Heh, that's funny. Hey Google, make me a sandwich. You got it. Engaging nanobot matter reconfiguration engine. 10% complete. What? If you have somehow avoided hearing about the topic, numerous smart people in the tech industry and academia have gone on the record as being concerned about the possibility of rogue AI, an artificial intelligence run amok that could be dangerous to humans, or if you're feeling especially pessimistic to all humankind. I've discussed the concept at length before, but the general idea is that a sophisticated AI, given an insufficiently defined task, like manufacture paperclips more quickly and efficiently, would function as a sort of be careful what you wish for genie that would spiral out of control almost instantly, commandeering every available computer on the planet, squashing any attempt to shut it down, harvesting every gram of steel from bridges and homes. If your only goal is to make more paperclips, all this makes perfect sense. Anxiety about the potential ill effects of an artificial intelligence explosion have prompted the creation of numerous organizations dedicated to avoiding this sort of AI apocalypse. But there's understandable skepticism about the relative risk posed to us by that possibility. Many experts are also frustrated with the media's focus on these prophecies about rogue AI, and with good reason. It has very little to do with the field at large. The vast majority of AI's in use today are a long, long way from anything like human intelligence, and it's annoying that real advances and problems with machine learning are being overshadowed by sci-fi speculation. AlphaZero, DeepMind's adaptive learning AI, is a fantastically impressive bit of software that has taught itself how to play go, shogi, and chess at superhuman levels in just a few days. But it needed careful calibration administration by its programmers to do so. Apart from that, the best that most AI algorithms can muster right now is to recommend YouTube videos you actually might want to watch, some of the time. So, should we be worried? It's difficult to say for certain. If we knew the details of how strong AI would ultimately come about, we'd have one already. Experts disagree about how long we have to wait for the sort of AI which might conceivably convert Earth and everything on it into paperclips if we're not careful, and how careful we ought to be. There's also the convoluting factor that nobody wants to be seen as chicken little here. If Elon Musk turns out to be simultaneously outrageously optimistic and paranoid about AI, no big deal. But if someone from the field stokes widespread panic about something that turns out to be centuries away, their reputation will probably evaporate. Yet, there's an aspect of the discussion that's worth considering. The idea that rogue AIs kind of exist already. In December of last year, science fiction author Charlie Strauss gave a talk titled Dude, You Broke the Future, where he discusses many issues that have been in the zeitgeist recently, manipulation of elections using data scrape from social media sites, the problems we've caused for ourselves by using advertising to build the early internet. That sort of stuff. But he also raised an interesting point that the very first AIs were developed between 1553 and 1844 and are known today as corporations. Corporations are, in many ways, very much like artificial intelligences in nature and operation. They're man-made systems greater than the sum of their parts. They accept input from shareholders and investors and produce some output, hopefully in the form of saleable product and dividends. They have goals which they pursue, and most importantly for the purpose of this discussion, those goals don't necessarily align with human interests. That probably sounds a bit peculiar. After all, aren't corporations just groups of humans? Don't humans ultimately enact everything that corporations do? Well, yes and no. While humans are the de facto operators and constituents, their effective agency often boils down to the function they perform in service of the corporation's goals. Shareholders probably don't care much whose name or face is linked to the HR manager or R&D engineer three positions. They only care if the people in those roles are fulfilling their job requirements satisfactorily. In that sense, with the exception of very tightly controlled privately owned companies, humans are just the substrate that corporation algorithms run on, with very little effective agency in their ultimate output. And, while corporations can have diverse mission statements and goals, they all share one particular goal that's intrinsic to the whole enterprise of being one to begin with. Increasing revenue. That might sound like it's perfectly aligned with human interests. After all, who doesn't like having tons of money? Well, who doesn't like having very efficient paperclip production? The revenue maximizing goal is certainly linked to the interests of the owners of the corporation, but there are additional pressures of competition and market forces that can and do push it into the realm of paperclip maximization, beyond what those owners might actively request. Consider, would you deliberately crash the US economy for $100 million? Would you significantly accelerate global climate change for the same amount? If you have some moral qualms about those propositions, congratulations, you're not a sociopath, but you're also considering aspects of the situation that corporations haven't been programmed to account for. Worse yet is the coordination game phenomenon I mentioned back in episode 133. In order to avoid these significant negative effects, most corporations have to choose not to take the bait, but if it's going to happen anyway, game theory implies that the only rational action is to beat their competitors to the best bits, and what do you know? They frequently do exactly that. Now, importantly, none of this is to say that corporations are bad or evil. They do humans a lot of good. The screen you're watching this on, the internet connection that allows you to see it, the clothes you're wearing, it's likely that all of these things have been made possible for your enjoyment by corporations yoke to some human need or desire that their creators were insightful enough to spot and exploit. Competition has forced the survivors to specialize even further in generating revenue, cannibalizing the weak for resources and driving rivals out of business, but it's also made them extremely efficient at converting that revenue into things that people want. Yet the parallels between fears about rogue AIs and the history of corporations making decisions suboptimal for human welfare are compelling. Abusive working conditions, deforestation, environmental destruction, polluting heavily populated areas, dismantling, subverting, and exploiting government. Corporations have performed many actions that most humans would find abhorrent or unconscionable, but it's not necessarily because the people enacting them are heartless comic book villains. Often it's because the corporations are operating exactly as they have been programmed to operate, both by evolutionary pressures and their implicit goals, increased revenue by any means necessary, and also sometimes make that thing that people like. Which is why it's so concerning that the most advanced AI research initiatives are corporately owned. Google, Facebook, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, Baidu, these companies are not dumping billions of dollars into AI development because they're sick of all the piles of cash they have laying around. They're anticipating that whatever algorithms their programmers produce are going to provide a reasonable return on investment, suggesting that those algorithms are being groomed to do exactly that. So, maybe those futurist fears about rogue AIs are worth considering now. The corporation isn't a particularly smart form of AI, but it may bring one about, and if that smart AI is created in the corporation's image, revenue might be what it's designed to maximize.  Sure, it's not paper clips, it's page views, but these machine learning algorithms are already sacrificing human welfare in pursuit of their corporate goals. If you're Google and setting the parameters for your brand new Omega-Zero strong artificial intelligence, the AI which will achieve superintelligence and outthink humans almost instantly, are you really going to set the variable for Google revenue generation at zero? Put another way, how much would you pay for one share of the company that creates a God? Are corporations a form of present-day rogue AI? Please leave a comment below and let me know what you think. Thank you very much for watching. Don't forget to ball ball, subscribe, blast share, and don't stop thunking.


This study examined the effect of several parameters on the performance of al4cu slash al203 composites produced via powder metallurgy. The parameters included the weight percentage of al203 reinforcement, the compaction pressure, and the height-to-diameter ratio of the compacted sample. The results showed that increasing the amount of al203 reinforcement improved the mechanical properties of the composites, while higher compaction pressure resulted in lower densities. Additionally, the height-to-diameter ratio had no significant effect on the mechanical properties of the composites. Finally, the use of a genetic algorithm and response surface methodology allowed for optimization of the parameters and prediction of the mechanical properties of the composites. This article was authored by Sally Elkatani, Muhammad F. Alsharek, Abdulrahman I. Alatiya, and others.


