-

Society

Healing the world

Posted on


The past year has been challenging for many of us. More than ever we need new ideas, hope and willingness to change. What would you do to make the world better? And what needs to change ?

The Psychology Behind Inequality

Posted on Updated on


I am scared. I’m scared by right-wing leaders and political parties who are popping up in Europe in like viruses. For that reason, the psychology behind inequality must be talked about. This is a reblog from an article on psychlogytoday.

Economic inequality is at an all-time high in the United States. Some claim that decades of systematic legislation have resulted in the wealthiest three families owning more wealth than the bottom half of the country.

This trend is not reflected in other countries with developed economies: Out of all 36 countries with comparable economics, the US ranks last in equal income distribution. As a result, we have returned to Great Depression levels of income inequality, and for the first time in American history, the working class pay a higher effective tax rate than billionaires.

article continues after advertisement

The adverse effects of economic inequality are well documented. Across societies, higher rates of inequality are associated with a myriad of health and social problems including obesity, mental illness, decreased life expectancy, and higher crime rates. The World Economic Forum ranked income inequality as one of the most important trends driving global risks such as social instability and unemployment. And yet a recent poll shows that less than half of Americans view income inequality as a serious problem. Why don’t people care?

Political scientists, economists, and philosophers have wrestled with this paradox for decades. The answer to this question—at least in part—can be explained by understanding how people experience inequality in their daily lives. Here, we offer one slice of the explanation: the psychology behind inequality perpetuates an unequal system.

People disproportionally care about local inequality

In an age where we are spending more and more time online, it is easy to compare ourselves to others. Yet not all comparisons are created equal (pun intended).

I may care less about a celebrity buying a multimillion-dollar house than my neighbors posting pictures about their luxurious vacation in the Bahamas. This is because social comparisons are particularly salient when made to others in your community. In comparisons with similar people, inequality can drastically shift our behaviors.

In one particularly creative study, researchers examined how a neighbor winning the lottery shaped others’ financial behavior. They pulled data from the Dutch Postcode Lottery, a system that randomly selects a postal code and distributes new BMWs to all lottery participants in that area.

This creates a unique situation where nonparticipants (who did not buy a lottery ticket) are faced with upwards social comparisons to neighbors who just won a new BMW. The feeling of “keeping up with the Joneses” can be potent: Nonparticipants who lived next to winners were far more likely to buy a new car in the six months after the lottery, compared to those who lived in non-winning districts.

article continues after advertisement

Visible inequality perpetuates adverse effects

Recent work also reveals that concealing inequality (e.g., not knowing how much your colleagues make) allows cooperation to blossom. And yet we live in a world rife with obvious and blatant inequalities.

To explore how visible inequality changes people’s behavior, researchers at Yale University created mini-societies of individuals with varying degrees of economic inequality and wealth visibility. When rich participants knew their neighbors were poor, they became less likely to cooperate with them. Wealthy individuals chose to selectively play with rich partners, resulting in a “rich get richer” and “poor get poorer” scenario. In contrast, when wealth was invisible (and thus inequality was unknown), cooperation flourished.

These experiments reveal a contradiction of sorts. Instead of rebalancing the scales, wealthier individuals use the knowledge that others have less than themselves to perpetuate inequality—perhaps in part because those who are poor are believed to be less deserving.

Inequality increases risky behavior

Although social comparisons with others in your community are particularly influential in shaping how we act as consumers (e.g., buying fancy cars), these comparisons can also drive detrimental, risky behaviors.

Researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill wondered how constantly comparing oneself to top earners influenced people’s decision-making abilities. In one experiment, they asked their subjects to gamble, but each gamble differed in value and risk (e.g., 90% chance to win 28 cents or 5% chance to win $5).

article continues after advertisement

The researchers split participants into two groups. One group was told that past participants earned an average of 51 cents and the spread of earnings was relatively equal, while the other group was told that past participants earned on average 51 cents, but the spread of earnings was highly unequal.

