Latest news with #narcissism
Yahoo
2 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
People Who Heard These 9 Phrases Growing up Were Likely Raised by Self-Centered Parents
People Who Heard These 9 Phrases Growing up Were Likely Raised by Self-Centered Parents originally appeared on Parade. Growing up, "Sticks and stones can break your bones, but words will never hurt me" was a common phrase to get over bullying and help brush off mean things kids were saying. However, words you hear from can stay with you for a lifetime."When we're young, our brains are still developing, and we are easily impressionable, so we naturally trust the adults around us to help shape our sense of self," explains , the author of Silver Linings: From Surviving to Thriving After 9/11 and the founder of Silver Linings Mental Health in Colorado. "That is why the way we are spoken to can have a big impact on our self-esteem, how we handle stress and how we connect with others."If your parents were self-centered, you may have heard phrases that were hurtful, dismissive or manipulative on repeat. And those remarks can continue to play in our heads today. Need a mute button? Silverman shares that finding one involves healing, which requires awareness of how your childhood affects you now, as an adult."[Awareness] gives us the power to heal and grow beyond them," she wants to raise awareness, so she defines what it means when a parent is self-centered. She also shares nine common you probably heard if you had a self-centered parent and how to heal from Since words like "toxic" and "narcissist" are thrown around and sometimes misused on social media, Silverman says it's important to define the true meaning of self-centered parenting. "Self-centered parents are more concerned about their own feelings and needs than about their child's emotional world," she explains. "They might lack emotional awareness, insight or have their own unresolved childhood pain that prevents them from seeing the inner world of their child."It sounds awful—and it can be. However, what's tricky is that sometimes self-centered parents don't even mean to cause harm to a child."It is usually not intentional or malicious, but their behavior can still impact their kids, leaving them feeling unseen, unheard or emotionally dismissed," she Silverman says self-centered parents often resort to this tactic when a child attempts to establish a valid boundary. For instance, it's perfectly reasonable for a teen to ask a parent not to berate them for bringing home a B+."Rather than honoring the child's experience, the parent frames it as entitlement, placing blame on the child instead of reflecting on their own reaction," she explains. This remark's also-toxic cousins include "Stop being such a baby" and "Toughen up." Silverman says phrases that chastise a child for being weak "shut down emotional expression" and can make a child feel like there's something wrong with them for having natural or sensitive reactions."It's dismissive and can prevent healthy emotional development," she explains. Self-centered parents use this phrase to minimize a child's feelings, especially sadness or anger."It puts the parents' discomfort above the child's emotional needs and teaches kids to doubt their own feelings," Silverman Um, yikes? "'Weird' [is used] to shame children for being different, whether emotionally expressive, creative or neurodivergent," Silverman reports. "It typically stems from the parents' concern with appearances or social norms rather than the child's individuality."Related: This one may seem ironic in retrospect as you unpack the long-term effects of a childhood with a self-centered parent. Nevertheless, they still say it."This phrase is frequently directed at children who are learning to set boundaries or speak up for themselves," Silverman says. "Instead of being celebrated, these healthy behaviors are framed as disloyal or hurtful. This can impact the child's assertiveness and sense of setting necessary boundaries."For instance, a child may request that their parent refrain from barking out advice from the sidelines during their soccer game (when the parent is not even coaching). The child isn't acting "selfish" or ungrateful—their feelings are valid (and probably shared with others on the team and sidelines). Silverman says this phrase is a "catch-all" when parents want to silence kids who are questioning, disagreeing or advocating for themselves."It shuts down communication and demands obedience rather than mutual understanding," she says. This one is a close relative of "Just relax," a phrase with a 0% success rate."This can minimize a child's emotions and cause them to second-guess their own perceptions," Silverman says. "It often reflects a parent's discomfort with accountability more than the child's actual behavior." Kids may also hear their self-centered parents describe them this way to teachers, friends or other family members."It suggests a character flaw rather than considering deeper causes like burnout, lack of support or neurodivergence," Silverman warns. "Kids don't thrive on criticism. They need structure, encouragement and understanding." Just reading the phrase may trigger you and bring back unhappy memories if you had a self-centered caregiver."This phrase teaches children to suppress emotions rather than process them," Silverman says. "Over time, this can create anxiety and confusion around emotional expression and trust."Related: Self-centered parents can take up a ton of oxygen and real estate in your head. An objective third party, like a trained therapist, can help you work through the long-term effects of your childhood in a judgment-free setting. You can also develop tools and skills to break generational cycles."Therapy can be a