Psychologist says "We are raising a generation of deluded narcissists"

- Because of social media people can warp their sense of reality of how interesting their life really is.
- More people think being scandalous warrants being famous instead of having a positive reason for getting attention.
- People these days think they are talented even though they're not.
- This generation and the general public is full of idiots

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/01/08/are-raising-generation-deluded-narcissists/

- Because of social media people can warp their sense of reality of how interesting their life really is.
- More people think being scandalous warrants being famous instead of having a positive reason for getting attention.
- People these days think they are talented even though they're not.
- This generation and the general public is full of idiots

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/01/08/are-raising-generation-deluded-narcissists/

mingmao3046

- Because of social media people can warp their sense of reality of how interesting their life really is.

mingmao3046

On Facebook, young people can fool themselves into thinking they have hundreds or thousands of friends. They can delete unflattering comments. They can block anyone who disagrees with them or pokes holes in their inflated self-esteem. They can choose to show the world only flattering, sexy or funny photographs of themselves (dozens of albums full, by the way), speak in pithy short posts and publicly connect to movie stars and professional athletes and musicians they like.Keith Ablow

[QUOTE="mingmao3046"]

- Because of social media people can warp their sense of reality of how interesting their life really is.

Blood-Scribe

On Facebook, young people can fool themselves into thinking they have hundreds or thousands of friends. They can delete unflattering comments. They can block anyone who disagrees with them or pokes holes in their inflated self-esteem. They can choose to show the world only flattering, sexy or funny photographs of themselves (dozens of albums full, by the way), speak in pithy short posts and publicly connect to movie stars and professional athletes and musicians they like.Keith Ablow

[QUOTE="mingmao3046"]

- Because of social media people can warp their sense of reality of how interesting their life really is.

Blood-Scribe

On Facebook, young people can fool themselves into thinking they have hundreds or thousands of friends. They can delete unflattering comments. They can block anyone who disagrees with them or pokes holes in their inflated self-esteem. They can choose to show the world only flattering, sexy or funny photographs of themselves (dozens of albums full, by the way), speak in pithy short posts and publicly connect to movie stars and professional athletes and musicians they like.Keith Ablow

That's rich:D.

He has no credibility in my mind. Just another unintelligent drone trying to capitalize by saying something about "kids these days". There is plenty wrong with what he's saying, but I'll just leave with this for now: if he thinks narcissism is something new he should probably check history. It's a trait that has been around for millenia and some of the most narcissistic figures to ever exist are long dead.

[QUOTE="mingmao3046"]

- Because of social media people can warp their sense of reality of how interesting their life really is.
- More people think being scandalous warrants being famous instead of having a positive reason for getting attention.
- People these days think they are talented even though they're not.
- This generation and the general public is full of idiots

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/01/08/are-raising-generation-deluded-narcissists/

LLYNCES

"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for
authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place
of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their
households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They
contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties
at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers."

-Socrates

Fox News... Deluded narcissists... Ok then

How is the virtual environment less real? Is spending time in a library real whereas spending time on Wikipedia is not? I don't understand the logic according to which such a major part of our life is deemed "less real" by an older generation that can't adapt to it.

Is this generation really dumber or was every generation just as stupid, but this one is the first that can make its voice heard thanks to new technologies?

Fox News going "everybody is an idiot except for us" again? Nothing new

I agree with all those points. People are idiots

Ablow wrote a column arguing that Newt Gingrich's three marriages actually made him more qualified to be president. He wrote: "When three women want to sign on for life with a man who is now running for president, I worry more about whether well be clamoring for a third Gingrich term, not whether well want to let him go after one."nocoolnamejim

:lol::lol:

In April 2011, Ablow wrote a health column for FoxNews.com[14] which criticized designer Jenna Lyons for publishing an advertisement in the J. Crew catalogue in which she was depicted painting her young son's toenails hot pink. Ablow wrote that gender distinctions are "part of the magnificent synergy that creates and sustains the human race". The column sparked a controversy around his claims that painting a child's toenails pink could have an effect on their gender identity and led to accusations of overreaction, as was reported upon by numerous news media sources.[15][16][17][18] Ablow refused to back down, even re-posting the column on his Facebook page. nocoolnamejim

Oh, wow. Fvck this guy. People like him are the reason I was kept in the closet for so long.

