Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to the Psychology Podcast with doctor Scott
Speaker 1: Barry Kaufman, where we give you insights into the mind, brain, behavior,
Speaker 1: and creativity. Each episode will feature a new guest who
Speaker 1: will stimulate your mind and give you a greater understanding
Speaker 1: of yourself, others, and the world we live in. Hopefully
Speaker 1: we'll also provide a glimpse into human possibility. Thanks for
Speaker 1: listening and enjoy the podcast. I'm really excited to have
Speaker 1: Kristin Dombeck on the show today. I hope I pronounce
Speaker 1: her name correctly. Kristin is an essayist and a cultural journalist.
Speaker 1: Her essays have been published in The New York Times Magazine,
Speaker 1: Harper's Magazine, The London Review of Books and Plus one
Speaker 1: in The Parish Review, and anthologized in Best American Essays
Speaker 1: and elsewhere. She received a Rona Jaffey Foundation Writer Award
Speaker 1: for Nonfiction in twenty thirteen, and her latest book, which
Speaker 1: we'll be discussing today, is The Selfishness of Others, an
Speaker 1: essay on the fear of narcissism. Really nice to meet you, Kristin.
Speaker 1: It's good to meet you too. Thank you for having
Speaker 1: me on your podcast. So I'm really excited to talk
Speaker 1: to you today about a lot of related topics that
Speaker 1: kind of all center on this idea of selfishness. But
Speaker 1: we put lots of labels on these things. So it
Speaker 1: seems like these days, as you point out, every time
Speaker 1: someone's that we perceive them as selfish, we put the
Speaker 1: labeled narcissism on them, and you kind of refer this
Speaker 1: as the new narcissm. Can you told me a little
Speaker 1: bit about what this idea of the new narcissism is? Well,
Speaker 1: I think the new narcissism was a title that a
Speaker 1: magazine gave to So I don't know if I guess
Speaker 1: what I'm trying to look at is in the context
Speaker 1: of the history of the way the word has been
Speaker 1: used in psychology, and then, of course, you know, even
Speaker 1: long before the birth of what we know as psychology,
Speaker 1: by as long as it goes of it, you know,
Speaker 1: in literature, like what does it mean today that this
Speaker 1: word seems to be like the popular insult for someone
Speaker 1: who you know, we want to name is selfish? So
Speaker 1: I guess we might compare it to a religious word,
Speaker 1: which would might you know, might be wicked, right or
Speaker 1: even evil. But now you know, when I hear my
Speaker 1: friends like condemning an ex boyfriend or something, We'll use
Speaker 1: the psychological diagnosis instead. And so I just got interested
Speaker 1: in that. And I got interested in it because I
Speaker 1: think I've felt that urge myself, and I've you know,
Speaker 1: I've felt the fear that there's a coming selfie apocalypse,
Speaker 1: you know, and I want to work against judgment in myself,
Speaker 1: you know. But I also got interested in it because
Speaker 1: it's a little bit funny, you know, like that moment
Speaker 1: when you're at the end of a conversation with someone
Speaker 1: and you're like, she didn't ask me a single question
Speaker 1: about myself, right, Yeah, what a narcissist. Yeah, But in
Speaker 1: that moment, you're stuck in this kind of like self
Speaker 1: centeredness too, right, So there's something circular about the diagnosis
Speaker 1: that seems like part of what's funny about being human,
Speaker 1: you know, Do you know what I mean? Oh, I
Speaker 1: definitely do what you mean. I mean, I can't tell
Speaker 1: you how many people I wrote the cover story for
Speaker 1: Psychology and Ala Sound's and now now I'm like super
Speaker 1: conscious about coming across as narcis no right, you know,
Speaker 1: but I'm just telling his fact. I wrote a cover
Speaker 1: story for psychology day called how to Spot a Narcissist?
Speaker 1: And I can't tell you how many emails I got
Speaker 1: from mostly women, So that's another fact and saying, you know,
Speaker 1: thank you so much for revealing. Now I know what
Speaker 1: my ex husband was. He never paid me as much
Speaker 1: attention as I felt like I deserved. So I'm like,
Speaker 1: that's interesting, right, It's like, wow, so there's an interesting
Speaker 1: interaction going on there where kind of when we feel
Speaker 1: like we're not getting, you know, the attention, we're like, oh,
Speaker 1: that person's so selfish. So is there real narcissism? I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, I know in psychology there's a clinical term
Speaker 1: to define it. Do you want to unpack with me today?
Speaker 1: What are the essential features of narcissism and what aren't
Speaker 1: I can do that if you want, sure, but if
Speaker 1: you if if I can ask you the question as well, right, absolutely, yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean as someone who's you know, more trained my
Speaker 1: PhDs in English literature, right, So, as I read a
Speaker 1: bit into the history of the way psychologies define that word,
Speaker 1: I found a lot of sort of contradictions and a
Speaker 1: lot of changes over time, which of course is going
Speaker 1: to happen, right, Like that means that people are thinking
Speaker 1: and disagreeing and developing. But this concept seems like it
Speaker 1: can be very contradictory and kind of a hall of
Speaker 1: mirrors even within psychology itself. Right, And I think that,
Speaker 1: you know, I don't know if you know this book.
Speaker 1: Elizabeth Lundbeck wrote this much longer. The book's called The
Speaker 1: Americanization of Narcissism, and it's kind of it's an account
Speaker 1: of the way that the debate over narcissism is really
Speaker 1: central to how the sub fields of psychology kind of
Speaker 1: split historically, you know, So like how you define narcissism's
Speaker 1: kind of becomes part of why groups split. So we
Speaker 1: have let's unpack it. So we have the clinical definition, right,
Speaker 1: which it seems to me to be a thing like
Speaker 1: that this is a deaf personality disorder. That is, it
Speaker 1: seems measurable and see it because a person who has
Speaker 1: MPG is doing the same behaviors right without over the
Speaker 1: course of their adult life, without being able to learn
Speaker 1: or change. Yeah. Yeah, So the question is, well, what
Speaker 1: is a narcissist? We'll use that word all these I'm
Speaker 1: not a big fan of labels in general. As a
Speaker 1: kid who was personally labeled a lot as a kid
Speaker 1: is not being smart as well. You know. So there
Speaker 1: are these just the you know, lots of labels we
Speaker 1: throw around. The kind of the thing with these labels
Speaker 1: that kind of like it's a way of dehumanizing someone
Speaker 1: right as creating the whole, especially the label like pejorative
Speaker 1: labels like narcissism. It's a way of well, that's the
Speaker 1: whole essence of the person, therefore they don't have experiences.