If you truly believe that there are many gods and you do believe in reincarnation, then ultimately you end up being a Hindu and yet again you can see here even though it's just a silly little game that doesn't go into depth, it doesn't need to go into depth because the basic outlines of the religion are manifested within this little graph.


Live from San Jose, California, in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's theCUBE. Covering Hadoop Summit 2016, brought to you by Hortonworks. Now, here are your hosts, John Furrier and George Gilbert. Okay, welcome back, everyone. We are here live here in Silicon Valley in San Jose. This is theCUBE's Silicon Angles flagship program. We go out to the events and extract the signal from the noise. We're wrapping up day one of three days of wall-to-wall live broadcast coverage. We are live in San Jose for Hadoop Summit 2016. I'm John Furrier with my co-host this week, George Gilbert and Peter Burris, who couldn't make it in the meeting. Guest analyst is Abhimeta, CEO, founder of Triseta. Welcome to theCUBE, filling in as our guest analyst on our club. It's great to see you again. You guys gave me a promotion to guest analysts. I appreciate it. Well, usually it's for unemployed entrepreneurs that come on or sold their company. It's kind of like they're not on the sidelines, coaching or playing, so they come on. No, but seriously, you're the CEO of Triseta. For the folks that don't know, Abhi was on theCUBE seven years ago, the official second one was the first time we were there at theCUBE. Hadoop Summit, the real world didn't start. Hadoop Summit seemed around. That's right. You were for Bank of America at the time. Now you went outside your own company, Triseta. Now we've lived through this. You've worked in the big company, financial services, where at that time you had clear sign of blind sight on analytics for fraud detection, a lot of things. Went out on your own, started a company. What's the status? Give us an update. Well, first of all, thanks for aging me for your viewers seven years. It's been a long time. And it's so good, always good to see the success you've had as an entrepreneur and the success we are seeing as Triseta. So a quick update on Triseta. We have nothing but good news to share. I think a big thing that is happening in the market today, especially with enterprise software, more so than B2C, but B2B software, is this ability for entrepreneurs. You call them tier one entrepreneurs. We finally have an ability and a arrow of an innovation economy where you can build a company that is capital light. What I mean by that is you can actually build a company without raising oodles and oodles of venture capital or private equity money built on revenues, which is the secret of Triseta's success. So we at this point have funded our CD's A and CD's B on organic revenues. We had become profitable two years ago. Last year was the first year we hit our striil as operating company. We hit our operating numbers, gross profit, net profit, how to pay taxes, which my lawyers and my accountants tell me is a fifth avenue problem. I shouldn't worry about it, much as much as it hurts. We are a contributing member of society now. We're not a company losing money. But more importantly, I think we have proven the vision that we have shared with you, that this era of data powered economic models is going to unleash a wave of business transformations, not just technology transformations, that is going to empower billions, right? I think you were the first ones to say that the economic value at stake is not billions, it's in the trillions. And we are seeing the early successes and the early signs of that unbelievable revolution. And you know, we'd love to share the data that's certainly live, and now Facebook does doing a lot of live, so it's good to see Facebook kind of copying the cube model, which is great, you know, they're worth billions. Now, all kidding aside, we've been successful, you've been successful. Congratulations. I want to get your take on it because you said something in 2010 that it still holds true today, data capital, data factories are going to drive the innovation and competitive economic advantages. I don't think you used the word valuations per se, but you were intimating, certainly talking about the value of the data that's going on. LinkedIn sold to Microsoft for $26 billion. You know, some would look at LinkedIn and say, hey, that's a Rolodex, that's a job board, but not really a social network, but they had unlimited, high quality data. They're not unlimited, high quality data. Absolutely. That's a showcase for this ecosystem we're living in. Question for you. Did Hadoop fail on its promise to build an app economy? Not at all. I think, and I love when you asked me to make controversial statements on theCUBE. Absolutely not. It did not fail. It succeeded. It is unleashing. Let's take a step back. Let's take a step back for a second. What we are seeing is a dramatic shift in S-curves. And when you have dramatic shift in S-curves that are driven by some tectonic underlying change, which in this revolution happens to be technology around data analytics, it takes time for the entire ecosystem to evolve because we are fundamentally rewriting business models. I know you guys believe that big vision, right? We are fundamentally- You can get more step up and value- Absolutely. With data. With ever low investments, right? With markedly lower investments. Well, the question is, do you shrink costs or increase value? So you can actually increase your value faster than you can increase, lower your, I mean lower your cost. But what if we came over here and we proved to you that we can do both? Yes. I think what this ecosystem is proving to us is you can do both. That you're enabling an innovation economy on a new S-curve. Give an example. So let's do a quick example. The one with this ecosystem doing that. Let's actually use the example that you use and we'll use two examples. We'll use an enterprise software example, which of course I'll talk about Trasada. And we'll use a data company example, which we use LinkedIn. LinkedIn and the value of LinkedIn is way beyond the social network that LinkedIn built. But we have to think about LinkedIn as creating a new data asset that never existed before, which is one single global location of not just professional data, but professional hierarchy and timelines. There is no company in the world that if they wanted could predict looking at global talent pools, global education certifications and global professional lineage, what people could do in the future with their careers when they start. You marry that information, that plethora of knowledge of a pathway of careers that is now owned by a behemoth in professional software, aka Office, and you can do not just sell more office software, which all the analysts looked at, but I think you start creating new products and services geared to make professionals successful in the pathway. That is the poster child of, in my opinion, because it's so sexy news-wise. And the number's big, of the value of data. George, I want to get your take as the analyst on the Wikibon team. He's really talking about, I was talking about the trends in the meta Uber business economic side and the entrepreneur side. Under the hood, okay? Are you happy with this ecosystem? Do you think that the engine that's in the car, so to speak, is working? I mean, obviously Hadoop was supposed to be the holy grail, it morphed. What's going on under the hood? What are the key innovations that you're seeing? Is there a new kind of component? Is there a turbo-charge engine? I mean, what's going on? I'd say 2016 is big data's moment of truth. And by that, I mean, we've assumed for several years, for more than five years in the commercial market that Hadoop was the big data platform. And by using the word platform, we were implicitly saying, and actually often explicitly saying, applications were coming and that they would reside on that platform. But the problem is the governance model, Apache Software Foundation, and then the companies that made distributions of Hadoop off of what came out of that foundation created these platforms that innovated in so many different directions so fast that there is no one platform. We can't say it's like Linux and there's just a little bit of difference in each distribution. You cannot build applications on Hadoop. You can build one on Hortonworks, you can build one on MapR, you can build one on Cloudera. And I think what's going to happen is and we were hearing this from our guests all day, that the very services that define the core of Hadoop are being swapped out, like instead of HDFS on-prem in the cloud, it's S3 or some other file system or object store. And so what we're seeing is, it's almost like a