When the distribution of earnings for past participants was very unequal, current participants took greater risks, presumably to try to achieve higher monetary outcomes. This relationship between inequality and risk taking is mirrored in the real world as well. People who live in states with greater income inequality exhibit greater risky behavior (e.g., greater participation in lottery gambles and payday loans).

Rising inequality causes people to take risker endeavors as they attempt to reach the top, but this may ultimately contribute to maintaining an unequal system. By examining the psychological impact of inequality, we can begin to understand the deeper mechanisms that contribute to the perpetuation of economic inequality. The question becomes, then, will we manage to do anything about it?

About the Author

Oriel FeldmanHall, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor of Cognitive, Linguistic and Psychological Sciences at Brown University.

what happens when you are generous towards others?

Posted on


This is a reblog from reflectd

Human beings are social beings. The tendency to behave, talk and walk like others is what we call conformity, which has been documented in various studies. It is believed that sociality is a product of evolution, meaning that we have had better chances of survival in groups than we have had on our own.

We may react strongly to social exclusion because we are social beings. Indeed, research has shown that the brain reacts to social exclusion and physical pain in very similar ways. This means that conformity is a driving force. Have you ever wondered why some people follow other people who don’t stop for a red traffic light? They behave like the group, possibly by instinct. We know that conformity can result in both prosocial and antisocial behaviors. But does conformity only happen at the behavioral level? It seems not.

A study by Nook and colleagues (2016) finds that when people behave generously, other people begin to behave more generously and feel more empathy as well. In the study, people who observed generous charity donations donated more than those who observed stingy donations. Moreover, the prosocial behavior generalized across behaviors and situations. The people who observed generous donations wrote more supportive notes to others at a later time point.

The sound of brains singing in tune

22 July

Posted on


Yesterday I finally had the courage to see 22 July. In Norway that day will never be the same. It’s our 9/11, our tragedy. Norway is a small country, so we were all directly or indirectly touched by Anders Behring Breivik’s mass murder of 77 innocent people the 22th of July. Seeing the movie was hard, but necessary. I remember how surprised I was by the reactions after the attack. How the trial focused on our core values, democracy and not giving in to fear and love. I remember how people gathered in our cities, showing their respect with roses that littered the streets. News headlines from other countries also reflected the surprise: Where was the outrage ? We were suffering, but we didn’t respond with bullets or hate.

Fear is dangerous. Maybe I’m a bit naive, but the answer is not to monitor everyone to be more secure. Crimes does occur and we must always try to minimize it. I have worked with trauma through my career, and know the pain sufferers and survivors endure. But the solution is not to become overly suspicious. Some countries are closing their borders after terror attacks, to protect their own people. But we are all humans, and by having a court system where we defend people who’s committed crimes we condone, we feel stronger. Revenge seldom helps, but trying to move on and focusing on what’s important, can. This doesn’t mean that feelings of hate and rage aren’t valid. We must be allowed to feel grief and the unfairness of meaningless acts from a person like Breivik. Healing is being able to feel different emotions at the same time and realize that it’s okay. We can feel strong and weak at the same time, love and hate. But how we act on those feelings, is what matters.

Enlightenment now

Posted on


If you want to read a book that will change your perspective, enlightenment now is the book for you. Even if you’re a skeptic, not believing that the world is actually getting better contrary to what the news tells us, you should read it. If it just is to argue about what he writes, that’s good too. We need good discussions, and the book gives you plenty of examples to impress others with. It’s so packed with new information that I used months reading it, just to digest everything before I continued with it. The trip to this surprising world, so much better than I though, was refreshing and showered me with hope and inspiration. Still not convinced? Why not check it out yourself ?

You can find the book here: Amazon.

If you want, I can even send it to a lucky follower of my book through audible. Just comment and it will be yours for free.

Why do police in this Canadian town hand out tickets for good driving?

Posted on Updated on


I love kindness. I also love the idea of it being recognized more, in a society where we sometimes feel helpless, especially after terrorist attacks or tragedies. That`s why I want to share an article about focusing on good deeds and behaviors, and remind you that it feels good when we help others or act in a way that feels right to us.
The article is from this site.
( ©Anne Sutherland / Montreal Gazette)

This is Jim (white beard) from Pointe-Claire, Montreal. He’s just been handed a ticket for good behaviour by Mayor Morris Trudeau (white shirt, former cop, no relation to Justin) in a pioneering project we’re studying as part of our Smart Cities research at Fluxx.