Speaker 1: We kind of like way of objectifying a person as well.
Speaker 1: In the clinical literature, in my opinion, the essence of
Speaker 1: narcissism is entitlement. And I think that we get confused
Speaker 1: between all these different things that are correlated with entitlement
Speaker 1: that tend to form the narcisis contract, but by themselves
Speaker 1: they're not actually narciss So, like I talked about essential
Speaker 1: features earlier, but I've been having a discussion on my
Speaker 1: college right now because I really firmly believe that we've
Speaker 1: misappropriate grandiosity. Like every time someone has a grandiose thought,
Speaker 1: the psychological literature labels them as a narcissist. And you
Speaker 1: rightly sow in your book talk about the corporate narcissist,
Speaker 1: the communal narcissist. And I'm so you basically took on
Speaker 1: my establishment and I love that you did that because
Speaker 1: I completely agree with you. You You know, it's and I've
Speaker 1: been having this conversation with some narcissism and experts in
Speaker 1: the field back channel and through email. I really, you know,
Speaker 1: you look at these some of these serferences, the communal
Speaker 1: narcissist construct take that a lot of those items reflect
Speaker 1: just someone who's a grand vision about helping the world.
Speaker 1: I mean, to me, that's just wrong to just call
Speaker 1: that person a narcissist, Like don't we want more people
Speaker 1: in the world who have grandiose images of helping people?
Speaker 1: Like is that a horrible? Is that like a selfish thing?
Speaker 1: The question is it's tricky, like where do you pars
Speaker 1: it out? And it's very tricky, But it turns out
Speaker 1: scientific big difference between an item of just grandiosity, like
Speaker 1: I want to come up with a big idea someday
Speaker 1: that helps a lot of people, versus I want to
Speaker 1: come up with an idea that is the best, that
Speaker 1: is the bestest idea. I want to be the best
Speaker 1: at helping others, right, And so yeah, you would you
Speaker 1: draw the line there? So entitlement would be and this
Speaker 1: idea should be magically accomplished without me having to work
Speaker 1: for it, right, like it should be. It should be
Speaker 1: given to me the image of having done this thing,
Speaker 1: whereas grandiosity right, whereas grandiosity is like, you know, you're
Speaker 1: maybe you're overly optimistic, you're your ideas it's too big
Speaker 1: person to write to carry out. But that kind of
Speaker 1: might motivate you to do something good or important in
Speaker 1: the world. Is that it's the realism part, right, It's
Speaker 1: really the realism part. Yeah, But you know, you bring
Speaker 1: up something that I noticed as soon as I started
Speaker 1: telling people that I was working on the topic of narcissism.
Speaker 1: And I don't know if you've had this experience, since
Speaker 1: you know, you've worked on it for much much longer
Speaker 1: than I did. But so I would tell them I'm
Speaker 1: researching narcissism and I'm working on this book, The Selfishness
Speaker 1: of Others. And I noticed that one of the very
Speaker 1: common reactions I got was that people started getting nervous
Speaker 1: and then they would try to use the word narcissist
Speaker 1: a lot in conversation, which I think is the way
Speaker 1: to tell me, you know, I know what the word
Speaker 1: is so I'm not one, right, And I think that
Speaker 1: there's I think that there's a real guilt around self
Speaker 1: focus and maybe the kind of grandiosity that we need
Speaker 1: to get by in well, you know there's that, or
Speaker 1: even to a flourished with capitalism and you know, to
Speaker 1: deal with academic competition maybe or whatever. Yeah, but why
Speaker 1: this guilt. It's like we fear being called a narcissist,
Speaker 1: I do you know more than almost anything else, right,
Speaker 1: And yeah, absolutely, do you know what it is? You
Speaker 1: know what I think it is. I think people are
Speaker 1: scared of not as coming across as inauthentic. So there's
Speaker 1: a deep seated fear, you know. I think it's related
Speaker 1: to the oh what is it where you're scared of
Speaker 1: being found out? What's it called? There's a imposter syndrome. Yes,
Speaker 1: it's called imposter sycrume. I think people afraid of you're
Speaker 1: somehow if you're called and if it's if everything you've
Speaker 1: done in your life is just reduced to, oh, well,
Speaker 1: you know that person's actually just a narcissist. That actually
Speaker 1: I think like kind of canoes, like all the stuff
Speaker 1: you did wasn't really worth it, you know, it wasn't real. Yeah. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I remember when I was just beginning my dissertation, we
Speaker 1: had a like writers group in the English department where
Speaker 1: we talked about everyone's fear of being a fraud, you
Speaker 1: know and like, and that was the first moment when
Speaker 1: I was like, oh, wow, ironically, I guess we all
Speaker 1: share the same fear, you know, but narcissists don't have
Speaker 1: that fear. See, this is the interesting thing is that
Speaker 1: most people have that fear. But actually people who are
Speaker 1: clinical narcissists that you show up in therapy and get
Speaker 1: diagnosed by the DSM or whatever is high entitlement, high
Speaker 1: all these things, they actually never worry about these things
Speaker 1: everyone else is worried about in this world, right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: So maybe the best sign of a true narcissist is
Speaker 1: the lack of fear of being called a narcissist. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I think so. I think so there actually is scientific
Speaker 1: we start selling. The best item to measure narcissism is
Speaker 1: just ask someone are you a narcissist? And if you
Speaker 1: say yes, then actually you probably are a true, true narcissist,
Speaker 1: as opposed to trying to you know, being like scared
Speaker 1: that you are and you know, like saying well, I
Speaker 1: don't think I you know, those people aren't the real
Speaker 1: you know, No, I think there's an impulse too. And
Speaker 1: you know, we're making generalizations without evidence here, but we're
Speaker 1: just thinking, right. But I think there's an impulse to say,
Speaker 1: you know what, I am a narcissist, because there's a
Speaker 1: bit of a like over on our end, on myself,
Speaker 1: you know, on the lave person's side, there's a bit
Speaker 1: of a feeling that sometimes that we should measure ourselves
Speaker 1: according to how mentally healthy we are, and there's some
Speaker 1: pressure you know that I think from the authority that
Speaker 1: psychology has in our lives. At least I feel it sometimes,
Speaker 1: you know, I click on the quizzes, the personality quizits right,
Speaker 1: just like I okay, I'm like, okay, you know, am
Speaker 1: I healthy? Could I be more mentally healthy? And so
Speaker 1: saying yeah, I'm a narcissist is also a way of
Speaker 1: just saying, like, you know what, whatever, I'm not going
Speaker 1: to be moral. You know, I'm not going to care
Speaker 1: about this, this kind of moral diagnosis. I mean, the
Speaker 1: subject is really it was hard to think about for
Speaker 1: a while because it does make you self conscious. I
Speaker 1: did kind of design the book to make you as
Speaker 1: you're reading it worry, you know, to feel the fear
Speaker 1: of being called and being disposed to called. This topic
Speaker 1: is so complicated that, you know, maybe you should just relax,
Speaker 1: don't worry about it, don't judge people so much, you know.