disarticulation of the Hadoop components. So, okay, I'd buy that. But to the question of what's working, what do you see working on the moment of truth on the public side? What's working is the principles that Hadoop stood for, which is huge amounts of storage where you don't have to decide upfront exactly how you're going to use it, the ability to send the compute or the analytics to the storage, and then sort of the ability to, well, expand in the elastic capacity and pricing, a metered pricing model. Those things. So- The two other things that are working John, I'm sorry to interrupt, but the two other things that are working that are dramatically important for us to talk about. I think the oil tanker has been shifted to, Hadoop did win the battle to become the de facto data storage platform for the industry. And I call it the HDFS ecosystem, number one. Let's talk about- Not MapReduce. Not MapReduce. HDFS, right? A distributed file system. Great place to store the data. Cheap, scalable, redundant, and works at massive, massive scale, irrespective of structure of the data assets. Hold on, hold on, hold on. Before you go to the second thing. Sure. Just interject. Do the cloud guys care about Hadoop? I think- Amazon, others? I think the reality in my opinion, having seen no one cares about infrastructure anymore because of what happens with infrastructure, which is at some point, when Cloud Foundry, Docker, Amazon have abstracted away the complications running applications at scale, no one's going to care about them. Okay. They'll make a lot of money about it with it, but no one's going to care about it. The second thing that's very important on the app question, because we've debated this for five years or six years now. Yeah, let's go again. Is there's a reason why we haven't seen a plethora of applications? And I know why you were turning back and looking at it. And here's why. What has happened is, we see the emergence of three tiers of new platform services emerge in the future of the enterprise software ecosystem. I would love to get your views on it. Sure. The bottom tier is the server operating systems, right? We call it the SOS. The historical operating systems have been Linux and Windows and the next generation are Cloud Foundry, Docker, et cetera, right? Then is the data operating system, which HDFS is the next gen of what has replaced what we had grown up with. And HDFS is absolutely one that battle on the data operating system. There's a critical missing component of writing applications because the data operating system is not building, the building of the data factory to enable application writing. We have added a third tier to it. We call it the analytics operating system. We have our own word at Trasera Optimus, and it's building the core functions necessary to arcaded apps really quickly. Without the analytics operating system that works on that tier, you can't write the apps. And that's why you haven't seen anybody but Palantir on a 15-year cycle building what they call Gotham, which was an analytics operating system, to set up with Optimus and IBM with Watson. And that regeneration cannot happen without that missing tier. And no one in the data operating system tier has focused on it, because to your point, when you look back, they're building functions that are essential to store and for them to be able to build a marketer on. All right, so here's my take on this. So, I mean, pretty dogmatic, obviously it's your company doing the analytics operating system, but here's a trend that would support that thesis. I've been kind of teasing it out in the cube and it hasn't really kind of come out. So I've been stitching it together in public in the open. But here's my take. What DevOps was was infrastructure as code.  So that created LinkedIn, Facebook, all these web-scale guys, Yahoo, Cloudera, Hordemarks, the DNA of this community, they had to build their own stuff. That was called DevOps. Eatin' glass spittin' nails is Dave Vellante and I always talk about that hardcore dudes. Well, DevOps just went mainstream, in my opinion. So with Docker containers, the application market, you're seeing DevOps is now a paradigm that's gone mainstream, which means the ITOps group has to accept the new narrative, the new reality, adjust operations to be agile. That's its own little challenge. That's a done deal. That's what we're covering at DockerCon, Red Hat Summit, and some extent, not so much here. But all the IT shows. But if you believe what DevOps did, maybe infrastructure as code, you could even take the same leads, move up the stack and say, data as code. Yes. So you'd argue that the benefits of a developer to say, whoa, I don't want to provision any hardware, I want pools of resource, be elastic. Of course. That is what developers wanted and that's what DevOps did. The next level is I don't want to deal with all the data, I just need data. So programmable data, data as code. Machine data. Machine, it could be machine to machine, augmented by AI, but my point is that's a new data ops layer. Yeah, it is, absolutely. So, data ops, DevOps is data ops. You see that? I do. Can you share your thoughts on that vision? Absolutely, and I think, I like, that's why I like being challenged by you, because you're not using different terms, but the data ops layer, what you call program data, what I call machined data, machine data is the automation of data ops into its own operating system. There are fundamental building blocks needed to architect analytical applications that solve business problems. And the goal is to make the developer go faster. And in some cases, abstract the way the developer itself or herself. Because the reality may be, let's take a step back. You look at the three big economic engines of an economy, agriculture, manufacturing, and services. And when each tier got machined, AKA automated, people moved to the next tier. We have lived in a boom of services with humans doing all activities around every single service, whether it's a data service or a product service. And we are now witnessing the era, the start of an era, where we will machine services and remove humans from it. With your terminology of yours being data ops. Data ops will be automated, but the core functions around it are... Data ops with bots. With bots. And the bots, in this case, will be not like the fuzzy bot running around and jumping rocks. It will be software. Yeah, software help make my life easier. Absolutely. So this data ops is going to enable a new class of developer, the machine developer. Absolutely. It's Terminator. It's Terminator. It's Skynet. It's Arnie. I mean, it'll be great to get Arnie to talk about. But you're absolutely right. I think we are witnessing the starts of artificial intelligence, not the scary part of artificial intelligence, but the ability for humans to program machines to think like humans. And you asked me for an example. I'll give you a very good example. Money laundering. Massive problem in the industry. Two trillion dollars. After every single automation, every single machining, every single technology innovation after 15 years remains a two trillion dollar problem. Which today... They fixed the X trillion dollars to only a two trillion. No, it's been growing. At 15% compounded every single year. So it hasn't even gone down. So the question you are... So they stop on the bleeding with their current solutions. And if they want to, because they keep screwing up part of my French and the regularity coming after them. So the question becomes, if we are so intelligent, if machining is truly coming, if Terminator is truly coming to data ops, why haven't we fixed the problem? And we took a crack at fixing the problem and we realized that by simple machine learning, as step one, and complex unsupervised learning, AKA AI as step two, we could eliminate 90% of the false positives and completely automate the human process of running down a suspicious transaction. It wasn't possible even when we spoke seven years ago. So to answer, now to bring it all down, it wouldn't have been possible without the HDF ecosystem that you have so passionately supported yourself, including companies like ours, because without that, the economics of doing so didn't exist. So absolutely, not only can we build Terminator, every single human being, every single family, can build their own Terminator to make human life better. Well, a final wrap up on day one. We've got two days of more coverage. Tomorrow will be day two. Got a great lineup, more great guests. Abhimedas filling in for Peter Burris and Dave Vellante. He's so powerful. We're filling in for two answers. Of course, George Gilbert and I'm John Furrier. You're watching theCUBE. We'll see you tomorrow here, live in Silicon Valley in San Jose for Hadoop Summit 2016. Thanks for watching and we'll see you tomorrow.