Since May 2015, over 1,000 citizens have been given tickets for good behaviour like “using roads in a safe and respectful manner, stopping at red lights and stop signs, obeying signals, waiting for the crossing lights at busy intersections and neither texting nor talking on a cellphone while driving.”

Citizens are a little confused: “I saw the flashing lights of the police car but I had no idea what was going on,” Scott told the Montreal Gazette. “I wondered why they were approaching me.” The ticket he received has a thumbs up logo, and no monetary or prize value.

This kind of positive reinforcement can seem strange in the context of police enforcement, but is rooted in the most basic behavioural psychology, and is increasingly being used by cities around the world to deal with a range of issues.

Turin’s terrible traffic was a key plot point in The Italian Job (1969), which is still probably the most entertaining film ever made about smart city infrastructure. (Image IMCDB)

Milan: The insurer paying drivers to leave their cars at home

Milan has the worst traffic in Europe and North America. Drivers there spend 57 hours a year in jams. (INRIX data, reported here in the Daily Mail).

To counter this and following a similar approach to Montreal campaign the second largest insurance company in Italy Unipol came up with an interesting solution to the city’s problems. By giving the residents of Milan free public transit vouchers in return for leaving their cars at home.

The city is using connected car devices made by Octo Telematics, a Rome-based telematics provider, installed behind the dashboards of Unipol customers’ vehicles, to transmit location data and ensure that cars remain parked on the driveway.” (FT).

This is the little box of traffic magic from Octo, called Unibox

Unipol policyholders receive a credit of €1,50 — the cost of one public transportation ticket — for every day their vehicles remain parked during peak hours.

In a lovely connected cities detail, participants can collect their tickets at any ATM ticket machine, in Milan.

Breda, Netherlands: The city rewarding drivers for staying at home

Dealing with traffic issues of their own, the Dutch city of Breda in 2012 launched the initiative ‘Positive Drive’. Instead of an expensive telematics box that needs to be installed in the car, they used a simple smartphone ap.

The Positive Drive app uses nudges (coaching, prizes, social status, achievements, etc) to strengthen the positive behaviours.

“Positive Drive rewards car drivers who respect speed limits with (s)miles. If they cycle instead of driving, they earn more (s)miles. Bonus (s)miles are rewarded when road users choose certain trajectories over others. In this way, the municipality can promote particular cycle routes and locations, and with their ‘smiles’ the participants can win prizes donated by enterprises based Breda” (Eltis).

Yes, the Dubai police do have a Bugatti Veyron, a Ferrari and a Lamborghini, although they’re parade cars, not actually out chasing criminals. Jalopnik have the story.

Dubai: White Points to reduce deaths in traffic

Back in 2013 the city of Dubai together with its police department launched a project called the ‘White Point’ system. Where participants can earn points by following traffic laws and avoid getting fines and tickets.

It was launched by Maj Gen Mohammed Al Zafeen, head of the Federal Traffic Council and assistant to the Dubai Police chief in operational affairs as an experiment that hopefully could help reducing the amount of deaths in traffic, but also encourage positive driving.

We started in 2013 by honouring 700 motorists, and now in 2016 we’ll be honouring more than double that amount. The system is still being developed, and we believe the more we reward people for good behaviour, the more positive the effect will be.” Maj Gen Al Zafeen (The National)

The participants can then earn a maximum of 24 points in one year. In case of a traffic violation, motorists can lose a month’s points and if involved in a huge violation, may lose their accumulated white points. These violations also include traffic fines such as ‘Salik’ (tolls) and parking fines. The system also allows drivers to recover points lost on their licences by driving without any infringement over a period of time.

Study: Your Generosity Creates More Generosity and Empathy in Others

Posted on


This is a reblog from reflectd

Human beings are social beings. The tendency to behave, talk and walk like others is what we call conformity, which has been documented in various studies.