healing space to unravel childhood experiences and how they may still be impacting your adult life," Silverman says. "If you're thinking about starting a family or want to heal your inner child, working with a therapist can offer insight, healing and strategies for change." Silverman says several books and insightful articles can help you feel validated. Some of her favorites are Dr. Susan Forward's Toxic Parents and Dr. Bessel van der Kolk's The Body Keeps the Score."These books can help you identify what you've been through and guide you toward healing," she says. "It can also offer insight and help you understand your experience further." Silverman shares that healing won't happen overnight. Patience and persistence are needed, but it's possible to move forward—and be even stronger than you were before."Keep building emotional awareness and break the cycle," Silverman says. "You can alter the narrative. Developing emotional intelligence, seeking out supportive relationships and committing to self-reflection can help you grow into the person and possibly the parent you want to be."Up Next:Samantha Silverman, LCSW (Licensed Clinical Social Worker), author of Silver Linings: From Surviving to Thriving After 9/11 and founder of Silver Linings Mental Health in Colorado People Who Heard These 9 Phrases Growing up Were Likely Raised by Self-Centered Parents first appeared on Parade on Jun 1, 2025 This story was originally reported by Parade on Jun 1, 2025, where it first appeared.
Forbes
2 days ago
- Health
- Forbes
5 ‘Fallacies' Narcissists Use To Confuse And Control You — By A Psychologist
Narcissists rely on these five 'logical fallacies' like a crutch. But, with a little bit of probing, ... More their arguments ultimately fall flat. Narcissists may come across as confident and convincing during arguments. But as soon as you peel back the surface layers of their reasoning, it begins to lose its integrity. That's because, as research shows, narcissists aren't interested in understanding opposing perspectives. They only care about winning. A 2023 study from Frontiers in Psychology found that narcissists tend to score low in intellectual humility. In other words, they're quick to assume they're right — and just as quick to reject any and all evidence that challenges them. Instead of engaging in good-faith dialogue, they usually resort to manipulative tactics that prop up their ego and snuff dissent. Beyond protecting the narcissist's self-image, these tactics also serve to exploit their victims' vulnerability. As a 2024 study in Memory & Cognition explains, people are more likely to accept weak or poorly reasoned arguments if those arguments align with what they already believe or fear. Narcissists leverage this cognitive bias by framing their arguments in emotionally loaded ways: they reinforce your insecurities by twisting the logic just enough to make you second-guess yourself. This allows them to arm themselves with a suite of flawed but familiar tactics; each is designed to confuse, derail and dominate both you and the conversation. In a previous article, I covered five of the most common fallacies that narcissists rely on. In this follow-up, I'll explore five more tactics they keep in their arsenal — and how they use them to stay in control. A causal fallacy occurs when someone mistakenly assumes there to be a cause-and-effect relationship between two events. This can be achieved in various ways: by oversimplifying an obviously complex situation, by falsely attributing blame to a victim or simply by jumping to conclusions without any evidence. These fallacies are especially dangerous in confrontations, as they serve to manipulatively distort the victim's sense of reality. For instance, a narcissist might claim, 'You made me yell at you by stressing me out.' Here, they imply that their anger was a direct result of the victim's actions. In one sentence, the aggressor suggests the victim is responsible for their behavior, while simultaneously ignoring the fact they chose to react aggressively. Narcissists employ causal fallacies as a means to shift blame onto their victims, all while avoiding accountability for their actions. They represent their behavior as an inevitable reaction to something external; in turn, they spin a narrative in which the victim is the one at fault. Unlike many of the other fallacies, the burden of proof fallacy doesn't serve to conjure up false narratives, nor to ignore or refute the points that have been made. Instead, it occurs when someone shifts the responsibility of proving a claim onto the person who initially made it. Yet, in great similarity to the other fallacies, this tactic also serves to evade accountability. Specifically, because it demands an unreasonable — or even impossible — level of evidence from the accuser. For instance, if a victim says, 'You've been lying to me,' the narcissist would simply respond with, 'Well, then prove it.' Even if there's very clear circumstantial evidence to support the claim, they refuse to acknowledge wrongdoing. That is, unless the victim provides absolute, irrefutable proof, which makes it all the more difficult to hold them accountable. Narcissists rely on the burden of proof when they are acutely aware of how challenging it will be for their victim to distinctly or undeniably evince their deception or manipulation. Naturally, deferring this responsibility sets an incredibly unfair standard: it makes it nearly impossible for their victim to gain closure or defend their dignity. The appeal to nature fallacy erroneously assumes that something is good, right or acceptable simply by claiming that it's 'natural.' Despite how persuasive these arguments may sound, it's important to note that this reasoning completely ignores whatever