Methodology to Break Through Our Culture of Narcissism

March 10, 2025

 

Reading through the latest Martin Geddes essay —

“Crypto Metaphysics” — London, Wed 12th March

— I was struck by his references to today’s prevailing culture of narcissism as well as his recognition that it is due to people’s reliance on the ego. Geddes assumes that’s because narcissists “lack a true self” (soul, essence). I assume that narcissists don’t lack a true self, but that they are unaware of its existence, being stuck at an early developmental stage —  which I speculate is the age of two, the “terrible two’s,” when the child learns to distinguish between inside and outside, and the two words  “me” and “mine” dominate.

This early stage is then buttressed by our so-called educational system, from pre-kindergarten on through graduate school, where we are taught to (more or less briefly) memorize what’s coming inside from the outside, and to be good, i.e., socially acceptable.  That’s about it!

Forgive me if I over-simplify. Or do I?

Here are three relevant excerpts from his essay:

 

 

 

So here we are, inside a culture of narcissism i.e., where ego completely covers the inner self, so there is no way for the inner self to push through into authentic expression.

This culture is nothing new. Way back in 1971, as a graduate student and teaching fellow in philosophy at Boston University, I stumbled upon a methodology which forces the student to uncover the inner self. And employed it, successfully.

Then, in 1972, I applied for a position at New College of California and was hired over hundreds of other applicants, thanks to the first sentence of my letter of application: “I want to help undo what was done to me.” While there, I employed the same methodology as a teacher, and, not surprisingly, was subsequently fired as “too experimental” for that experimental college.

My (Unusual) Methodology as a Teacher

 

 

 

MY “Climate Change” Conundrum

March 7, 2025

Despite my instinctive approval of what DJT appears to be accomplishing as he rushes into his second and final term as president after four years to ponder how he could change it up next time (hint: choose your cabinet carefully, which he appears to have done, despite questions many of us have with Patel and Bondi) so that he wouldn’t be constantly trapped into preoccupation with continuous lawfare, impeachment, and other insidious attacks against him; despite all this, I remain, underneath, deeply suspicious of the overwhelming political power that wealth buys, no matter who has it. Plus, Elon’s AI focus disturbs me no end. Are we headed into technocracy, a full-on surveillance state? It really does feel like no matter how much it appears that the two of them actually are beginning to dismantle the deep state (Department of Education plus USAID currently on the chopping block), I keep wondering who, actually, is pulling Trump/Elon’s strings? Are they puppets too? If so, willing puppets? If so, of whom, human beings in the shadows, even higher up? Or, worst, most paranoid, case scenario: Off-planet or below ground “reptilians” for whom Earth is but a farm, and we, its cud-chewing animals, to be harvested?

And, if the two of them are also puppets, do they even know they are puppets? I keep wanting to see individuals in terms of basic ethical values; and if they don’t know they are puppets, then I can at least appreciate them, empathize with their effort.

Meanwhile, I want to widen my lens, so that I don’t end up simply circling the inside of my own tiny silo. Today, I decided to read the new substack of Daniel Pinchbeck.

Pinchbeck is someone whose views I used to go along with wholeheartedly, until I switched, from left to right, as the Democratic party got more and more “out there.”

(When exactly, did I make the switch? I wish I knew. It’s hard to say. Though I do know it had something to do with the reversal of my opinion of Hillary Clinton, formerly my feminist heroine.)

But then, or I should say now, post-election, more and more, I want to not just straddle the divide between right and left, but to encompass it in a larger understanding. And to do that I need to begin by paying attention to those who, when I identified with the right, I saw as my enemies . . . . So, to Pinchbeck:

Lets End Empathy and Shorten People’s Lives

 

I do so appreciate much of what concerns him. But then, I got to the part that concerns his seemingly automatic assumption of “an approaching climate apocalypse.”

Oh dear, here we go again, I thought. I just can’t read any further.

Checking in with twitter/X, this, immediately. Check it out. Bullshit. No drop in sea level.

https://x.com/wideawake_media/status/1897961927071985754?s=61&t=aUBDiSUrvn0aSlRBtZx0wQ

Seeking to buttress this opinion, I went on twitter/X, and searched for “climate change.” Post after post indicating it is utter bullshit. Or at least that’s where the twitter/X algorithm took me.

(On a related theme, I remember back about seven years ago, speaking with a permaculture teacher, who mentioned the growing, supposedly horrific carbon dioxide overload. But then I asked, but don’t plants need carbon dioxide to grow? This brought him up short, but not for long. He replied something like “yes, but not too much,” and changed the subject.)

Okay Ann. Return to Daniel Pinchbeck one more time. Let’s look at the url he points to to buttress his view.

Whew! Is he right?

https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2025/02/mechanisms-behind-a-steep-rise-in-temperature.html

What’s the truth? No idea. I plod along, attempting to be the best I can be no matter what. My recognition that I’m due to die soon, within 15 years, is no consolation since I can’t help but hope for an intact, flourishing planet for my grandkids.