It is believed that sociality is a product of evolution, meaning that we have had better chances of survival in groups than we have had on our own.

We may react strongly to social exclusion because we are social beings. Indeed, research has shown that the brain reacts to social exclusion and physical pain in very similar ways.

This means that conformity is a driving force. Have you ever wondered why some people follow other people who don’t stop for a red traffic light? They behave like the group, possibly by instinct.

We know that conformity can result in both prosocial and antisocial behaviors. But does conformity only happen at the behavioral level? It seems not.

A study by Nook and colleagues (2016) finds that when people behave generously, other people begin to behave more generously and feel more empathy as well.

In the study, people who observed generous charity donations donated more than those who observed stingy donations.

Moreover, the prosocial behavior generalized across behaviors and situations. The people who observed generous donations wrote more supportive notes to others at a later time point.

The sound of brains singing in tune

Mass suggestion: A way to save the world? 

Talk to me

Posted on Updated on


When I was 15, I took the bus from Stavanger to Bergen after saying goodbye to my boyfriend. The last thing I wanted, was to talk with anyone. I struggled to keep my tears back and wanted to have time to think about everything we did and he said (like a typical teenager). But to my horror, an old woman sat next to me and I knew immediately that she was a talker. Little did I know that this would be one of the very conversations I remember from that year. We talked about everything, and soon started on a philosophical journey together. I told her about my boyfriend, and how hard it was to live so far apart from him (over 10 hours with a car or bus). She responded by saying how healthy it is to meet people who live in a different place than where you grew up. Because they probably see the world a little bit different than you, and that means you might end up learning something new.
This woman was so wise, and I learnt something new too: By opening up to all kinds off people, even strangers, you might change the way you think and see the world. I was reminded of this event when I listened to “an organized mind” by Daniel Levitin in my car. He described a study where the researchers asked people if they thought they would prefer sitting alone or talk with a stranger on the bus. They were quite sure about what they would like the most, but it seems like we don`t always know how much we crave connections with others. The study is described below, and I hope you enjoy it as much as me. Maybe the next time you`r filled with dread, hoping that somebody won`t disturb you on a bus, plane or train, you might look at the commute as an opportunity instead of fear.

Why You Should Put Down Your Smartphone and Talk to Strangers

Credit: pio3 / Shutterstock.com

Talking to the stranger in seat 4B on a cross-country flight is often considered one of the torments of air travel, to be avoided at all costs. But new research suggests people are deeply wrong about the misery of striking up conversations on public transit.

Contrary to expectations, people are happier after a conversation with a stranger, the study revealed.

“At least in some cases, people don’t seem to be social enough for their own well-being,” said study researcher Nicholas Epley, a professor of behavioral science at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business. “They think that sitting in solitude will be more pleasant than engaging in conversation, when, in fact, the opposite is true.” [7 Thoughts That Are Bad For You]

Talking to strangers

Epley, author of the book “Mindwise: How We Understand What Others Think, Feel, Believe and Want” (Knopf, 2014), studies social connection. Humans are social animals, he said, to the extent that having more and stronger friends and family connections is linked with a healthier life.

But in waiting rooms, trains, planes and other public spots, people fail to show their social stripes, Epley told Live Science. During his own commute in Chicago, he sees “highly social animals getting on the train every morning and being remarkably anti-social … They might as well be sitting next to a rock.”

Perhaps people know that interacting with a stranger is likely to be less pleasant than sitting in silence, so they choose the latter, Epley said.

Or maybe, just maybe, everybody is wrong about talking to strangers. Maybe it’s actually fun.

Only connect

To find out which is true, Epley and his colleagues recruited real-life commuters at Chicago train stations. They also conducted a series of experiments with bus riders. In some of these experiments, they simply asked people to imagine striking up a conversation on the bus or train. Would it be pleasant? Would they feel happy afterward?

By and large, people said “no,” it wouldn’t be pleasant, and that such an interaction wouldn’t result in a happiness boost. In addition, people guessed, on average, that fewer than half of strangers would be interested in chatting. They expected to be rebuffed.