Why do narcissists feel that they are victims all the time, victimized by everyone, in every possible circumstance, in every setting, the family, workplace, church, neighborhood pub, a club, you name it? Why this constant, all-permeating, ubiquitous feeling of being disrespected, being slighted, ignored, discriminated against, treated unjustly, abused? Well, today I'm going to give you an innovative or novel answer. I'm going to ground the narcissist's sense of victimhood in his own inner turmoil. It's a disruption in his inner dialogue, a confusion between internal objects and external objects, you, and the desperate attempt that he makes to avoid total meltdown psychosis by deploying an infantile primitive defense mechanism called splitting. The narcissist uses splitting in a very, very special way, which has not been described in the literature very well or at all. There's been a lot of attention given to splitting in borderline personality disorder, but scant attention and almost no studies with regards to narcissistic splitting. This is the topic of today's video. You're going to discover amazing things about the narcissist's internal world and how he sees you. But before we go there, I would like to draw your attention to a new study published actually a few weeks ago, less than two or three weeks ago. The study is titled the tendency for interpersonal victimhood, the personality construct, and its consequences. And it was co-authored by a group of Israelis, Rafab Gabbay, Boaz Hameiri, Tami Rubel Lifshitz, and Arian Adler. What they say is that there is a personality construct.  Personality construct is a set of traits and behaviors that are correlated. They go together and they appear in a variety of settings in the family setting, in the workplace, outside the workplace, etc. So you have the same traits and behaviors manifesting, expressed in a variety of unrelated settings and across the lifespan. So it's not unique to a specific period in one's life. It's not reactive. It's not a reaction to something bad that had happened or to a real state of victimhood. It seems to be detached from reality. There's poor or impaired reality testing, etc. So these guys, they propose and girls, they propose a new personality construct. They describe people who persistently see themselves as victim within interpersonal conflicts. Well, you see, narcissists, for example, they're hyper-vigilant. They go around, they scan the environment all the time. Is someone disrespecting me? Is someone talking about me, gossiping about me behind my back? This is known as referential ideation or ideas of reference. Our people skimming and conspiring and colluding to deprive me of what's mine, to undermine me, to sabotage my work, to keep me from getting promoted, to treat me unjustly, etc.  We all are subjected to disrespect, to insults, to mistreatment, to abuse and to injustice. This is an integral part of life as people experience friction with each other. You know, we move in the same spaces and there are many of us, billions of us. It's inevitable that we are going to clash like so many billiard balls, you know, but most people shrug it off. Yeah, it's been unpleasant, even unwarranted. I shouldn't have been treated this way, but, you know, I'll let it go.  They get stuck, they keep rehashing the incident, they hold grudges, they ruminate and they persistently paint themselves as victim. The authors say that this persistent sentiment, this persistent conviction that one is a victim is not just yet another thing, another eccentricity, if you wish. But it's a personality-constructed influences, how these people make sense of the world around them. In other words, it imbues their life with meaning. I've been saying the same thing since 1995 when I wrote the article, When Victims Become Narcissists. The researchers coined a new phrase, a new word, and they call it tendency for interpersonal victim, T-I-V. And they define it as an ongoing feeling that the self is a victim which is generalized across many kinds of relationships. So there's an ongoing feeling, it's all the time, you feel as a victim and you generalize this feeling across many types of relationships. In all relationships, you tend to find yourself victimized or so you believe. You seem to attract abusers, you remember, and magnet, and puffs, and all these other nonsense. This is actually eternal victim stance. This is what these authors call tendency for interpersonal victim. The authors have conducted three studies and all three studies have shown that tendency for interpersonal victimhood, T-I-V, is consistent. It's stable, it's a trait that involves four dimensions. One, moral superiority or moral elitism. These perpetual professional victims, they believe that they are morally superior, not only to their abusers, but to everyone. Number two, a lack of empathy. Yes, you heard me correctly. These perpetual eternal victims, the empaths and so on, they lack empathy, exactly like narcissists, which led me long ago to believe that self-styled victims are actually covert narcissists. Number three, the authors say, number three is the need for recognition. Narcissistic supply. Number four, rumination. They describe an obsessive-compulsive narcissist without calling it by name because it's politically incorrect to say that victims are narcissists. I refer you to yet another study published almost a year ago in British Columbia, which had demonstrated conclusively that many social justice activists, you know, Black Lives Matter, Greta and the ecological movement, all these saints or self-styled saints, social justice activists this study had discovered actually have pronounced psychopathic traits, including defiance and grandiosity. Psychopaths seem to drive me too. Black Lives Matter and so on, they seem to be the driving force in social justice movements. Similarly, victims, not all, not all, of course not all, but victims who make victimhood their identity, they're actually narcissists. And there was a follow-up study to this Israeli study and it found that the tendency for victimhood is linked to anxious attachment. Let me remind you, I refer you to my video on attachment styles. Anxious attachment is an attachment style characterized by feeling insecure in one's relationship, suggesting that the personality trait of victimhood is rooted in early relationships with caregivers. Sounds very much again like close to being. The two studies, the two of the three studies, they discovered the people who scored higher on interpersonal victimhood, people who were victims by definition and as an identity, they were more likely to desire revenge against the person who wronged them. You don't have to trust these studies, just go to any forum of self-styled empaths. These are cesspools and cesspeeds of viciousness and malice and aggression, the likes of which I have never come across in 26 years of studying the film. This desire for revenge translates into behavior according to these studies. People high in TIV, in interpersonal victimhood, they are more likely to, for example, remove money from an oppop, steal, cut a long story short. They are more likely to steal when given the chance. Despite being told that stealing will not increase their own welfare, so that they are still to hurt the other person, to spite their spiteful. Participants who are very high on the victimhood trait, they reported experiencing more intense negative emotions and a higher entitlement to immoral behavior. They conducted something called mediation analysis and it offered insight how the revenge process unfolds and quoting from the study. The higher participants TIV victimhood trait, the more they experienced negative emotions and felt entitled to behave immorally. However, only the experience of negative emotions predicted behavioral revenge. Gabbai and her colleagues, they express the belief that their studies indicate the tendency for interpersonal victimhood is a stable personality trait that is linked to particular behavioral cognitive and emotional characteristics they say in the study, deeply rooted in the relations with primary caregivers. This tendency affects how individuals feel, think and behave in what they perceive as hurtful situations throughout their lives. The authors of the study suggest that TIV, this tendency to feel like a victim, the construct offers a framework for understanding how a person's interpretation of social transgressions, real or imagined, can inform feelings of victimhood and lead to revenge behaviors. And these insights probably can underline a therapeutic approach etc. The authors conclude by suggesting that it would be particularly interesting to study in the future what happens when people high in victimhood trait are in positions of power. They wonder whether leaders like Donald Trump with this persistent tendency to see themselves as victim, these leaders might feel more inclined to behave in a vindictive way. Brilliant, just confirms what many of us have been saying for a while and what I have been saying for well over two and a half decades. Many, many victims are actually narcissists and psychopaths. Many victims adopt victimhood as their engine of grandiose narcissistic supply. It's a power play, revenge, vindictiveness. These are not saints and the motives are not only. Be very careful who you associate with online and avoid these toxic movements of self-styled empaths and so on and so forth.  