ethical concerns surround the behaviors. The appeal to nature oversimplifies objectively harmful human behaviors; by attributing these behaviors to biology or tradition — rather than personal choice — the victim is falsely led to believe that they're impossible to condemn. For instance, a male narcissist might justify their aggression by saying, 'Men are just naturally dominant. You should accept it.' Or, on the other hand, a female narcissist might say, 'Women are naturally overprotective. You can't blame me for that.' Arguments like these suggest that harmful behaviors, such as control or possessiveness, are merely unavoidable. But, in reality, these behaviors are always a conscious decision — ones that can and should be challenged and changed. Narcissists appeal to nature purely so that they can normalize their unacceptable or abusive behaviors. They frame their actions as either natural or inevitable, and, as a result, they render any meaningful discussion regarding boundaries futile. More insidiously, these appeals make their victim feel unreasonable for expecting a different or better relationship with the aggressor. Cyclically, this reinforces control by making it seem as though the victim is resisting something fundamental, rather than rightly rejecting their mistreatment. The appeal to ignorance fallacy is, in many ways, quite similar to the burden of proof. However, it rests on a different, faulty (yet equally cunning) assumption: that a lack of evidence against something automatically makes it true. Or, conversely, that a lack of evidence for something automatically makes it false. In reality, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. When narcissists use this fallacy, they exploit uncertainty by twisting it into certainty. For instance, if someone says, 'You've been acting strangely lately, and I get the feeling that you're hiding something from me.' In turn, a narcissist might respond with, 'If you can't prove I've done anything wrong, then I haven't.' Unlike the burden of proof — which pressures others to produce impossible evidence — the appeal to ignorance shuts down the conversation by pretending that not having definitive proof is the same thing as being exonerated. It reframes ambiguity as innocence, which urges the victim to discount their own judgment. This tactic is especially effective in emotionally complex situations. If intuition, patterns or past behavior may point to wrongdoing, but hard proof is hard to come by, narcissists lean on this fallacy to rewrite the narrative in their favor. The appeal to personal incredulity fallacy serves to dismiss something as false simply because it sounds unbelievable or difficult to understand. This reasoning invalidly relies on gut reactions, rather than any hard facts. Consequently, it allows aggressors to reject evidence of their wrongdoings — purely because they don't like or can't comprehend it. Say, for instance, a narcissist is presented with evidence of their manipulation tactics. In response, they might say something like, 'That's ridiculous! I would never do that.' Here, they reject reality simply because they don't want to acknowledge it. As opposed to taking the time to disprove the claim or apologize, they merely dismiss it outright as being absurd. Narcissists often rely on personal incredulity fallacies, as it allows them to shut down conversations without expending any effort whatsoever. They simply act as though an idea is too far-fetched to even consider, which makes it nearly impossible to challenge. In turn, it's futile for the victim to attempt to discuss their behavior in any meaningful way. And, even if they do, they'll more than likely tire themselves out by over-explaining their concerns. Concerned that you might have narcissistic tendencies? Take this science-backed test to find out if it's cause for concern: Narcissism Scale
Forbes
3 days ago
- Health
- Forbes
5 ‘Argument Tactics' That Narcissists Rely On — By A Psychologist
To strip the power from an emotional abuser, you must recognize their argument tactics for what they ... More are: logical fallacies. Narcissists tend to vastly overestimate the accuracy of their own beliefs. They become defensive, or even combative, when confronted with viewpoints that don't align with their own. As a 2023 study published in Frontiers in Psychology explains, this is due to the fact that narcissists often exhibit very low levels of intellectual humility. As a result, they rely heavily on manipulative argument tactics that serve to protect their inflated self-image. At face value, these tactics might seem clever, or maybe even intellectually sound. In reality, however, these tactics focus more on control than they do logic. A 2024 study in published in Memory & Cognition also notes that individuals prone to such poor argument tactics are highly likely to accept and perpetuate information that confirms their existing beliefs. Narcissists exploit this cognitive bias to others' wits end: they frame their arguments to align with their victims' fears or insecurities, or in ways that defend their warped self-image. As such, they're adept at spinning webs of flawed reasoning that feel convincing — but, under any actual scrutiny, they fall right apart. In other words, many of their go-to argument tactics are riddled with errors that are designed to deflect blame and derail conversations. In turn, they keep themselves in a position of control. Here are five logical fallacies narcissists often rely on, and why they keep them in their repertoire. The ad hominem fallacy occurs when someone chooses to attack the person making an argument instead of addressing the actual argument itself. They refuse to engage with the issue that was brought up, and instead discredit the