Speaker 1: So I'm really glad you made that point first, wall,
Speaker 1: like everybody just calmed down. But then there's the question
Speaker 1: about empathy that I wanted to talk to you about,
Speaker 1: because you know, there's this idea that narcisses are empty
Speaker 1: inside and the rest of us are operating there on
Speaker 1: a full tank. But that's quite an assumption, you know,
Speaker 1: Like I think all of us are kind of just
Speaker 1: trying to make it through the day, and maybe there's
Speaker 1: a greater capassion if we kind of have great, you know,
Speaker 1: connection about our common humanity as opposed to sticking some
Speaker 1: people in the their dead inside box and those that aren't.
Speaker 1: That seems so binary, doesn't it. It does? But I mean,
Speaker 1: do you think that from a cognitive science point of view,
Speaker 1: that there are people who are done inside? Can you tell?
Speaker 1: Can you guys tell by looking at brains? Yeah? Well
Speaker 1: you can tell, yes, you can tell by looking at brains,
Speaker 1: whether you're likely to have psych be a psycho not
Speaker 1: you know, have psychopathic tendencies, and that tends relate to
Speaker 1: being emotional bluntness. But even people with emotional bluntness, what
Speaker 1: that means is that they still have emotions. They're not
Speaker 1: dead inside. They tend to just operate more on basic appetites,
Speaker 1: so they still will feel, you know, a sexual rout.
Speaker 1: They're almost like an animal walking around with basic primitive emotions,
Speaker 1: and that's that they have a narrower set of emotions
Speaker 1: that they operate on a daily basis. So that's true,
Speaker 1: and we could operationalize that as being dead inside, but
Speaker 1: that's actually a very small proportion of population, very very small. Actually,
Speaker 1: the number of you know, bonafide you'd be by the
Speaker 1: hair checklist, get a psychopath diagnosis is vanishingly small number
Speaker 1: of the general population. So for everyone else there actually is.
Speaker 1: I don't think that idea of dead inside really. I
Speaker 1: think each of us go it throughout our lives at
Speaker 1: some point feeling dead inside, like when we have existential
Speaker 1: crisis or when we just have depression. People who have
Speaker 1: depression feel dead inside, but then when they go through
Speaker 1: help and they often join the human race, again, so
Speaker 1: you know, like it's not like a stable thing that
Speaker 1: it's like, oh, you're dead inside. That's it. You're done.
Speaker 1: You know, there's hope, you know. When I was going
Speaker 1: through and checking some of my sources that at the
Speaker 1: very last sort of night before I turned in the book,
Speaker 1: I re read Froid's essay on narcissism and he has
Speaker 1: this and the first time I had read it, I
Speaker 1: was very resistant to it because it was so much
Speaker 1: about femininity and women and gayness, you know, like and
Speaker 1: so I was like, you doing obviously, you're just he's projected.
Speaker 1: This isn't this isn't science. You're just projecting. And then
Speaker 1: I read it, of course, you know, many more times,
Speaker 1: and then I read it one last time and there's
Speaker 1: this sentence in it that describes exactly what you just said,
Speaker 1: the way that someone who is feeling sick will withdraw
Speaker 1: from people and from things and that, you know, and
Speaker 1: he describes it in this beautiful way, and I finally
Speaker 1: really got it, and I was like, I recognized that experience,
Speaker 1: because that's what this last month writing this book is
Speaker 1: what a great analogy between being a writer. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I hope temporarily, and I do think temporarily, I'm recovering
Speaker 1: now like someone who appears to be self absorbed and
Speaker 1: selfish because I'm withd On from my loved ones. I'm
Speaker 1: spending my you know, and it feels sick and it's
Speaker 1: over now. But I understood what he was describing, you know,
Speaker 1: which I love that. Yeah, anyone. Yeah, Freud wasn't a
Speaker 1: total hack, No, he's kind of a He's just really
Speaker 1: thinking in his writing, you know. And you know who
Speaker 1: I prefer better than Freud and the well I like you,
Speaker 1: but I actually really like someone called Karen Horney, Yes,
Speaker 1: and she challenged a lot of the feminine ideas that
Speaker 1: Freud had. But you were asking about Tucker Max and
Speaker 1: in this I thought when I came across your interview
Speaker 1: with him online, I found it so fascinating. He clearly
Speaker 1: someone who is so thoughtful about what he was doing,
Speaker 1: right yeah, oh yeah, reflective, almost purposeful, really smart about
Speaker 1: other people and how they work, right yeah. And but
Speaker 1: also the way that you got him to talk in
Speaker 1: that interview, someone who's really changing, you know, who was
Speaker 1: in process, who was trying to figure out how to
Speaker 1: deal with the way that this I'm an asshole thing
Speaker 1: which was always pretty tongue in cheek. I think for him,
Speaker 1: from what you know, from what I can see from
Speaker 1: reading like how that how that was sort of functioning
Speaker 1: in the world and limiting his life, and and so
Speaker 1: it just doesn't strike I mean, he's the kind I
Speaker 1: guess part of what I was doing in that chapter
Speaker 1: about him is like saying, like, he's the kind of
Speaker 1: guy that gets described so often on the sort of
Speaker 1: self help websites that are about, you know, how to
Speaker 1: deal with your bad boyfriend. And yet he's not the
Speaker 1: dead inside. He doesn't seem dead inside right in the
Speaker 1: way that you were just saying about that that very
Speaker 1: small percentage that we fear. And so I guess i'd
Speaker 1: wonder for you, like, what does that mean about the
Speaker 1: way we understand empathy? I know that's a very big question,
Speaker 1: but clearly, you know, I mean there's is that did
Speaker 1: he just have cold empathy? You know, like he can
Speaker 1: read the people's minds, he could develop a good theory
Speaker 1: of mind but didn't care, doesn't have compassion or I
Speaker 1: don't know. It seemed like it complicated that interview complicated
Speaker 1: a lot of the simpler ideas about we have empathy
Speaker 1: and our people who are nurses just don't. They can't,
Speaker 1: they don't. You know, it's such a great question. You
Speaker 1: know that part of Tucker's life where I interviewed him
Speaker 1: was ray on the cusp. You're right, you sent something.