Okay, I said in one of my previous videos that narcissists constantly feel that they are victims. They are eternal victims. They actually have TIV. They have this victimhood trait, this victimhood kind of tendency for interpersonal victimhood. They would score very high on these tests. Why is that? It's because all narcissists are actually collapsed. All narcissists, you heard me well, even high functioning narcissists, even productive narcissists, even successful narcissists, even accomplished narcissists, pillars of the community, celebrities, presidents of countries, they all collapse narcissists in their own mind and they are collapsed because they are faced with unattainable, unrealistic goals. They have an inner voice which is perfectionist. We will come to it a bit later. But suffice it to say at this stage that when you have a constantly receding target, when your aim is perfection and nothing less, when you strive and aspire to be God-like in the fullest sense of the world with all of God's attributes, you're bound to fail. You're setting yourself up for failure.  You would still feel that you fell short of your goals and aims and purpose in life.  The imposter syndrome was first described in relations to women in position of power. Women felt that they were faking it, that they were imitating men in the 1970s when they started to attain a higher representation in the workforce and accumulate more societal and political power. Many women describe the sensation that they're faking it, that they're fake, that they're frauds and that men around them might expose them. So this is called the imposter syndrome. The narcissist has the imposter syndrome.  The narcissist knows that he is an emptiness, nothing but a void howling deep space. The narcissist knows that at the core of himself there is no self, there is nothing there. The narcissist is terrified to let you come too close, to let you observe him in a variety of ways because he is afraid that you will discover who he truly is or more precisely who he truly is not. He is afraid that you will discover his absence and then you will dump him. Once he is exposed as a fraudster, the narcissist anticipates inevitable punishment. So the narcissist keeps you at arm's length, approach avoidance, intermittent reinforcement. It's a tool of control, of course. There are other reasons to behave in these ways which I've described in other videos. But one of the crucial critical reasons is that the narcissist really, really believes that he is faking it and not making it.  He doesn't want you to find out the con. He is a con artist, he is a scammer and he doesn't want you to expose the plot too early or to his detriment. So there's an imposter syndrome. But there is a much deeper layer, there is a much deeper, more profound explanation as to why the narcissist feels constantly like a victim. Now, you're in for a bumpy ride. Focus, stay with me. Rewind, re-listen, rewind, re-listen. It's not going to be easy, but it's going to be very rewarding if you invest the effort. Understanding the narcissist will lead you to understand yourself. In many ways you were attracted to the narcissist because your shadows resonated. There's something in you that complements the narcissist. If you listen carefully to my description of the narcissist in a world, to the mechanisms that he uses to try to reconcile his internal irreconcilable differences, you might yourself embark on a path to healing and you may avoid similar bed choices, the wrong made selection in the future. So let's dive right in. The narcissist has a problem of attribution. Remember my previous video about the inner dialogue? Your mind is populated by objects. Many of these objects, internal objects, they represent other people. They represent the voices of your parents, teachers, role models and influential peers. These are known as introjects. They represent constructs, ways, interpretative frameworks and organizing principles. How you make sense of the world, what is called the internal working model. The internal working model includes a theory of mind, what it means to be human and how other people tea, how they function. This empathy is part of this and includes the theory of the world, how the world function, how you should function within the world, self-efficiously as an agent in order to secure favorable outcomes and all this gigantic ego sphere, like ecosphere but ego sphere, all this gigantic ego sphere, inside it there's a lot of tension, numerous debates and arguments, disagreements, conflicts and dissonances, voices clash, voices fight, voices disagree, voices argue and many times these are unsettled arguments. No party wins. There's a stalemate. Actually the state of stalemate is homeostatic. This equilibrium is a good state in effect. But the tension, the dissonance, the conflict is fake, you feel it. It's a problem of attribution is the fact that many internal objects used to be external.    So now she's an internal object, but wait a minute, she's also an external object. Here's an external object who is also an internal object, mother. This is very confusing.  And what is the difference between the external and the internal object in this case? How faithfully does the internal object, the introject, the voice of your mother, how faithfully does it represent your actual mother who is an external object assuming she is alive? So many internal objects used to be started off as external objects and this creates a normal confusion. Now this confusion between internal objects and external objects, if it is taken too far, if it is not reconciled and mediated, if it is not resolved psychodynamically, it leads to two very, very, very bad and self-destructive outcomes.  You are psychotic. That's one solution, psychosis. It's when you say, okay, I can't tell the difference between external and internal anymore. This work is too onerous. I can't do it.  They are out there. I can see them. I can hear them. These are called audio and visual hallucinations. So the psychotic gives up, raises his hands and says, I surrender. I've been trying for years to tell the difference between external objects and internal objects I give up. From now on everything is external. The voices that used to be inside my head are now external. And this is called hyperreflection. Hyperreflection is actually a narcissistic defense. The psychotic person inflates, like in the Big Bang, those of you who know astrophysics, there's an inflationary theory in the Big Bang. So then the psychotic inflates. There's a Big Bang, psychotic Big Bang, and the psychotic person becomes the universe. From that moment, he has no boundaries in any sense of the world. He is the world. Like the famous song, We Are The World, that's a psychotic song. Okay. The second solution, if you can't tell the difference between internal and external objects you're about to give up, the second solution is exactly the opposite. It's to say everything is internal. Remember, the psychotic says all objects are external. The narcissist says all objects are internal. There are no external objects. I am godlike. The universe is within me. I include everything. I am everywhere, omnipresent. I am the world, but in a different sense. The world is me. It's like Louis XIV in France, the king, the emperor, who used to say, let's say what? The state is me. Like Nixon and Donald Trump, who said that the United States is the president. So the narcissist says that there are no external objects.  They are actually internal. What he does, the narcissist, he takes a snapshot of you. He internalizes this. He converts you into an internal object via the snapshotting process. And then he continues to interact only exclusively with the internal object. Okay, these are two dysfunctional solutions to the attribution problem. When we can't tell the difference between internal and external objects, when we fail, when we are very, very uncertain, insecure, which of the voices, which of the entities, which of the elements is inside our mind and which are outside, at that point, we choose either narcissism or psychosis. Psychosis, they are only external objects. Narcissism, they are only internal objects. Now, most mental health conditions belong to the psychotic group or the narcissistic group. For example, borderline and psychopathy, they belong to the narcissistic group. And borderline, sorry, borderline belongs to the psychotic group, my apologies. Borderline belongs to the psychotic group. Psychopathy belongs to the narcissistic group. So you can take all mental health disorders and divide them into these two solutions. Okay. What are these introjects? I keep talking about internal objects. Okay, some of them are easy to understand.  