By far the most limiting aspect of traditional approaches to understanding the most character-disturbed individuals among us is that purely behavioral descriptions don’t capture the essence of what is unhealthy and problematic in them.
‘Personality Disorders’ at Psychology, Philosophy and Real Life, Page 8
The following articles are related to ‘Personality Disorders’ at Psychology, Philosophy and Real Life.
This list is sorted chronologically, from newest back to earliest.
Aggressive personalities are fundamentally at war with anything that stands in the way of their unrestrained pursuit of their desires.
Splitting refers to the unconscious failure to integrate aspects of self or others into a unified whole. The age old conscious and deliberate game of “dividing and conquering” is not the same as splitting.
Often when someone says that another person is being “passive-aggressive,” they really mean something else. Let’s clarify just what passive-aggression is — and what it isn’t — with the help of a framework for understanding human aggression in general.
Several intriguing comments and questions have been posted in reply to my earlier articles on character disturbance. In this post, I’d like to address some of these and the issues which readers have raised.
Personality and character disorders are not the same thing. Our personality defines the stylistic way we tend to interact, while our character is defined by the level of social conscientiousness and virtue in our personality. When personality or character traits present major obstacles to functioning in a healthy way, they might constitute a disorder.
Almost all the principles of traditional psychology are based upon the attempts of various theorists to explain a phenomenon rare for its time and almost totally unheard of in modern times. Character disturbance — not neurosis — is the pressing psychological reality of our day and simply can’t be understood or dealt with using traditional paradigms.