Speaker 1: There was Ray in the cusp before he made a
Speaker 1: shift to a whole new chapter of his life as
Speaker 1: a father. You know, he's a father now and all
Speaker 1: these things, and a businessman. So I think that it's
Speaker 1: a very tricky. This question of empathy is tricky because
Speaker 1: there are a psychologists have to have various components of empathy.
Speaker 1: So I don't think empathy is this thing that you
Speaker 1: either have or you don't as a person. You know,
Speaker 1: each one of us throughout our day wax and wane,
Speaker 1: and how much we're focused on others, how much we're
Speaker 1: in our own head. That's called being human. It's constantly
Speaker 1: going back and forth. There's no you know, even saints
Speaker 1: act out of character the majority of their day. I mean,
Speaker 1: the recent research on personality traits shows that these are
Speaker 1: not stable, These are not actually within person variation is
Speaker 1: greater than between person variation, which just means throughout the
Speaker 1: course of your day, let's say you're an introvert, you know.
Speaker 1: There are many moments through your day react extrovert, you know,
Speaker 1: and what does that mean to be who you are?
Speaker 1: Who is the real you? You You know? I don't think.
Speaker 1: I think the idea of the self as is kind
Speaker 1: of becoming clear that it's an illusion in a lot
Speaker 1: of ways, because there's lots of sides to ourselves and
Speaker 1: we're constantly having these different sides. So I think that
Speaker 1: throughout our course of our own day, there are lots
Speaker 1: of moments where we show zero compassion because like maybe
Speaker 1: we're working on a math proof or we're intensely writing,
Speaker 1: and then our partner comes, you know, and says like, hey,
Speaker 1: do you want to Hey Kristen, do you want to
Speaker 1: get some food with me? And you go shut up,
Speaker 1: you know, because you're and that's a moment where you've
Speaker 1: showed zero compassion well, or empathy. So do we want
Speaker 1: to say that you're therefore, oh, I discovered you're not
Speaker 1: an empathic person, you know, Like, no, you've just discovered
Speaker 1: that she's normal, she's a human. So the question we're
Speaker 1: really asking psychology is, well, do some people on average
Speaker 1: tend to be a lot less empathic during the course
Speaker 1: of their day. That's the real question, not all or none.
Speaker 1: And I think that you know, there was a period
Speaker 1: in Tucker's life where in college which and he wouldn't
Speaker 1: be the f like he says, he's you know, he's
Speaker 1: like maybe one of the first to write about it
Speaker 1: so publicly, but I was in a fraternity in college.
Speaker 1: The point here is that, you know, I think that
Speaker 1: these human I think a lot of people go through
Speaker 1: periods in their life where they are more immature in
Speaker 1: their responses and defenses and are more self focused than
Speaker 1: there are other periods in their lives where there aren't
Speaker 1: And I really do believe that these things can wax
Speaker 1: and wan across our lives. The real question I think
Speaker 1: that fascinates you and fascinates me is you know, well,
Speaker 1: are there some people very small minority, but are there
Speaker 1: people truly truly throughout their whole life? It's kind of
Speaker 1: like that ship is gone and can never activate that
Speaker 1: chip ever. And I don't know the answer that question,
Speaker 1: other than there does seem to be some people who,
Speaker 1: because of a combination of genetics and horrible, horrible maltreatment
Speaker 1: in childhood, like abuse at a very severe level, they
Speaker 1: at one point of their life. Almost all of them
Speaker 1: have been born with that chip. But what has happened
Speaker 1: is it has become so shut off that they almost
Speaker 1: don't even know how to access that brain region anymore
Speaker 1: or the you know so. And that's a fascinating question
Speaker 1: because and you tend to find that. If you just
Speaker 1: find the abuse, or you just find just the genes,
Speaker 1: you don't find that. But when you find the storm,
Speaker 1: this perfect storm of someone with the anti genes that
Speaker 1: increase the probability of antisocial traits and horrible maltreatment and
Speaker 1: environmental conditions that allow them to act to enact their
Speaker 1: dark desires, then you do you do tend to find
Speaker 1: you know, what approximates evil? I would say, but I
Speaker 1: would say that's very small. We're talking definitely less than
Speaker 1: one percent of the publish Does that all make sense?
Speaker 1: What I said? It does make sense. I mean my
Speaker 1: hunt then is that, like, if you're in a relationship
Speaker 1: with that sort of person, right, whether it's a parent,
Speaker 1: a boss, you know, a boyfriend or girlfriend, husband or wife,
Speaker 1: it's probably not that hard to figure it out, right,
Speaker 1: that's right, that's right. So then my interest is in
Speaker 1: the people who if we take the kind of trait
Speaker 1: model of you know, like that there's a kind of
Speaker 1: continuum that people who might perform those patterns patterns that's right,
Speaker 1: that's what they are, and do things that you know, this,
Speaker 1: do the sort of things about which you and I
Speaker 1: would say I would never do that, right, I would neverice.
Speaker 1: So then there's a sort of a I don't know
Speaker 1: if it's a philosophical question or or what, but for me,
Speaker 1: the question is is it better in all the senses
Speaker 1: of better, better for the world, better for my relationship,
Speaker 1: better for my well being, better for that person's well
Speaker 1: being and growth? Right if I treat them from a
Speaker 1: kind of diagnostic standpoint, like looking for the traits and
Speaker 1: trying to say you're this, and therefore I'm going to
Speaker 1: treat you as different than me, or do I have
Speaker 1: a kind of do I kind of try to unlabel them, right,
Speaker 1: not label them? See what are you doing? Right? That's
Speaker 1: my question, and that's a life question, but also a
Speaker 1: question for how we whether or not, you know, we
Speaker 1: should maybe push against the impulse to diagnose for the
Speaker 1: people that are do you know what I'm saying? I
Speaker 1: do know what you're saying, and I think It's a
Speaker 1: profound question with a lot of me with a lot
Speaker 1: of importance for people's life. So let me tell you
Speaker 1: how I think about this. I think, first of all,
Speaker 1: is the healthiest thing for your well being is to
Speaker 1: get off the label train. Get off that train and
Speaker 1: take responsibility for your life, take responsibility for your actions.