In other experiments, the researchers actually asked the commuters to go through with the conversations. At random, some participants were assigned to start a conversation. Others were asked to sit silently, and a third group was told to go about their normal commute routine (which involved silence for some and speaking to a friend for others). The participants were given sealed surveys to complete and mail in after their commute.

The results? People had a more pleasant time when they talked to a stranger versus when they stayed silent. Incredibly, the findings held even when the researchers controlled for personality traits, like extraversion and introversion.

 Does the finding that talking to strangers makes people happier make you more likely to strike up conversations in public more often?
  • No way. You couldn’t pay me enough.
  • Maybe. I can see the upsides.
  • Definitely. I’d like to meet new people.
  • No – but only because I already chat with strangers.

“Everyone seems happier and has a more pleasant interaction when they connect versus sit in isolation,” Epley said.

Perhaps even more surprising, their conversation partners seemed to welcome the connection, too.

“Nobody was rejected in any of our studies, as far as I can tell,” Epley said. “Everybody who tried to talk to somebody was able to.”

In another study, the researchers set up participants in a waiting room, so they could test the happiness of both the conversation starter and their target. Again, everyone was happier after chatting — even the person who hadn’t started the conversation. Pairs of strangers deep in conversation also reported that the wait seemed shorter.

Epley’s research isn’t the first to find that interactions with strangers influence mood. Findings reported in 2012 showed that even smiling and nodding at strangers makes people feel more connected. [5 Wacky Things That Are Good for Your Health]

“Flawed individuals will victimize you”: A top FBI profiler’s lessons on extreme narcissists like Trump

Posted on


There are 130 warning signs of the narcissistic personality. Trump checks off at least 90

"Flawed individuals will victimize you": A top FBI profiler's lessons on extreme narcissists like TrumpDonald Trump (Credit: AP/Paul Sancya)

This article originally appeared on AlterNet.

This article originally appeared on AlterNet.

AlterNetI recently spoke with former FBI agent Joe Navarro about Donald Trump. Navarro was one of the FBI’s top profilers, a founding member of their elite Behavioral Analysis Unit and author of several books on human behavior, including “Dangerous Personalities: An FBI Profiler Shows You How to Identify and Protect Yourself from Harmful People.”

To be clear, at no time did Navarro diagnose Trump as having a narcissistic or predator personality. He says we should leave formal diagnoses to professionals  —  but that each of us still needs to be able to identify and protect ourselves from harmful people in our lives. And so he created behavior checklists and published them in his book to let you do just that.

Navarro’s book warns that if a “person has a preponderance of the major features of a narcissistic personality,” then he “is an emotional, psychological, financial or physical danger to you or others.” As the book “The Narcissism Epidemic” explained, “A recent psychiatric study found that the biggest consequences of narcissism — especially when other psychiatric symptoms were held constant — was suffering by people close to them.”

It’s even more important for journalists to decide if Trump behaves like a narcissist — as James Fallows explains in his must-read post at the Atlantic. Fallows cites a reader’s note to him “on how journalism should prepare for Trump, especially in thinking about his nonstop string of lies.”

VideoColombia’s Juan Manuel Santos Accepts Nobel Peace Prize as ‘Gift From Heaven`

“Nobody seems to realize that normal rules do not apply when you are interviewing a narcissist,” this behavior expert explains to Fallows. “You can’t go about this in the way you were trained, because he is an expert at manipulating the very rules you learned.” He criticizes The New York Times for believing what Trump said when they interviewed him (which is the same point I’ve made). Finally, he warns:

“… anyone who’s dealt with a narcissist knows you never, ever believe what they say — because they will say whatever the person they are talking to wants to hear. DT is a master at phrasing things vaguely enough that multiple listeners will be able to hear exactly what they want. It isn’t word salad; it’s overt deception, which is much more pernicious.”

I’ve been professionally interested in behavior assessment because to achieve and sustain serious climate action, empathy may be the most important quality in a president or political leader.