You perceive other people, the way you perceive what it is to be human and how other people's minds work, theory of mind. The way you perceive the world and how you should operate in the world, that's the theory of the world, and together the internal working more. Attachment has its own internal set of internal objects. You actually get attached to internal objects. Attachment by definition is narcissistic. There's no non-narcistic attachment, but we'll leave it to another video. So all these objects, but what are these objects? Can we categorize them? Can we classify them? Can we make a cast, like in a film, like in a movie? Can we make a list of characters in the cast? Who plays what? Well, here we get a lot of help from Carl Jung. Now, I am not a proponent or an admirer of the late Jung. I think he went off the rails. Technically, diagnostically, clinically, the man was psychotic. He had, for five years, he suffered from psychotic disorder. And you can see it very clearly in his late work. His late work is utterly insane and nonsensical in the extreme. But his early work is amazing. And the bridge between his early work and his late work are the archetypes. Jung suggested that there are all inner objects. First of all, he suggested that we are born with a set of inner objects. And that these inner objects dictate to us how we acquire language and how we use language to form consciousness. In other words, how we interact with the world. So Jung's internal objects are what he called the archetypes. Of course, the archetypes are the inner objects according to Jung that we are born with. Later on, we acquire many other inner objects, the most famous of which is the self or what Freud called the ego. So we'll come to it in a minute. Okay, so Jung gives us a list of archetypes. These are inner objects. And this list is very helpful because Jungian archetypes help us crucially to distinguish between external objects and internal objects. So there is the self. The problem of attribution in the inner dialogue is that there's a constant inner dialogue in your mind, but you don't know, you can't tell which of these voices is actually you. Which of these voices is authentic, genuine, echt in German? Which of these voices is you? And which of these voices is not you? Is a snapshot? Is an introject? Is a construct? Is the outcome of empathic resonance? Which of these voices is not you? This is the problem of attribution in a nutshell. And Jung says there's only one voice that is the authentic voice that is you. And he calls it the constellated self. Now ironically in Jungian theory, self constellates via processes of introversion and narcissistic introversion. I have two videos dedicated to this and I recommend to you to watch them. They're fascinating. Jung's thinking is fascinating. But coming back to our core issue, Jung says, yes, there's a whole family of archetypes, which I call inner objects. There's a whole family of archetypes, but only the self is you, the constellated self. Only others? They were given to you when you were born, which is where I disagree with him. But that's besides the point. He makes this distinction between voices that are you, a voice, the only voice that is you, the self, and all the other voices which were given to you. Much later in his work, he said that these other voices, which he calls the archetype, these other internal objects, which he calls the archetypes, they actually represent collective conscious. The collective consciousness. So it's like the collective unconscious. Sorry. So the collective unconscious is like the legacy of the entire history of mankind, compressed and represented symbolically, like in dreams, via the archetypes. So Jung's approach is, yes, in our mind there are many, many internal objects. One of them is you, that's the self. That's the authentic, genuine voice that is you, and only this voice is you. The others are given to you, and they are given to you by the collective history of mankind. They form the collective unconscious. They are part of the collective unconscious. And as part of the collective unconscious, they dictate to you how to comprehend reality, how to make sense of reality. How to make, how to meaningfully decipher reality by dividing it, classifying it, categorizing it into highly specific forms of principles of operation. Okay. So Jung once was asked, what are the important, because they are like 360 archetypes. And Jung was asked, which of the archetypes are the real ones? Which are the original ones? Which archetypes do you stand by? And he answered, I'm quoting him, the shadow, the wise old man, the child, the mother, and her counterpart, the maiden. And lastly, the animine man and the animus in woman. These are the Jungian, the classic Jungian archetypes. He did not accept other archetypes, proposed by other post-Jungians, followers, fans, and so on. Okay. So this is the Jungian ecosystem, or ecosystem. That's the habitat. Jung didn't call it internal objects. He called it archetypes. And he too made the distinction between one privileged observer to borrow from physics. And that is you, which is the consulate itself and all the others, which represent, according to him, the collective unconscious. So I suggest that all the internal objects are divided to six types. Persecretary objects. Persecretary object.  That's the persecretary object. The sage. The sage is an inner guru. This is the repository of life, experience, and wisdom, yours and others. So it's a kind of a hive mind. It's a composite. It's a kaleidoscope of everything you've ever heard, which resonated with you as a pearl of wisdom. That's the sage. When you're in trouble, when you're in crisis, you consult the sage. There's the infant, especially with narcissists.   They don't disappear and they are not replaced. They're sliced off. They're firewall. They're isolated. They're in an enclave and an island like Lord of the Flies, you know.  And when all other voices are silenced, when you crumble, for example, in the case of narcissistic modification, there is regression to the infantile, to the infant inside you. There is regressive phase where you become childlike. You have infantile defenses, infantile behaviors and infantile traits come out. Lack of impulse control, for example, immaturity. So there's the infant. Three voices until now. The persecutor, the sage, the infant. The next voice is the mother. We all have a mother voice, mother in a voice. Now it doesn't have to be your real mother. It's a mother, the mothering, the maternal voice. It's a voice that parents you and reparents you.  Tomorrow from Andre Green is a bed and dead mother and creates a new insecure, avoidant attachment style.     But if the internal mother is bed and dead, she will not provide a safe base. On the contrary, she will increase the anxiety. She will, in other words, generate internal modification in addition to the external modification. She will enhance and amplify the life crisis. She will make it much worse, which explains many dynamics in narcissism and in borderline. The next voice is the gender voice, what the Jung called the anima and the animus. The gender voice has two parts. There is the dominant gender voice. So if you're a man, it's a man. If you're a woman, it's a woman. And there is the recessive gender voice, dominant and recessive. Some would say dominant and submissive because studies in psychosexuality have shown conclusively that in all of us, especially in women, there's a submissive part. So the gender submissive part, I mean psychosexuality. So the gender voice has a dominant, recessive or submissive part. The dominant side corresponds with your gender identity, which doesn't have to be same as your sex identity. You could be a man and feel like a woman. So your dominant gender side would be a woman. You would be transgender. Anyhow, you have a dominant gender. So the gender voice is critical. People who failed to differentiate as far as gender, they have severe difficulties in functioning according to their assigned gender, self-imputed gender, adopted gender, whichever way they try to act gender-wise, they fail. And we feel something right, something wrong in their gender functioning. And finally, the last voice is sex. But when I say sex, I don't just mean the act of copulation. I mean denuding yourself, being naked, being vulnerable, being susceptible, being open to the world, not only to other people. Sex, exactly as Freud said, is the libido. It's eros. It's the life force. So I would say that the last voice is not sex necessarily. It's more what Bergson called Elan Vital, the force of life, libido. Now, where is death? Where is Thanatos? Thanatos can be in any of these. Thanatos, while the force of life is usually confined to a specific introject or internal object, the force of death is diffuse. The per-secretary object, for example, per-secretary internal object can push you to commit suicide. I'll talk about it in a minute.   