Speaker 1: You actually have a lot not you particularly crisis, but
Speaker 1: all of us have a lot more power to control
Speaker 1: our lives then we think, we realize we do. You know,
Speaker 1: my boss here, pen Martin Seligman coined the whole idea
Speaker 1: of learned helplessness right where we tend to get into
Speaker 1: a situation where and I think it's very easy for
Speaker 1: a lot of people in abusive relationships to get learned helplessness.
Speaker 1: What they don't realize is that they actually can make concrete,
Speaker 1: set boundaries. There are a lot of things that we
Speaker 1: can do, you know, where at the same time we
Speaker 1: can still accept the person. So I actually think that,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm a big fan of acceptance, self acceptance,
Speaker 1: but also other acceptance. These are patterns, deeply ingrained patterns
Speaker 1: of behavior in your partner or a close friend, or
Speaker 1: whatever it is that is in your life that you
Speaker 1: can't sharee you shouldn't be in the business of trying
Speaker 1: to change. So you either make the decision to take
Speaker 1: responsibility for your life and get out and like say,
Speaker 1: you know what, I don't want to be this person's
Speaker 1: friend anymore, you know, like, and you say you and
Speaker 1: you you have an assertive conversation with this person, say
Speaker 1: you know, look, I just I don't think this is
Speaker 1: working as a friendship or as a relationship. And you
Speaker 1: get out or you make the decision, you know what,
Speaker 1: that's that person's character. And I accept that person's character,
Speaker 1: both the good and the bad. I love when we
Speaker 1: I love how zany he is or she is, and
Speaker 1: how unconstrained they are, and that's awesome. I can't stand
Speaker 1: when they get angry at me for things they don't do,
Speaker 1: but I'll take responsibility for that. And when they do that,
Speaker 1: I'll say back, I'll say, you know what, that wasn't
Speaker 1: my fault, you know, like just so you know that
Speaker 1: wasn't my fault. And I'm not going to deal with
Speaker 1: you when you're like that, and I'm going to go
Speaker 1: in the other room now. And you kind of take
Speaker 1: that responsibility for yourself in that situation. Now. I don't
Speaker 1: want to be an apologist. Of course. You know a
Speaker 1: lot of people hearing this right now and say, well,
Speaker 1: are you advocating you know, like if you're an abusive relationship,
Speaker 1: That's totally not what I'm saying, but because I think
Speaker 1: that a lot of times it can be hard, especially
Speaker 1: if someone's physically abusive, right, But I'm not really talking
Speaker 1: so much about that. I'm saying, you know, I think
Speaker 1: we can accept others and still take responsibility. Does that
Speaker 1: make sense? Absolutely? Yeah, I agree with you, and I
Speaker 1: also am. I mean, I was so worried in writing
Speaker 1: this book. I think I I felt like I should
Speaker 1: begin every paragraph with you know, I'm not talking about
Speaker 1: if you're in an abusive religion? Yeah, we have to
Speaker 1: say that because kind a nuance. Yeah right, yeah, absolutely.
Speaker 1: I don't think it does any justice to people who
Speaker 1: are in abusive relationships for this word or this label
Speaker 1: to be just applied so generally, right, Yeah, we should
Speaker 1: distinguish between that and sort of the kinds of the
Speaker 1: dynamic of everyday selfishness that we all go through in relationships, right,
Speaker 1: and absolutely choosing again and again to turn towards someone
Speaker 1: and to try harder to understand them rather than turning away. Right,
Speaker 1: And do you know what, Kristin, You're absolutely right. I
Speaker 1: think that values come into play with this. Some people
Speaker 1: might actually be okay. You know, there are jerks in
Speaker 1: this world. You know, that's what we tend to call
Speaker 1: a narcist. But like it's not from a moral stamp,
Speaker 1: but like, if you're okay with being with someone who's
Speaker 1: a jerk, that's your own value and that's your decision.
Speaker 1: You know. It's like it's like, you know what, I'm
Speaker 1: with a jerk, Like, but they're also an amazing artist,
Speaker 1: and they're also great in bed, and they're and you
Speaker 1: list all these things that outweigh them being a jerk.
Speaker 1: Then who are we as a society judge, Oh, she's
Speaker 1: staying in that relationship with that jerk or he's in
Speaker 1: that But it's like it's no one's business in a
Speaker 1: way unless that person is genuinely like you know, not
Speaker 1: happy and it's against their value system. And I think
Speaker 1: you need to know yourself, Like, if you have a
Speaker 1: value system that I don't want to date jerk, and
Speaker 1: you are dating a jerk, then take responsibility for your
Speaker 1: life and say that's this is against my value system,
Speaker 1: you know what I mean. But if it's not against
Speaker 1: your value do you know what I mean? Like, it's
Speaker 1: not who am I to judge what in that situation?
Speaker 1: If your value system is different than what you're actually doing,
Speaker 1: you're the one who's the fraud in the fake, right
Speaker 1: I mean? Or you might do some work on that instead,
Speaker 1: And I think I wouldn't say I wouldn't go that far,
Speaker 1: but yeah, I know, but just like in terms of
Speaker 1: the language of the narcissist story, right well, right, yeah,
Speaker 1: we saw that person who's a jerk also a fake,
Speaker 1: which is really interesting to me. Someone is performing a
Speaker 1: self more than other people do, right, And yeah, we're
Speaker 1: also all most of us are insecure, deeply insecure humans.
Speaker 1: It's it's part of being human. Yeah, that you wrote
Speaker 1: about these websites where they get together and they spend
Speaker 1: all day on these chats chatting with each other about
Speaker 1: how horrible the person is about doing something about it. Now,
Speaker 1: I don't want to again, you know, I feel like
Speaker 1: I had to keep prefacing this with like, I don't
Speaker 1: want to shame the person, but I guess I want
Speaker 1: to empower people to realize that there is something they
Speaker 1: can do about it that is more productive than just
Speaker 1: labeling another person. And do you know what I mean,
Speaker 1: it's a tough I mean, it's a tough subject. It's
Speaker 1: so tough. And there's one study and I don't it
Speaker 1: would take me a second to find this source. But
Speaker 1: there was one study that I read that really gave
Speaker 1: me pause, and it was maybe you'll know what it was.
