality and fantasy, using examples from popular movies such as The Truman Show and The Matrix. He delves into the idea of living in a dissociative state and the construction of narratives in our minds. Vaknin also explores the ethical implications of imposing happiness on others and the philosophical implications of virtual reality and simulation. He concludes by connecting these concepts to narcissism and shared fantasy in relationships.


No Identity Without Memory (Lecture for Southern Federal University, Rostov-on-Don)

Professor Sam Vaknin discusses the complexities of modern psychology, particularly the challenges in defining concepts such as personality and memory. He explores the cultural and perceptual influences on psychological constructs, the dichotomy between observer and observed reality, and the limitations of accessing and defining memory. Vaknin also delves into the fluid nature of memory and its impact on personal identity, challenging traditional views and proposing a new understanding of identity as a flexible algorithm that processes and adapts to changing memories. He emphasizes the evolutionary advantage of human adaptability and the role of storytelling in shaping identity.


Narcissist Trust Your Gut Feeling 4 Rules To Avoid Bad Relationships ( Intuition Explained)

Professor Sam Vaknin discusses the importance of intuition in relationships and decision-making. He explores different types of intuition, including idetic, emergent, and ideal intuition, and how they are used in various philosophical and psychological theories. He emphasizes the significance of intuition in understanding and navigating complex human interactions, particularly in dealing with narcissists and psychopaths.


Why We Dream (International Congress on Neurology and Brain Disorders)

Professor Sam Vaknin discusses the functions and significance of dreams, as well as their cultural and societal roles. He also critiques the movie "Inception" and its portrayal of dreaming. Vaknin emphasizes the subjective nature of dreams, their role in processing information, and their connection to creativity and inspiration. He also challenges the idea of dream sharing and the distinction between endogenous and exogenous ideation.


Dostoyevsky’s Beef With Psychology Path Towards Its Renaissance ( Congress Presentation)

Professor Sam Vaknin discusses Fyodor Dostoyevsky's quarrel with psychology and how it contrasts with modern psychology. Dostoyevsky's work delves into the human soul and the individual's reaction to society, contrasting with the statistical and pseudo-scientific approach of modern psychology. Dostoyevsky's characters struggle with morality, suffering, and the conflict between the pursuit of truth and the rejection of life. His use of symbolism and exploration of the self reflect his own inner conflicts and his commitment to truth. His characters' inner fixity and rejection of life lead to a spiritual death, and his work serves as a critique of narcissism and the pursuit of perfection.

Transcripts Copyright © Sam Vaknin 2010-2023, under license to William DeGraaf
Website Copyright © William DeGraaf 2022-2024
Get it on Google Play
Privacy policy