After all, climate change requires us to take very significant if not drastic measures today in order to avoid catastrophe for billions of others in the future who contributed little or nothing to the problem. Without empathic leaders, the necessary climate action becomes all but impossible.

That is a why the Pope ends his landmark 2015 climate encyclical calling on God to “Enlighten those who possess power and money that they may avoid the sin of indifference, that they may love the common good, advance the weak and care for this world in which we live. The poor and the earth are crying out.”

What I learned from Joe Navarro’s work

To leap to the conclusion, people on the far end of the narcissist spectrum lack empathy. And, Navarro told me, “these personality traits are fixed and rigid.” That person doesn’t change. They don’t pivot. Not what you would want in the leader of the world’s most powerful nation.

So, if you come to the conclusion that Trump (or anyone in your life) is on the extreme end of the narcissist spectrum  —  using the tools Navarro provides   — then that person is, as his book explains, “an emotional, psychological, financial, physical danger to you or others.”

Navarro urged me to get his book and go through the checklists and make my own decision. In my scoring, Trump is off the charts. Your scoring may be different.

Interestingly, it was one of the checklists Navarro posted online that motivated me to contact him in the first place. I had been engaged with the question of whether Trump was delusional or a con man (or neither) since late May, when he told Californians suffering their worst drought in a thousand years, “There is no drought.”

As any potential levity about Trump’s participation in the GOP nomination fight was stamped out by the serious and growing concern that he might actually become president  —  or merely trample our democracy in the process of losing  —  I kept reading up on the subject. I came across the work of Navarro, who spent a quarter century as an FBI agent and supervisor focusing on counterintelligence and behavioral assessment. Now Navarro writes, consults and speaks on human behavior.

In particular, because few people are professional psychological diagnosticians or FBI profilers — but we all run across people who might be a danger to us or others  —  Navarro wanted to empower laypeople to be able to decide for themselves if someone they knew had a dangerous personality.

The cult of Donald Trump?

I came across a 2012 article from Psychology Today Navarro wrote listing “the typical traits of the pathological cult leader … you should watch for and which shout caution, get away, run or avoid if possible.” Here are just the first nine of the 50 traits he lists:

  1. Has a grandiose idea of who he is and what he can achieve.
  2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power or brilliance.
  3. Demands blind unquestioned obedience.
  4. Requires excessive admiration from followers and outsiders.
  5. Has a sense of entitlement  —  expecting to be treated special at all times.
  6. Is exploitative of others by asking for their money or that of relatives, putting others at financial risk.
  7. Is arrogant and haughty in his behavior or attitude.
  8. Has an exaggerated sense of power (entitlement) that allows him to bend rules and break laws.
  9. Takes sexual advantage of members of his sect or cult.

Navarro writes, “If these traits sound familiar to leaders, groups, sects or organizations known to you then expect those who associate with them to live in despair and to suffer even if they don’t know it, yet.”

And yet they do sound familiar, don’t they?

Navarro had “studied at length the life, teachings and behaviors of” people like Jim Jones (Jonestown, Guyana), David Koresh (Branch Davidians), Charles Manson and other infamous cult leaders, and concluded: “what stands out about these individuals is that they were or are all pathologically narcissistic.”

Indeed, when I contacted Navarro, he explained that someone could meet most of these criteria and be pathologically narcissistic, but still not necessarily be a cult leader because cult leaders have other traits. For instance, they generally try to isolate people from their families.

In August, GQ interviewed cult expert Rick Alan Ross, director of the Cult Education Institute and a Republican, about Trump. Ross had been watching Trump’s rise with concern and was especially struck by his words at the GOP convention, “I alone can fix it.” Ross said, “That kind of pronouncement is typical of many cult leaders, who say that ‘my way is the only way, I am the only one.’”

Trump shares many key traits with cult leaders including extreme narcissism, Ross said. But “we’re not talking about a compound with a thousand people,” referring to the Reverend Jim Jones. Jones gave cyanide-laced Kool-Aid to more than 900 of his followers in Jonestown — some 300 of them children. “We’re talking about a nation with over 300 million people. So the consequences of Trumpism could affect us in a way Jim Jones never did.”