Speaker 1: It was a study about the way that people who
Speaker 1: are I think score high on the MPI respond to kindness,
Speaker 1: and that they respond to kindness by becoming more manipulative. Right,
Speaker 1: And that gave me pause because they see kindness as
Speaker 1: an opportunity for exploitation. Right, that's super interesting. I haven't
Speaker 1: come crossed it. So this is the thing. This would, like,
Speaker 1: I think, destroy my entire argument. But if that's true, right,
Speaker 1: if that were true, if that's replicable, if that's you know,
Speaker 1: if that were true, that in being kind and understanding,
Speaker 1: I mean, I guess this is just the old Coha
Speaker 1: Kurrnberg debate. Right, But if it were true that in
Speaker 1: being kind and understanding empathetic towards someone who's trying to
Speaker 1: manipulate me, I'm actually making their problem worse and creating more,
Speaker 1: you know, possibly paving a way for whatever, for bad
Speaker 1: things to happen in the world. That's challenging. Like this
Speaker 1: is a difficult question, That's what I'm saying. Is there difficult?
Speaker 1: There a point? What is the point at which you
Speaker 1: write someone else? So I don't know. I mean in
Speaker 1: the book, I tried to just wrestle with it, right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: And I guess I become more concerned with this way that.
Speaker 1: And I don't blame this on psychology. I mean, how
Speaker 1: could you blame something on psycho You are a little
Speaker 1: harsh on psychologists in one chapter, which was I remember,
Speaker 1: there's one line where I was like, whoa too chee?
Speaker 1: You said, you know, on those who who need this
Speaker 1: the most become psychologists. That's not me, that's Alice Miller.
Speaker 1: She's a psychologist of the drama The Gifted Child. Yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: so you didn't say that, No, but I did kind
Speaker 1: of you know, sinuated it into it at a crucial
Speaker 1: It's probably true though, But the thing is it's probably true.
Speaker 1: But then, I mean, what she's saying, I think is
Speaker 1: that people who have had maybe cold or cruel parents
Speaker 1: become highly sensitive to figuring out what other people are doing.
Speaker 1: She tries not to use the word narcissists, chooses it
Speaker 1: rarely right, and that what else would motivate someone to
Speaker 1: go into the profession of psychology but desire to understand,
Speaker 1: you know, how people work, because maybe it's something you
Speaker 1: I don't know, you couldn't you know control? You're interested
Speaker 1: in how how people work, how the performance of self happens,
Speaker 1: and so on. I think what I was trying, I
Speaker 1: didn't feel like I was like condemning psychology. I was
Speaker 1: more trying to point out how the methods of different
Speaker 1: fields really influence the claims that they make. Right. I
Speaker 1: thought it was a great point. I mean, and I think,
Speaker 1: I don't mean that that's bad, Like we need all
Speaker 1: different kinds of approaches right to how you say other selves,
Speaker 1: how selves work, and so on. And I think there's
Speaker 1: value in I mean, I find great value and say,
Speaker 1: social psychologies attempt to get out of the subjective point
Speaker 1: of view and try to see things across great numbers
Speaker 1: of people. I think that's important. I think that it's
Speaker 1: just that the way in this moment where on the Internet,
Speaker 1: where I start translating it really quickly and then turn
Speaker 1: it into kind of a world diagnosis of a whole
Speaker 1: culture that I'm somehow outside of. I think that moment
Speaker 1: is very interesting, right, because it's like I'm maybe responding
Speaker 1: to the authority that psychology has in my life by
Speaker 1: trying to then become a kind of psychologist myself, you know,
Speaker 1: and hold myself above the people I'm around. And it's
Speaker 1: I guess it's which brings me to like another question
Speaker 1: I have for you, which is, like, what's it like
Speaker 1: to try to translate this work which you do in
Speaker 1: you know, in labs, in with the computer for you know,
Speaker 1: crunching numbers, or in therapy rooms to people who are reading,
Speaker 1: you know, a thirty second Haffington Post, you know, like
Speaker 1: an article of that. How to you know, the listical
Speaker 1: thing that you make a gentle fun of in one
Speaker 1: of your pieces, right of how do you diagnose your
Speaker 1: boyfriend in five seconds? Yeah? Like, do you find yourself
Speaker 1: trying to both work within that and against that as
Speaker 1: someone who's speaks and writes publicly about the work of psychology. Oh? Absolutely,
Speaker 1: I'm learning as a science writer, and I think I'm maturing.
Speaker 1: Let me say so myself. I look at some of
Speaker 1: my older writings about narcissm and I even the article
Speaker 1: had to spot a narcissist, and I don't. It doesn't
Speaker 1: feel good to me anymore to these labels. I'm more
Speaker 1: on your side these days about it. And I'm not
Speaker 1: just saying that to be agreeable. It really has been
Speaker 1: a shift in my thinking about this stuff to the
Speaker 1: complexities of being human. And I wrestled with that a
Speaker 1: lot when I wrote my recent book Wired to Create,
Speaker 1: where I talk about how creative people tend to take
Speaker 1: the dualities in them that most of us, all of
Speaker 1: us have these contradictions, but creative people are really good
Speaker 1: at reconciling those contradictions and integrating it, and even just
Speaker 1: like the whole point of the creative process for them
Speaker 1: is to make meaning out of themselves and the contradictions
Speaker 1: and others. And the more I thought about that, the
Speaker 1: more I realized that, Yeah, gosh, it's really hard to
Speaker 1: write about this stuff because I want to now not
Speaker 1: use the word narcissism, because I don't want to label people,
Speaker 1: but I want to describe a set of characteristics that
Speaker 1: everyone I know. It's so easy, it's so easy to
Speaker 1: just slip into this language and to be part of it,
Speaker 1: like you said, but I want to be out of
Speaker 1: it as well, nuanced away. And it is hard, It's
Speaker 1: really hard, because how do you describe, you know, tendencies
Speaker 1: towards these traits, but give it a neutral label of
Speaker 1: some sort in a way that people will understand. Is gosh,
Speaker 1: that's hard to do. If you if you have an
Speaker 1: idea how to how to write about that in that way?