So you can see that death is everywhere. The Thanatic, Destrudo, Mortido, as it was called. The opposite of libido is Destrudo or Mortido. So these powers are diffuse. We are actually, if I had to describe it, we are driven not by the force of life, as Freud said. We are driven by the force of death. It also makes sense. We are dying all the time. We are born, and from the first second that we are born, we are on the way to dying. Death is the vector of our existence. It's the aim of our being. It's the end all and be all. Death defines us. Of course, we deny it. We ignore it. We pretend there's no death. We act as though we were immortal. These are classic defense mechanisms against the truth, against reality, against fact, in this sense at least. We are all, when we are confronted with death, we are all to a very large extent psychotic. See the reactions to the pandemic, for example. So these are the voices. Back to the narcissist. The narcissist's constant collapse state is the outcome of a disruption in the inner dialogue between his internal objects and the resulting confusion between internal and external objects. Because his inner dialogue is disruptive and disrupted, because it leads nowhere except to inner turmoil, chaos, mayhem, dissonance, anxiety. The inner dialogue in the narcissist is an engine of anxiety and depression and emotional negativity. It's a horrible state to be in. It's like having an internal insurgency. A civil war. A constant civil war. So the narcissist has a problem with his inner dialogue. And when he tries to somehow solve this, he confuses external objects with internal objects. His collapse state is the outcome of these dysfunctional strategies as we are going to show in a little while. It's important to understand that within the narcissist there's a sadistic perfectionist inner critic, inner critic, erstwhile called super ego. This sadistic perfectionist judge. There's a constant, constant trial, like in Kafka's der Pozess, the trial. There's a constant trial, but the narcissist doesn't know what are the challenges against him. The tribunal sits in sessions after sessions after sessions after sessions and never informs the narcissist. What is the rap? What's the charge? What are the charges against him? What's the evidence for the charges? The narcissist keeps attending this court, this sadistic court, and never ever with no prospects of absolution and redemption. So there's this perfectionist. Vile, harsh, abrasive, brutal, hateful, perfectionist super ego in a critic. And it sets him up for failure, of course. Why? Because it keeps posing unattainable and unrealistic goals. Because it keeps chastising and criticising and mocking and deriding and decrying the narcissist without telling him why. It's energy depleting at the extreme. And the narcissist does his best to avoid this group of introjects or introjet or internal object. He tries to avoid the persecutor, the persecutory object. And so when the narcissist is pushed in adversity, in times of adversity, in times of extreme deep life crisis, narcissistic modification, it becomes psychotic. That's not some Wagner. That's Otto Kernberg. Narcissists and borderline.  When the inner critic of the sadistic super ego becomes overwhelming, becomes life-threatening, the narcissist becomes psychotic. He misperceives this persecutory object. He misperceives this judge as external. He projects this judge. There is a voice in him. And the voice tells him, you're bad. You're unworthy.   You're weak.  You should die. Die. Die. And narcissists can't stand it anymore. He overwhelms him and he feels very threatened because he realizes, should this continue, he will end up committing suicide. So what he does, he takes this persecutory object inside himself. He takes this tribunal. He takes this prosecutor. He takes this voice of voices which hate him, which drive him to self-annihilation, which amplify his innate emptiness. He takes these voices and he projects them. He throws them out onto other people. These voices continue to victimize and criticize and attack and deride and decry and humiliate. Humiliate and they continue to do their thing. But now they don't belong to him. They belong to other people. So he feels victimized. Ironically, the narcissist is victimized by his own internal objects, which he mistakenly attributes to other people via the process of projection. Now, we all project this in inner dialogue, even in healthy people, becomes overwhelming and sometimes life-threatening in everyone. Healthy, narcissists, neurotypical, you name it. High empathy, low empathy, no empathy, irrelevant. The inner dialogue is not optimized, is suboptimal and leads to suboptimal results. And the reason it is suboptimal and not optimized is because voices keep being introduced into the inner dialogue. So the inner dialogue is open. The environment keeps affecting the inner dialogue. So we can't really close it off in an enclosure and say, OK, now we isolate the inner dialogue and we can optimize it. We can't do this because it's open to the world. So it always leads to dissonance, always increases anxiety. There's always a feeling of something's wrong. There's always a feeling of inner conflict and disagreement and so on. And everyone, healthy or not, uses projection to resolve the inner dialogue or voices within this dialogue that are so uncomfortable, ego-distonic, so uncomfortable that they cannot no longer be countenanced. So we project the inner dialogue whenever we are overwhelmed in the case of borderline. This happens every two minutes. In the case of the narcissist during modification or extreme narcissistic injury. In the case of the psychopath, when there's a goal, goal orientation in the psychopaths tends to provoke this projection of the inner dialogue. We'll discuss it some other time. But we project the inner dialogue. Now we project the inner dialogue when we are triggered to, when we are triggered to a condition called revividness. Revividness is the clinical term for flashbacks. Flashback to remind you is reliving an experience in its totality, including smells and tastes, mistaking the relived experience for reality, disconnecting from reality and believing yourself to be back in the forest of Vietnam or being life-threatened by your mother. So flashbacks are dissociative islands in the river of life where for a minute or for ten minutes or sometimes for days, that's called a fugue, you disconnect from reality, you have no access to reality, zero access to reality and you are in another reality, which is inside your mind. So, and this is called revividness. We project the inner dialogue when we are triggered to revividness. In other words, post-traumatic stress disorder is a form of psychosis. Now, follow me, it's a bit of a complex argument. What happens when we project the inner dialogue? When we project the inner dialogue, we mistake internal objects as external objects.  So I take this voice, I project it onto my wife. From that moment, it's my wife's voice, not mine, and I feel that I'm being victimized by my wife. So, on that occasion, I'm acting as a psychotic person. It's a psychotic reaction because I mistake my internal object, which is the internal voice, for an external object, which is my wife. So when we are triggered, when we experience flashback, what we do? We take an internal object and we experience it as real, as external. Flashbacks are therefore psychotic. They're forms of psychosis and people who've been traumatized went through traumas and then developed PTSD or other post-traumatic conditions. They were actually driven to adopt psychotic solutions through the overwhelming inner dialogue. Okay, so this is one form of projection. We overwhelm, we project internal objects onto external reality via flashbacks or via classical projection, and so we become psychotic. The other process is when we interject in inner dialogue. When we are traumatized, we tend to interject the inner dialogue. Now, in the first case, when we are triggered, an external object, because we are triggered from the outside, something or someone triggers us in the first case, yes, in the previous case. Something or someone triggers our trauma that creates PTSD. The PTSD is founded on triggering in flashbacks. So something triggers us. Someone triggers us. It's external. It comes from the outside. So an external object initiates direct communication with an internal object in PTSD. So PTSD is the following. An external object communicates with an internal object inside us, triggers us. The triggering is overwhelming.  