speaker by focusing on their personal traits, emotions or past behavior. As a result, they shut down the discussion in its entirety. For instance, say you confront a narcissist about their manipulative behavior. With an ad hominem attack, they might respond with, 'You're just insecure and bitter, that's why you're making such a big deal out of this.' Rather than addressing your very real concerns, they attack you instead. As a result, your criticisms are rendered 'irrational' in their eyes. Narcissists heavily rely on ad hominem attacks, largely due to the fact that they will avoid engaging with facts that threaten their self-image at all costs. By turning the discussion into a critique of the accuser rather than their own actions, they change the course of the conversation. They make the victim feel self-conscious about raising concerns, which ensures the narcissist remains in control. The false dichotomy fallacy arises once someone presents two extreme options as the only possible choices; they ignore the existence of middle-ground or nuance. This type of reasoning serves to force the victim (and the conversation as a whole) into a total gridlock. In turn, they prevent the possibility of any thoughtful discussions ensuing. For instance, if you critique something that a narcissist says or does, they might respond in black-or-white statements like, 'Either you agree with me, or you're against me.' They equate any disagreement whatsoever with outright hostility. But, in reality, relationships cannot function without compromise. Nor can discussions be productive without acknowledging the existence of both parties' perspectives. Regardless, the narcissist limits the conversation to two opposing sides, which takes reasonable discourse out of the question entirely. Narcissists favor false dichotomies given how well they simplify complex issues in ways that solely benefit them. By forcing you to choose between two extremes — total compliance or rejection — they pressure you out of thinking critically or independently. More cunningly, this also serves to instill you with guilt: as though refusing to align with their viewpoints equates to a signal of disloyalty. 'Strawmanning' refers to the distortion of another person's claim, which makes it easier to attack, refute or ignore. They refrain from acknowledging any of the actual points that were made, and opt instead to exaggerate, oversimplify or misrepresent the argument. Consequently, the argument is painted as unreasonable or extreme. This eschews them from accountability, while simultaneously dismissing your concerns. Imagine that you've calmly expressed your discomfort about a narcissist's behavior. In response, they start a tirade with, 'Oh, so now I'm the worst person in the world? I guess I can never do anything right!' But by grossly exaggerating the complaint, they turn it into an extreme accusation (which was never never actually made) and trick you into focusing on damage control instead. Strawmanning is useful when a narcissist feels the need to redirect the conversation, or when they want to put their victim on the defensive. They turn your genuine concerns into a caricature, or create an entirely new, false version of it, to ensure the discussion revolves around their feelings instead of their actions. Not only does this discourage you from bringing up concerns in the future, but it also allows them to cherry-pick which of your points are worth giving credence to — even if they aren't based in reality. A red herring is a distraction tactic in which an unrelated topic is brought up purely to steer the conversation away from the real issue at hand. This technique is used to discombobulate the opposition, and to, once again, make it impossible to hold the person accountable for their actions. For example, when confronted about emotionally hurtful behavior, a narcissist might suddenly say to you, 'Well, remember when you forgot my birthday last year?' With this completely out-of-left-field rebuttal, your attention is diverted away from their actions. In lieu of admitting any kind of wrongdoing, they portray you as the aggressor and themselves as the victim. Red herrings are ideal when a narcissist is confronted with an argument that makes them feel uncomfortable, as they can derail the discussion in a manner that still allows them complete control over the narrative. Much like the other fallacies, red herrings divert your focus in a direction that ultimately only benefits them. You're forced into a position in which you must now defend yourself. Distractions like these are thrown in the hopes that their behavior will pale in comparison to yours — or that you forget you even brought it up in the first place. An appeal to hypocrisy, or tu quoque fallacy, is made by deflecting criticism with the fact that the accuser has likely done something similar in their lifetime. Once again, rather than addressing whether their behavior is right or wrong, the argument is sidetracked to whether the other person has ever made a similar mistake. In charged discussions, this appeal may actually seem like a valid rebuttal, which is what makes it so reliable. Ultimately, however, it's simply another way to avoid taking responsibility. For instance, imagine that you're trying to call a narcissist out about lying. Instead of explaining why they lied, or admitting that it was hurtful, they instead say, 'Oh, so you've never lied before?' Dishonesty is no longer the topic at hand; your past mistakes are instead. With this logic, they make it seem as though only a 'perfect person' has the right to call them out. Narcissists employ appeals to hypocrisy when they have no desire to engage in a meaningful conversation about their actions. They choose instead to create a false equivalence that vindicates them — a reality where there's neither a need to take accountability or admit that their behavior was unjustified. Concerned that you might have narcissistic tendencies? Take this science-backed test to find out if it's cause for concern: Narcissism Scale