Speaker 1: Let me know the thing that will go unnamed. You know,
Speaker 1: it's hard. It's a question similar to the question that
Speaker 1: I have as a writer, and we all have, but
Speaker 1: just also how do we write for the internet? Yeah?
Speaker 1: Right about stuff that's very very complicated that people want
Speaker 1: to read very quickly. But I mean, I don't know,
Speaker 1: I don't have an answer for you. That's exactly the
Speaker 1: problem you should be working from, right, That's that should
Speaker 1: be the problem. Yeah. Absolutely. Can I bring back an
Speaker 1: idea about empathy for a second. So Paul Bloom has
Speaker 1: made an argument recently about why empathy is very myopic,
Speaker 1: very narrow, and how we'd all be better off without empathy,
Speaker 1: and he has a book coming out of the Case
Speaker 1: against Empathy, and the case against empathy is not a
Speaker 1: case for narcissism, which is interesting. That's not the opposite
Speaker 1: flip side of it. He views the flip side of
Speaker 1: it compassion, and compassion is different than empathy. There is
Speaker 1: emerging brain and research showing that when we automatically feel
Speaker 1: the pain of others, we are more likely to have
Speaker 1: emotional burnout. You know, like a lot of nurses doctors
Speaker 1: wouldn't reduce their empathy, But compassion is different. It's more
Speaker 1: of a feeling of love and warmth towards a person
Speaker 1: who's suffering without feeling their suffering. So it does complicate
Speaker 1: the picture a bunch because you can't just say just
Speaker 1: because someone's low empathy, they're a narcissist, you know, like
Speaker 1: that's way too simplistic. Someone might take a more rational
Speaker 1: approach to things where they don't want to be They
Speaker 1: want to like actually not be biased by how someone's
Speaker 1: feeling in the moment, to kind of get a bigger
Speaker 1: picture view of what might be going on to help
Speaker 1: the person truly, because there are moments when having empathy
Speaker 1: can get in the way of actually giving the person
Speaker 1: what they actually need. So I just want to put
Speaker 1: that wrench in things because it's really tricky. Well, you know,
Speaker 1: it's write a little bit in the book, and I
Speaker 1: started thinking about how that exact problem is complicated by
Speaker 1: our desire to be seen as decent and good and empathetic. Right,
Speaker 1: So if we're just looking for the moments when we
Speaker 1: can feel empathy because that makes us feel good about ourselves,
Speaker 1: we might actually, you know, and it's a complicated argument,
Speaker 1: but we might actually be less likely to understand what
Speaker 1: someone else is doing. Right. And that's a good point. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's a really profound, like that's very different. So I
Speaker 1: guess that brings I mean, that brings me back to
Speaker 1: the question of then why is the narcissist our favorite
Speaker 1: insult in, our favorite name for our whole culture right now?
Speaker 1: And it seems like it's there's something very to me,
Speaker 1: very profound going on in like this moment in history
Speaker 1: where maybe because of the Internet, maybe because of like
Speaker 1: how self reflective we are, because of your discipline, we're all,
Speaker 1: you know, evaluating ourselves in ours it's our fault. I
Speaker 1: don't have a like, I don't feel helpless about psychology.
Speaker 1: I take responsibility myself. Yeah. Good, But we are partly
Speaker 1: all because we're creating the constructs and tests. Yeah, but
Speaker 1: like what you know, in this moment in history when
Speaker 1: you know, right now we can see each other's faces,
Speaker 1: but if we were just messaging on Facebook, we'd be
Speaker 1: having to decide how to whether to trust each other,
Speaker 1: you know, whether to like I did with you right
Speaker 1: when you messaged me, I was like, oh, so I
Speaker 1: trust this guy. Seems nice. He could be faking, right.
Speaker 1: I don't have the advantage of whatever mirror neurons or
Speaker 1: whatever it is. I don't have some of the major
Speaker 1: ways in which we understand and interpret each other otherre's actions.
Speaker 1: I can't see your eyes, so I can't read your
Speaker 1: mind in the eyes, but like you know, no, we're
Speaker 1: faced right, yeah, yeah, And so I think we're more
Speaker 1: and more conscious of both how performed selves always are,
Speaker 1: how much we depend on that mirroring and that physical
Speaker 1: presence to understand each other. And then you know, we're
Speaker 1: trying to understand comprehend so many more people at such
Speaker 1: a greater rate than we used to historically. Right, And
Speaker 1: here I'm just speculating, you know, but this is my
Speaker 1: hunch about like why in this moment we might feel
Speaker 1: insecure about our ability both to decide whether or not
Speaker 1: to trust other people and ourselves because we have to
Speaker 1: more explicitly perform ourselves every day. That takes us to
Speaker 1: the big question that you brought up about the whether
Speaker 1: the self is you know, even a thing, and whether
Speaker 1: it's sort of dissolving in this moment, and like what
Speaker 1: is this? You know, it's stuck, it's very deep, and
Speaker 1: I just, you know, I take a very Maslow approach
Speaker 1: to a lot of this stuff, and I think that
Speaker 1: we should wreck And this is so consistent with your
Speaker 1: own ideas in your book, but we should really just
Speaker 1: acknowledge that esteam needs are a basic need of humans,
Speaker 1: and if we're not getting those needs met, like we
Speaker 1: can turn into jerks. All of us can have the
Speaker 1: potential for that. And when we're in a relationship, we
Speaker 1: need to recognize that if we're getting upset you know,
Speaker 1: that our steam needs aren't being met, they're a good
Speaker 1: chance the other person is being upset too that their
Speaker 1: steam needs aren't being met. And so you have two
Speaker 1: people who think each other are narcissist when both people
Speaker 1: are just not getting a basic fundamental human need a
Speaker 1: satisfied to the level which they feel like they need it.
Speaker 1: So that's just my thinking about that. Yeah, let's trust
Speaker 1: each other and acknowledge we have these needs. And if
Speaker 1: someone's needs for that are so great, then maybe we
Speaker 1: might want to distance ourselves a little bit because that
Speaker 1: could happen. But I think it's okay to lead to
Speaker 1: with trust. I don't know, just in my opinion. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but you know, in the I don't know if you
Speaker 1: read comments sections on online, but you know, it's like
Speaker 1: you've got that problem multiple by just exponentially, where people
Speaker 1: are just like distrusting each other right away, right and
Speaker 1: assuming that the position that the others coming from is
Speaker 1: going to be a selfish one, therefore it can be
Speaker 1: just condemned, and then these fights pile up, you know.