As I’ve written, if Trump simply follows through on his repeated campaign pledges to kill the Paris climate agreement and all domestic climate action, then he will ruin a livable climate for billions and billions of people for hundreds of years.

That doesn’t make Trump a cult leader, of course, but it does make him very dangerous.

Navarro told me that in the past year, many people have contacted him to comment on Trump’s personality after they came across the behavior checklists he published on narcissistic personality. Understandably, he declined to make a judgment about Trump. He would like to “personally observe” Trump before making any such pronouncement.

Does Donald Trump behave like a narcissist?

As you may have read, the question of whether a psychologist should publicly diagnose someone they haven’t personally observed has a long history. A bunch of psychiatrists responding to a survey offered harsh diagnoses of Barry Goldwater, which ultimately led the American Psychiatric Association to issue a rule that “it is unethical for a psychiatrist to offer a professional opinion unless he or she has conducted an examination and has been granted proper authorization for such a statement.”

Yet some psychiatrists became so concerned about a Trump presidency last November that they broke the rule and were quoted in a Vanity Fair piece, “Is Donald Trump Actually a Narcissist? Therapists Weigh In!”:

“Textbook narcissistic personality disorder,” echoed clinical psychologist Ben Michaelis. “He’s so classic that I’m archiving video clips of him to use in workshops because there’s no better example of his characteristics,” said clinical psychologist George Simon, who conducts lectures and seminars on manipulative behavior. “Otherwise, I would have had to hire actors and write vignettes. He’s like a dream come true.”

Are such diagnoses untenable and/or meaningless? Not necessarily, says psychiatrist Dr. Sally Satel, a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, in an article in Slate in October, “It’s OK to Speculate About Trump’s Mental Health.”

She argues we used to diagnose people by spending a lot of time talking to them. Now the “gold standard” is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition (DSM-V), which bases diagnoses on observations. For instance, these are the nine diagnostic criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) in DSM-V (“Five are needed to be eligible for the diagnosis”):

  • A grandiose logic of self-importance
  • A fixation with fantasies of infinite success, control, brilliance, beauty or idyllic love
  • A credence that he or she is extraordinary and exceptional and can only be understood by, or should connect with, other extraordinary or important people or institutions
  • A desire for unwarranted admiration
  • A sense of entitlement
  • Interpersonally oppressive behavior
  • No form of empathy
  • Resentment of others or a conviction that others are resentful of him or her
  • A display of egotistical and conceited behaviors or attitudes

One of Satel’s main points is that even an official NPD diagnosis by a professional should not necessarily be disqualifying for a presidential candidate.

Interestingly, conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer wrote in August that Trump’s behavior “is beyond narcissism.” In mid-October, he listed “a dazzling array” of “reasons for disqualification: habitual mendacity, pathological narcissism, profound ignorance and an astonishing dearth of basic human empathy.” And so despite how much he despises Hillary Clinton, he could not bring himself to vote for Trump.

Coincidentally, Krauthammer, a trained psychiatrist, “contributed to the creation of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, currently referred to as the DSM-5.”

Ultimately, Fallows himself writes, you don’t need a “medical diagnosis” to realize “there are commonsense meanings for terms to describe behavior,” and “in commonsense terms, anyone can see that Trump’s behavior is narcissistic, regardless of underlying cause.”

The “Warning Signs of the Narcissistic Personality” checklist

The bottom line is that the degree of narcissistic tendencies  —  and the related lack of empathy  —  matters when assessing potential leaders.

Two key reasons Navarro developed his extensive checklists for dangerous personalities are 1) DSM-V has too few criteria to discriminate between degrees of narcissism and 2) he wants to empower individuals to be able to identify these dangerous personalities, because we will never get official diagnoses for the overwhelming majority of people in our lives.

Navarro actually has behavior checklists for four key personality types in his book: the Narcissist, the Paranoid, the Unstable Personality and the Predator. You can see a short version of the “most central” criteria for each type in this 2014 Psychology Today interview.