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"] Ablow wrote a column arguing that Newt Gingrich's three marriages actually made him more qualified to be president. He wrote: "When three women want to sign on for life with a man who is now running for president, I worry more about whether well be clamoring for a third Gingrich term, not whether well want to let him go after one."JML897

:lol::lol:

i'll tell you what we are rising! communism!!!!! godless liberals destorying the world!

If that isn't common knowledge I don't know what is.

Not sure that you can list the author of that article as an expert in the field anymore given that he's not a member of the APA. Keith Ablow [quote="Wikipedia"] Dr. Ablow has made a number of controversial statements, including psychological assessments of various celebrities he has never examined, that have drawn criticism from other practitioners in his field as well from as various organizations and groups which were offended by his comments. Ablow has stated in an article on the Fox News website[13] that years ago he "resigned in protest" from the American Psychiatric Association, which is the governing body that sets the standard of practice in the field of psychiatry and publishes the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). In the article, he did not state what he had been protesting about, but expressed his disagreement with various entries in the DSM. Articles by Dr. Ablow later clarified that he worried that the American Psychiatric Association had stood silent while the psychotherapeutic skills once learned by psychiatrists were left out of current training regimens. He also agreed with leaders in the field like Paul McHugh, MD and Phillip Slavney, MD that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (published by the APA) was oversimplifying human experience and pathologizing it. In April 2011, Ablow wrote a health column for FoxNews.com[14] which criticized designer Jenna Lyons for publishing an advertisement in the J. Crew catalogue in which she was depicted painting her young son's toenails hot pink. Ablow wrote that gender distinctions are "part of the magnificent synergy that creates and sustains the human race". The column sparked a controversy around his claims that painting a child's toenails pink could have an effect on their gender identity and led to accusations of overreaction, as was reported upon by numerous news media sources.[15][16][17][18] Ablow refused to back down, even re-posting the column on his Facebook page. During the 2012 Republican primary, Ablow wrote a column arguing that Newt Gingrich's three marriages actually made him more qualified to be president. He wrote: "When three women want to sign on for life with a man who is now running for president, I worry more about whether well be clamoring for a third Gingrich term, not whether well want to let him go after one."[19] The column was criticized, with Rod Dreher of The American Conservative commenting thusly: "Oh for fracks sake. At some point, you have to wonder when shamelessness crosses the line from character defect to psychopathology. If only Dr. Leo Spaceman were a Republican, he could have a lucrative career on Fox."[20] Dr. Ablow later clarified that his position was that one's private sexual life should remain private and that dissecting the sex lives of public figures was counterproductive and salacious. While providing Fox News television "medical analysis" of the October 11th, 2012 Vice Presidential debate, Ablow strongly and repeatedly suggested that some of Vice President Joe Biden's behaviors, such as interruptions of the opposing candidate and what he believed to be excessive laughter, might mean that he should be evaluated for dementia, alcoholism, or other conditions.[21] "I'm not diagnosing him," he clarified. "I haven't evaluated him. But psychological testing - It's anyone's guess what it would show." Psychologist John Grohol questioned Ablow's ethical behavior in an article on Psych Central, a website he created for the the accurate dissemination of authoritative mental health information to the public. Citing Section 7, Article 3 of the APA's "Principles of Medical Ethics...,"[22] he accused Ablow of a double standard.[23] "He prefaces his comments with a standard disclaimer media doctors often try to use to make it sound more ethical. Dr. Keith Ablow acknowledges hes never seen Joe Biden in a professional capacity. Yet, Dr. Ablow is discussing differential diagnoses about Biden as though he had...Would anyone feel comfortable being judged by a medical professional like Dr. Ablow based upon a single incident like this?" At the time of Dr. Ablow's comments, however, he was no longer affiliated with the APA and not technically bound to its ethical standards. nocoolnamejim

It's never easy to self-diagnose projection.