Daily Mail
5 days ago
- General
- Daily Mail
Can YOU spot the psychopath based on these headshots? New study reveals subtle clues in people's faces
Would you be able to detect narcissism or psychopathy simply by looking at someone's face? Science suggests it's possible. A new study has demonstrated that people with so-called 'dark triad personality traits' share similar facial features and expressions. They tend to have stronger brow ridges, unreadable expressions, symmetrical faces, narrower eyes, and a direct gaze — and they smile less. Researchers in Turkey conducted three studies on people from Turkey and America who looked at photos of digitally created faces. The faces has been carefully crafted based on features associated with high or low levels of Dark Triad traits based on photos constructed by averaging the facial features of real individuals who scored either high or low on Dark Triad trait tests. The study showed that people could identify all of these traits at least 50 to 75 percent of the time from headshots alone. Scientists suggest that people's ability to identify these traits may be an evolutionary adaptation that our human ancestors developed to avoid dangerous people. 'Estimating the personality traits of others has adaptive advantages such as being aware of the opportunities and costs that the other party can offer... and it can guide us about behaving and making decisions in our social interactions,' the researchers wrote in the paper published in Personality and Individual Differences. People with the three main Dark Triad traits —narcissism (grandiose self-obsession), Machiavellianism (cold, tactical manipulation), and psychopathy (impulsive ruthlessness)— are often manipulative and emotional brick walls, typically willing to do or say anything to get their way. They also have a grandiose sense of self, are typically impulsive, and may engage in dangerous or exploitative behavior, such as love-bombing and emotional blackmail. People with these traits can be especially adept at hiding them, especially at first. Narcissists often come off as exceedingly charming and engaging upon meeting them. Machiavellians, meanwhile, excel at adjusting their moral values based on what will benefit them most and tend to be callous and cold. Researchers conducted three studies encompassing 880 total people. They viewed composite images from photos of people who scored very high or very low on personality tests, and were asked to guess which face displayed more of a given trait. The first study involved 160 Americans who looked at composite face images depicting high and low levels of the Dark Triad and Big Five traits -- openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism (anxious versus stable). People had to guess which of two faces scored higher on a given trait. Participants guessed correctly over 50 percent of the time for Dark Triad traits, while the Big Five were identified less often. There were, however, a few exceptions, including agreeableness – which involves being kind and trustworthy, was the easiest for study subjects to spot, particularly in male faces – 58 to 78 percent of the time; conscientiousness, about 55 percent of the time, and extraversion, roughly 75 percent of the time. But people consistently struggled to identify openness and neuroticism, which covers emotional instability, anxiety, self-consciousness, and sadness, often guessing the associated faces incorrectly. They identified extraversion – being outgoing, sociable, and energized by social interactions – only in women's faces, not men's. In study two, researchers included 322 American adults who participated in the same study as the first but also included demographic questions such as age, ideology, and sex, which helps ensure that effects aren't driven by particular hidden biases, like if one group skews younger or more liberal. Dark Triad traits were again correctly identified, while identification of the Big Five traits was more mixed. Again, the only two that were not identifiable were neuroticism and openness. The subjects were not influenced by age, sex, or political ideology. Study two proved that the results of study one were not a fluke, researchers concluded. Study three involved 402 Turkish college students who repeated study two, but in a classroom setting. The results were the same. And they were better than American adults at identifying narcissism, though less able to judge male extraversion and openness. Researchers did not identify any of the faces belonging to people with psychopathy. Still, those people with those disorders tend to also possess those personality traits, including callousness, thrill-seeking behavior, ease of manipulating people, and superficial charisma. Throughout human evolution, being able to 'read' people has proven a key survival mechanism. Spotting personality traits by how someone looks gives people an advantage, telling us to steer clear of a person who seems manipulative or exploitative. These traits inform the way people act. People who score high in extraversion are typically easy to spot because they are talkative, energetic, and quick to smile. They exhibit outward cues, including a relaxed posture and a warm expression, that are typically easily recognized. On the other side of the spectrum, people with the Dark Triad traits are more likely to lie, manipulate, and act aggressively, which makes them more likely to cause trouble in workplaces and in their relationships.