Navarro, however, directed me to his book for the full checklists. Given my interest in Trump, he pointed me toward the checklists for both the predator and the narcissist. I focused on the latter.

There are 130 “warning signs of the narcissistic personality.” The behavior checklist “will help you determine if someone has the features of the narcissistic personality and where that person falls on a continuum or spectrum (from arrogant and obnoxious to indifferent and callous to abusive and dangerous).”

If you find someone has between 15 and 25 of these features, they’ll “occasionally take an emotional toll on others and may be difficult to live or work with.” Someone who scores between 26 and 65 “has all the features of and behaves as a narcissistic personality. This person needs help and will cause turmoil in the life of anyone close to him or her.” Lastly, Navarro warns:

“If the score is above 65, this person has a preponderance of the major features of a narcissistic personality and is an emotional, psychological, financial or physical danger to you or others.”

Personally, no matter how many times I go through this checklist and give him the benefit of the doubt, I get a score for Trump of over 90. I suspect a great many people would score over him well over 100.

Of course, I’m not asserting that my assessment of his behavior means anything whatsoever. It doesn’t. Nor am I suggesting anything about his followers.

What I am trying to do is to persuade you to download Navarro’s book and do the assessment yourself. That way you can assess for yourself whether or not his behavior is so pathologically narcissistic, so devoid of empathy , that the only viable response to his election is to actively oppose him and his divisive and destructive agenda. As a side benefit, you’ll end up with an important book you can use to identify and protect yourself from the various harmful people you will come across in your life.

If you’re a journalist, you’ll be able to assess whether you need to alter your strategy for interviewing and reporting on him. Again, the key lesson for dealing with a narcissist is “never, ever believe what they say.”

It has been crystal clear for a while that the election of Trump would be catastrophic for humanity, that it would jeopardize the health and well-being of billions and billions of people in the coming decades and centuries. Now that he has been elected, it appears he may move even faster than we thought to destroy the Paris climate agreement, the world’s last, best hope to preserve a livable climate.

If you have any remaining belief that somehow Trump is not a threat to our very way of life  —  if you have the tiniest belief that his pattern of behaviors suggests he could grow into the presidency, as some others have in our history — you should do the checklist. As Navarro told me, “the purpose is to warn people that these traits are fixed and rigid” and that those who possess them in the extreme are a danger to everyone they have power or influence over.

All they never got

Posted on


They never got the chance to live in a warm home, cooking dinner. Laughing with their children. Instead some ended up at hospits, another shot of ampethamine running through their veins. One bad decision, and their lives were changed forever. 

I have just watched an episode of ‘Kristine moves in’. It’s about a journalist moving into different institutions, and in this episode, she stayed at a hospits. She met wonderful people. 

One of the addicts was an artist, paining beautiful pictures. But he had a difficult life, and he made some bad choices that will haunt him for the rest of his life. His talent in front of him in form of a perfect picture. If only he could wake up and see it clearly. 

Whk are we to judge? Could we not be in the same position? What if we’d experienced abuse and trauma? Wouldn’t we want to escape? 

We can sit in our warm houses. We can live our privileged lives. But we should never forget how lucky we are. When we tuck our children into bed at night, remember all the people who lost their chance to do the same. The people who could not provide for the people they love the most. Who were helpless against the addiction.

 Remember all they never got. 

Book's & Life

Interviews, reviews, marketing for writers and artists across the globe with some tit-bits on life.

Hoping for Dandelions

Healing from complex trauma

Frozen in the Fire

Rising up through Grace

Tap ON (Tapan)

I masturbate my thoughts here. Seriously.

Saba Niaz siddiqui

Get rid of ignorance. Let's share what we know and strive to quench the thirst of knowing..

Musings of a Wanderer

Love Travel Meditate

Christian Devotions

Daily Christian thoughts music, poems based around God

Poemysteria

~Poems+Hysteria~

Coronavirus vu du monde : ethnographies d'une crise globale

un peu partout dans les monde, des anthropologues racontent ce que le Corona fait à leur quotidien, ce que leur entourage fait avec le virus.

%d bloggers like this: