Comments on: Neurosis vs. Character Disorder: Self-Image Issues

By: Dr George Simon, PhD

Dr George Simon, PhD — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 16:57:07 +0000

Thanks for your comment, Ken. I’m not sure what you disagree about, the accuracy of my reporting about the science or the prevailing interpretations stemming from the most recent research.

I too, have come across bullies who I felt reasonably sure were cowards “underneath.” However, the research is quite clear that it would be wrong to make such a sweeping generalization. Indeed, in MOST cases, not only are bullies not cowards, but the fact that they tend to victimize the weak is not a de facto proof that they fear more formidable opposition (though that’s a viable possibility, granted.) Science has more than scratched the surface on this issue.

You have had some experiences that appear to have convinced you that the traditional assumption about bullies is correct. I would ask you to consider that it’s always risky to for us to generalize from our experiences, no matter how many of them we have had. While I will easily grant you that not all bullies are alike, the evidence is fairly overwhelming about the majority of them. The principal causes of bullying are not low self-esteem and cowardice but aggressive temperament, lack of empathy development (could easily explain what appeared to be the use of baby as a shield) and deficient parenting with respect to the use of an control of power. And most bullies target the anxious, sensitive, and those prone not to retaliate not because they fear those who are stronger but because it gives them a “quick and easy” sense of “superiority” over those they perceive as “weaker.” They see more formidable opponents as “peers” and therefore can’t feel “superior” to them.

You indicate you’d like more details. Because the research is so abundant, I’d start with Dan Olweus and the research done at the University of Bergen.

Lastly, I wrote this piece and included the research on bullying as a way of illustrating a necessary point. It was not meant as on overly simplistic way of looking at bullies.
Rather, it was a way to illustrate that some of our longstanding assumptions about the underlying causes of behavior are not only not as accurate as they intuitively seem but also can inadvertently increase a person’s risk of being victimized by behavior that they misinterpret.

By: Ken Sack

Ken Sack — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 15:40:16 +0000

You claim that the bullies are really cowards belief, has been debunked by “some fairly sound science in the last 20 years”. With respect, I disagree. I’m in my late 50’s and have observed many such bullies (all my family members are bullies). I once had a bully verbally attack me. He had his baby in his arms the whole time, using it as a shield. I have seen this again and again. They are bold roaring lions when they believe they have a soft mark, or have a shield of some sort (they are a parent, teacher, work-boss), but when when confronted with obvious danger, they are cowards. My reply to this “fairly sound science in the last 20 years”conclusion, is scratch the surface, don’t just take things at face value. Isn’t this the mistake Margaret Mead made in Samoa? And I would love to have details of this “fairly sound science” as well.

By: Dr George Simon, PhD

Dr George Simon, PhD — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 15:29:58 +0000

Great question, Kelvin about whether a person with Schizoid Personality Disorder would be considered more neurotic vs. character-disordered on balance. Schizoid PD is a rare condition, best conceptualized as an “asocial” personality pattern. That is, in contrast to the avoidant personality who desires intimate conduct but is so afraid of being hurt that he avoids it, the schizoid personality lacks the typical interest for human engagement. There are many who wonder whether the entire cluster of personality syndromes that are marked by some of these odd or eccentric qualities should rightfully even be thought of as personality disorders. It’s quite possible, for example, that what appears a personality preference of disengagement, is really the result of a low-level thought process disturbance or autistic-like tendency. Although schizoid personalities are probably best viewed as more neurotic than character disordered, neither metaphor appears adequate to describe this personality type.

By: Kelvin Ng

Kelvin Ng — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 03:04:20 +0000

Would schizoid personality disorder be considered neurosis or character disorder?

By: Evan

Evan — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:01:09 +0000

I’m not sure if I’m reading you correctly. You seem to me to be saying that neurosis can have pro-social consequences, while character disorder doesn’t?

Looking forward to the future posts.

By: Diane

Diane — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 02:27:18 +0000

I’d love to hear the relationship to children psychology on this bully issue. That they have debunked that they are cowards and they really think they are all that. hmmm… Since I have worked with kids often times one of the parents is of the same mainframe.

And relationship to the deluge of high school/College shootings that has escalated in the past 15 years.

What disorder or neurosis would apply here?