Speaker 1: You know, but the truth is that all of our
Speaker 1: decisions are selfish ones by definition, because we're the only
Speaker 1: frame of reference we have. Whether we realize it or
Speaker 1: like it or not, you know, all of our decisions
Speaker 1: are selfishly motivated, even pro social decisions. And that's the fact.
Speaker 1: The word selfish doesn't have to be a bad thing.
Speaker 1: You know, if I'm sitting alone watching a beautiful sunset
Speaker 1: and no one else is with me to watch it,
Speaker 1: am I being selfish. You know, it's like, I think
Speaker 1: what we really mean is, you know, this person is
Speaker 1: not considering the needs of another person to extend to
Speaker 1: which it's hurting someone. And that's a different territory. That's
Speaker 1: I think there's different categories of selfishness, but I don't
Speaker 1: think just selfishness in itself. All it means is that
Speaker 1: it's coming from yoursel and for all of us. You know,
Speaker 1: everything is selfish. Really when we consider the needs of
Speaker 1: other people, you know, I guess that is selfless, but
Speaker 1: it's not a hundred present selfless because evolution evolved us
Speaker 1: a system that where we get a reward, intrinsic reward
Speaker 1: value for helping others as well. So it's almost impossible
Speaker 1: to completely disentangle that. But while we're getting really deep
Speaker 1: here a second. Yeah, yeah, you know, I say that
Speaker 1: and it sounds skeptical. I'm actually a positive psychologist, so
Speaker 1: I don't say that in a skeptical way. I think
Speaker 1: that I guess I want to make a point that
Speaker 1: we throw around that word selfishness, and I think this
Speaker 1: does relate to the essence of your book. We throw
Speaker 1: that around in a way that it's like it's always
Speaker 1: a bad thing if we're not considering the needs of
Speaker 1: another person. But I think that it's it's important to
Speaker 1: recognize that we all have this tendency to be selfish
Speaker 1: because we are the only frame of reference we have,
Speaker 1: and just by the nature of being self absorbed or
Speaker 1: being like wanting to be happy for yourself is not,
Speaker 1: by itself, you know, a horrible thing. Yeah, I would
Speaker 1: put it maybe because you're still it's like, we can't
Speaker 1: get away from this word selfish, right, but we're you know,
Speaker 1: but like when you get really get down into it,
Speaker 1: that word itself assumes this like difference between self and
Speaker 1: other that doesn't it doesn't hol up in many philosophical traditions,
Speaker 1: religious traditions, and also you know, in fact, in like
Speaker 1: neuroscience in some ways, right, like we are living through
Speaker 1: imitation of others, Like we learn to be ourselves by
Speaker 1: imitating others, and we have I guess I would say
Speaker 1: this just in a more poetic way, like we in
Speaker 1: addition to what you're saying, like I would say, I
Speaker 1: also am always amazed by how people are always stretching
Speaker 1: to get out of that spot where they're stuck at
Speaker 1: the center of the world. But they're always right. They're
Speaker 1: always longing to understand others, to not be trapped there
Speaker 1: in only our own perspective, you know, to like, do
Speaker 1: you know what I mean? Oh, gosh, I totally know
Speaker 1: what you mean. I mean, And that's what you know.
Speaker 1: That's what people in your I mean. We the fact
Speaker 1: that we study each other, right, we want to understand
Speaker 1: how everyone else works. We want to understand the difference.
Speaker 1: We want to Well, that's that's the great value of
Speaker 1: humility is recognizing what you've recognized. That's wisdom. You recognize
Speaker 1: that all of us are have the self selfish viewpoint
Speaker 1: of the world. And you know, these body these people
Speaker 1: that become Buddhist monks, they're not all becoming Buddhist monks
Speaker 1: or because they're all narcissists and they want to be
Speaker 1: trans they want to be transformed. They're becoming boudhed monks
Speaker 1: because they're human and they and they have the wisdom
Speaker 1: to recognize that there's a greater perspective, that no single
Speaker 1: person has a perspective on the world that's the truth
Speaker 1: or reality. So so so yeah, you make a lot of
Speaker 1: really good points in your book along those lines. And
Speaker 1: I think maybe, like I mean, I do think that
Speaker 1: we we, whoever the we is, that there's an over
Speaker 1: use of narcissism this word as a diagnosis that has
Speaker 1: a moral implication and as a kind of apocalyptic story
Speaker 1: about the future. Right, I do think that's overuse. But
Speaker 1: I also think that like it's good that we see
Speaker 1: like the thing that we're naming as like evil or
Speaker 1: harmful in that word is evil and harmful. It is
Speaker 1: what right, it's I just want it to be stretched
Speaker 1: a little bigger than any given individual, you know. So
Speaker 1: I've been thinking since I got done with the book
Speaker 1: about the ways in which, like say, whiteness is a
Speaker 1: kind of can be a kind of narcissism, right, the
Speaker 1: inability to see outside of a position of privilege in
Speaker 1: a certain situation, right, like in the city, to see
Speaker 1: except for from the position that you're in in the world.
Speaker 1: But then like written large over history, right, you know
Speaker 1: what I mean? And so like, yeah, of entitlement and
Speaker 1: kind of blindness to others is something that we see
Speaker 1: in it is what causes harm. But part of why
Speaker 1: it causes harm is because it maintains a myth. Uh oh,
Speaker 1: I don't want to get too deep, crazy, but it
Speaker 1: makes that, you know, it maintains this the myth of
Speaker 1: that we're separate, right. Yeah, so maybe one of the
Speaker 1: most uplifting aspects of your book is is that if
Speaker 1: we want to have true empathy, we need to be
Speaker 1: a little bit more lenient on our labels and recognize
Speaker 1: we're all just trying to get by. We're all just
Speaker 1: trying to get through the day in a lot of ways.
Speaker 1: And yeah, is there anything else you want to add
Speaker 1: to this interview? Yeah, my head is kind of spinning
Speaker 1: with all the topics. But it's very cool to talk
Speaker 1: to you. Thank you, really cool to talk to you too. Thanks.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to The Psychology Podcast with doctor Scott
Speaker 1: barrk Kauffman. I hope you found this episode just as
Speaker 1: thought for booking and interesting as I did. If you'd
Speaker 1: like to read the show notes for this episode or
Speaker 1: here past episodes, you can visit the Psychology Podcast dot com.