I can agree with pretty much everything OP said.

He has no credibility in my mind. Just another unintelligent drone trying to capitalize by saying something about "kids these days". There is plenty wrong with what he's saying, but I'll just leave with this for now: if he thinks narcissism is something new he should probably check history. It's a trait that has been around for millenia and some of the most narcissistic figures to ever exist are long dead.

TacticalDesire

If he has the education and has both practiced and published in peer-reviewed journals, then he's an expert. Being an expert doesn't mean you're the best, but it does mean that you hold the credentials that assure you possess a certain level of expertise.

Foxnews really knows how to pick their "experts." :eyeroll:jimkabrhel

Who you gonna call? Narcissist-busters.

Only 30% of this country believes in evolution

I say we have bigger problems than social media narcissism.

There is definitely some truth to that. Looking around OT proves it.

Only 30% of this country believes in evolution

I say we have bigger problems than social media narcissism.

Blue-Sky

[QUOTE="jimkabrhel"]Foxnews really knows how to pick their "experts." :eyeroll:JohnF111

I'm secretly a pirate. But don't tell Pirate700.

[QUOTE="TacticalDesire"]

He has no credibility in my mind. Just another unintelligent drone trying to capitalize by saying something about "kids these days". There is plenty wrong with what he's saying, but I'll just leave with this for now: if he thinks narcissism is something new he should probably check history. It's a trait that has been around for millenia and some of the most narcissistic figures to ever exist are long dead.

Ernesto_basic

If he has the education and has both practiced and published in peer-reviewed journals, then he's an expert. Being an expert doesn't mean you're the best, but it does mean that you hold the credentials that assure you possess a certain level of expertise.

[QUOTE="Ernesto_basic"]

[QUOTE="TacticalDesire"]

He has no credibility in my mind. Just another unintelligent drone trying to capitalize by saying something about "kids these days". There is plenty wrong with what he's saying, but I'll just leave with this for now: if he thinks narcissism is something new he should probably check history. It's a trait that has been around for millenia and some of the most narcissistic figures to ever exist are long dead.

nocoolnamejim

If he has the education and has both practiced and published in peer-reviewed journals, then he's an expert. Being an expert doesn't mean you're the best, but it does mean that you hold the credentials that assure you possess a certain level of expertise.

Unless he's no longer licensed to practice due to a discrepancy related to ineptitude, then he's still an expert (being licensed to practice is something completely different). Writing an article is far different than representing someone in a courtroom or performing a procedure on a patient - those licenses are there to ensure that the person performing/practicing has been licensed (met the minimum requirements - nothing more) in that state and DO NOT determine the rigor nor the aptitude of that person's ability to practice.

For instance, in the realm of information security, the CISSP - accredited by (ISC)2 - is the "gold" standard for information security professionals (similar to the CPA for accounting and the PMP for project management). The Department of Defense REQUIRES (DoD 8570 to be exact) you to have the CISSP for handling their most sensitive systems, yet it does not determine who is or isn't an expert in information security.

Only 30% of this country believes in evolution

I say we have bigger problems than social media narcissism.

Blue-Sky

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="Ernesto_basic"]

If he has the education and has both practiced and published in peer-reviewed journals, then he's an expert. Being an expert doesn't mean you're the best, but it does mean that you hold the credentials that assure you possess a certain level of expertise.

Ernesto_basic

Unless he's no longer licensed to practice due to a discrepancy related to ineptitude, then he's still an expert (being licensed to practice is something completely different). Writing an article is far different than representing someone in a courtroom or performing a procedure on a patient - those licenses are there to ensure that the person performing/practicing has been licensed (met the minimum requirements - nothing more) in that state and DO NOT determine the rigor nor the aptitude of that person's ability to practice.