Entrepreneur
5 days ago
- Business
- Entrepreneur
Why All Leaders Need a Touch of Narcissism
Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own. You're reading Entrepreneur United Kingdom, an international franchise of Entrepreneur Media. I've certainly never seen it in a list of key requirements on a job description. Yet decades' worth of research tells a very different story. Because it shows that a little narcissism can go a long way, helping leaders be effective, and that, in many situations, it may actually be essential for effective leadership. There are different types of narcissism, but it essentially involves being preoccupied with yourself, and is commonly associated with overconfidence, being overly-dominant, believing oneself to be superior to others, and having a sense of entitlement, and a need for admiration. So, to be fair, it doesn't sound like the ideal foundation for leadership. And backing this up, there is a wealth of research showing that narcissistic people can make really, really bad, ineffective and destructive leaders. For example, they tend to be less willing to heed expert advice and more likely to rely on what they already know and over-simplistic formulas. They are thus more likely to make poorly informed decisions. Feeding off flattery, they tend to encourage ingratiation and reduce employee voice. They are also more likely to create a working culture in which bullying and fraud exist. And as a result of all that, as CEOs they tend to both be more vulnerable to lawsuits and produce extreme and fluctuating levels of organisational performance. One could be forgiven, therefore, for thinking that narcissism isn't good. Except, when it comes to someone's suitability for leadership roles, it often is. Because there is evidence that moderately narcissistic leaders can be highly effective in many situations. The main driver of this is that they tend to a bit overconfident and so more likely to take risks and invest. So, they're more able to find and take opportunities. They also tend to be more persuasive and better at interviews and presentations, which means boards and investors are often attracted to them. For example, with investors, overconfident CEOs have been shown to be more able to secure credit and negotiate lower financing costs. And finally, the point has also been made that surviving the pressures of being a senior leader often requires the thick-skinned self-belief that narcissism gives people. So, on multiple fronts, moderately narcissistic leaders tend to be better equipped for the challenges of leadership. And as one final piece of evidence, there's the fact that people without any trace of narcissism often lack confidence, decisiveness and assertiveness – all valuable traits in a leader. As a result, the consensus amongst researchers these days is that a mild case of narcissism can be extremely useful for leaders, especially when bold, innovative strategies are required. The caveat to all this, of course, is that too much narcissism is almost always a bad thing. And for leaders themselves, it can be next to impossible to notice when they reach that tipping point. One of the challenges here, as well, is that the authority, control and power that come with being a leader tend to increase people's pride and confidence, and therefore also their susceptibility to hubris and narcissism. How, then, can you walk the line between believing in yourself, but not falling foul of believing a bit too much? The key lies in watching how others react to you and to look for two things in particular. First, ingratiation or continual praise from others – as they tend to be both a sign of narcissism and a reason why it can rapidly become much, much worse. Second, the degree to which people are willing to question, challenge and disagree with you. Because they should be doing so, and if they're not, that usually means something about how you're behaving is holding them back. So, let's give credit where it's due and hear a cheer for a little narcissism. Because being focused on you and how you feel and what you believe isn't always a bad thing. Just be careful you don't believe it too much.