For instance, in the realm of information security, the CISSP - accredited by (ISC)2 - is the "gold" standard for information security professionals (similar to the CPA for accounting and the PMP for project management). The Department of Defense REQUIRES (DoD 8570 to be exact) you to have the CISSP for handling their most sensitive systems, yet it does not determine who is or isn't an expert in information security.

[QUOTE="Ernesto_basic"]

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"] When someone is no longer a member of the organization that hands out accreditation in their profession, typically they're no longer considered to hold any credentials whatsoever. Would you let someone perform heart surgery on you if they were no longer a member of the American Medical Association and hadn't been for years? How about someone represent you in court if they were no longer a member of the American Bar Association. This guy is a paid shill for hire these days, nothing more. You may as well ask your local hot dog vendor for psychiatric advice over a guy who thinks the greater the number of times you're married the better your qualifications to be president of the united states. nocoolnamejim

Unless he's no longer licensed to practice due to a discrepancy related to ineptitude, then he's still an expert (being licensed to practice is something completely different). Writing an article is far different than representing someone in a courtroom or performing a procedure on a patient - those licenses are there to ensure that the person performing/practicing has been licensed (met the minimum requirements - nothing more) in that state and DO NOT determine the rigor nor the aptitude of that person's ability to practice.

For instance, in the realm of information security, the CISSP - accredited by (ISC)2 - is the "gold" standard for information security professionals (similar to the CPA for accounting and the PMP for project management). The Department of Defense REQUIRES (DoD 8570 to be exact) you to have the CISSP for handling their most sensitive systems, yet it does not determine who is or isn't an expert in information security.

There could be a number of legitimate reasons for him to not be a current member of the APA - many that have NOTHING to do with his degree of expertise. The fact that you bring politics into the discussion - particularly in the derogatory tone you've chosen to express yourself with, does nothing to support or strengthen your argument. So a few call his expertise into question; what does that prove? Just as easily as one can call another's credibility into question, others can do so unto them - sounds like a subjective matter of opinion without objective facts, huh?

There could be a number of legitimate reasons for him to not be a current member of the APA - many that have NOTHING to do with his degree of expertise. The fact that you bring politics into the discussion - particularly in the derogatory tone you've chosen to express yourself with, does nothing to support or strengthen your argument. So a few call his expertise into question; what does that prove? Just as easily as one can call another's credibility into question, others can do so unto them - sounds like a subjective matter of opinion without objective facts, huh?

Ernesto_basic

[QUOTE="Ernesto_basic"]

There could be a number of legitimate reasons for him to not be a current member of the APA - many that have NOTHING to do with his degree of expertise. The fact that you bring politics into the discussion - particularly in the derogatory tone you've chosen to express yourself with, does nothing to support or strengthen your argument. So a few call his expertise into question; what does that prove? Just as easily as one can call another's credibility into question, others can do so unto them - sounds like a subjective matter of opinion without objective facts, huh?

nocoolnamejim

Yeah, I'm not going to dissect political theater to either prove or disprove anything - that's a path to insanity.

[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="Ernesto_basic"]

There could be a number of legitimate reasons for him to not be a current member of the APA - many that have NOTHING to do with his degree of expertise. The fact that you bring politics into the discussion - particularly in the derogatory tone you've chosen to express yourself with, does nothing to support or strengthen your argument. So a few call his expertise into question; what does that prove? Just as easily as one can call another's credibility into question, others can do so unto them - sounds like a subjective matter of opinion without objective facts, huh?

Ernesto_basic

Yeah, I'm not going to dissect political theater to either prove or disprove anything - that's a path to insanity.

Only 30% of this country believes in evolution

I say we have bigger problems than social media narcissism.

Blue-Sky

Psychologist are idiots, yeah it's TV's fault with their reality shows, not you lot pumping kids with all kinds of drugs cause he can't pay attention in class or some crap like that. m25105

TV is a drug.

Blah blah liberal facts, blah blah reasoning, blah blah reality...nocoolnamejim

Basically this.