We say it's not, it's on my voice. It's really out there. It's really there. It's a flashback. So we react psychotically. We no longer can tolerate our internal object. So we pretend that it is external or we attribute it to an external object. And this creates, of course, confusion about reality. And this confusion is known as flashbacks. Okay. In the second case, an internal object. So in the first case, external object initiated communication with internal. In the second case, an internal object initiates communication with an external object. And this is the process of trauma. When we are traumatized, trauma is not an objective external event. You can take 10 people, expose them to the same natural disaster or car accident or war or domestic violence. Seven of them would not be traumatizing the least. Three of them would be traumatized. One of them would be seriously traumatized. Why? If trauma is an objective external reality, all 10 should have been traumatized because trauma is not. Trauma is an internal reaction. Trauma is the reaction to circumstances, the reaction to an event. In other words, trauma is 100% an inner dialogue. So when we're traumatized, an internal object or group of internal objects initiate communication with reality, initiate communication with the external traumatizing object. The external object just does what it does. The external object acts. How we react to the external object is the trauma. When we allow internal objects inside us to interact with the external objects, to react to the external object, to be in cahoots with the external object, to be influenced by the external object, it is then that trauma is generated. And that's why trauma, all trauma, is a narcissistic reaction. Again, what is narcissism? The narcissist considers external object as internal. Same happens in trauma. In trauma, the trauma is an internal experience, 100% internal and contained. It has no external element, none. And yet, we experience it as external. We confuse internal and external, external and internal. Our reaction is narcissistic. We take an external event, external event, our inner, our internal objects communicate with this event and appropriate it. We try to digest the event, merge with the event, fuse with the event, which explains why codependents are very often traumatized. They're much more prone to be traumatized because they tend to fuse and to merge. So when we are faced with a situation, any situation, we can take it, internalize it, continue to interact with the internal object, which creates the trauma. That's narcissism. That's the reason why it's very difficult to tell apart. Borderline personality disorder and complex post-traumatic stress disorder. CPTSD and BPD are indistinguishable. Traumatized people tend to become more narcissistic. For example, we have numerous studies that show that traumatized people lose empathy. They become disempathic. They lose their empathy, which is a narcissistic trait, psychopathic trait also. So let's summarize this very difficult section. There's an inner dialogue, okay? There's an inner dialogue.  And this triggers us. As we are triggered, we relive, we re-experience a traumatic event from the past. This is called reviviveness, or in colloquial term, flashback. So when an external object initiates communication with an internal object, it may create PTSD, flashback, reviviveness. But this is a psychotic reaction because we experience the inner object as an external thing. We lose touch with reality. We are really inside the flashback. We hallucinate. We think the flashback is real. That's why it's called flashback. You're there, again. So it's a psychotic reaction. And PTSD in this sense is a form of psychosis. We project our inner dialogue. There's an external object communicating with an internal object. This creates an inner dialogue. And we take this inner dialogue and we throw it out. And we experience it as though it's happening outside in the form of flashback. So PTSD is psychosis because this is what psychotics do. They take internal objects and they throw them out. They project them. And then they experience these objects that they had projected as real in the form of hallucinations. So in psychosis, it's hallucinations. In PTSD, it's flashbacks, which are, according to many scholars, a form of hallucination. And so PTSD equals psychosis. It's a psychotic reaction. Remember, there are two reactions to disruptions in inner dialogue. Psychotic and narcissistic. Now we come to the narcissistic. The opposite. An internal object inside us initiates communication with an external object. You remember the previous case, external communicated with internal. In this case, internal communicates with external. As we communicate with the external object via the internal object, we get traumatized. Trauma is an internal experience, 100,000 million percent internal experience. So when our internal objects communicate with an external object, it can create trauma. Trauma is one voice of our internal objects. It's a way of relating to the world. It's an organizing principle. It imbues everything with meaning, direction, purpose. Trauma is an organizing scheme. It's a framework. So when internal objects communicate with an external object, they can react with trauma. And when they react with trauma, this leads to narcissism. Because at that point, they merge with the external object. They fuse with it. They internalize it. And they continue to interact with the external object inside themselves, which is a great definition of narcissism. So what they do is introject the dialogue. In the first case, they project the dialogue. In the second case, they interject the dialogue. How do people, narcissists, psychotics, traumatized people, victims, cluster B, borderline, I mean, out of all these people. All these people that I just mentioned, they have problems with regulation of internal dialogue. Which leads us to understand that the inner landscape, the inner ego sphere includes, for example, emotions. And that's why borderlines cannot regulate emotions. They have dysregulated emotions. These emotions are inner voices. They are their inner objects. Cognitions are inner objects as well. Okay. So how do these kind of people work? People with disrupted inner dialogue. People were in inner and internal and external are confused. People where the internal objects are in conflict and dissonance. People who resolve and solve this situation by becoming psychotic, by believing that the internal is external, or by becoming narcissistic, by believing that the external is internal. How do they try to solve it? They try to solve it via a very primitive, perhaps the first, defense mechanism known as splitting. But to remind you what is splitting, and I advise you to read the work by Melanie Klein and others. Melanie Klein, we decode vermal object relations in general. I mean, all great names of object relations theory have dealt with splitting. Splitting is simply when information, so splitting is a very infantile defense mechanism. It happens in the first few months of life. It's when there is contradictory information that is hard to reconcile, hard to put together, hard to attribute the two types of information to the same object. So for example, mother. Mother could be good and loving and caring and compassionate and warm and accepting. But she can also be withholding and absent and angry. So here are two streams of information. Information about the good mother, or what Melanie Klein called pornographically the good breast. And information about the bad mother. So we have good information about mother and bad information about mother. Consequently, we have a good mother and a bad mother. How to put them together? The baby is not capable of integration. She cannot, is not sufficiently developed cognitively to integrate these conflicting streams of data. Mother can be nice and then she can leave the room. That's not nice, that's frustrating. So how to put the two together? He doesn't. He doesn't put the two together. He creates two objects. One object is all bad. One object is all good. Problem solved. Now, all the information that is good, loving, caring, compassionate, safe base, accepting, all the information that is good goes to the good object. And all the information that is bad, withholding, absent, cold, narcissistic, all this information goes to the bad object.  Because if she is a bad object, she may not give me food as a baby and I will die. So I can't think about this. No way. No way I can think of mother as bad. Instead, I think of myself as bad. So we have in splitting, in classical infancy, splitting, the baby becomes the bad object and mother becomes the good object.  Of course, splitting is black and white thinking. What we call dichotomous thinking. All bad, all good, all white or black. Enemy or frame. Idealization, devaluation is a process of splitting. Prolonged and mature and adult process of splitting, but it's still splitting. Now, to resolve the disruptions and the contradictions in the inner dialogue, the narcissist, I mean people and the narcissist use splitting. Because splitting leads to dissociation.  Remove them apart. When you remove them apart, they can't fight. But how to remove them apart? You need to dissociate. You need to forget certain things. You need to not have access to certain things.  And it operates in two ways. You remember that the baby divides, the baby's world includes only the baby and mother. And by the way, until age six months more or less, the baby doesn't make distinction between himself and mother. It's my mother. My mother. Mother me. I mean, it's one entity. So, the splitting defense mechanism operates to heal, to resolve the conflicts in the inner dialogue in one of two ways. Method number one. We are all bad. We are all bad. The environment is okay. External objects are okay. We and our internal objects are at fault. We are guilty. We are to blame. We are responsible. The corruption, the decadence, the fighting, the dissonance, the anxiety, the depression, the emotional negativity. All this resides here and only here. We are the bad object. Mother and the world are the good objects. External good, internal bad. That's one solution. We are all bad. External all good. We call this internal modification. So, splitting leads to internal modification. We are all bad. Mother and the world are all good. And then we need to remove ourselves, to kill.  Because we are the source of everything that's evil and vile and wicked and bad. So, we need to put a stop to it by eliminating ourselves. And how do we eliminate ourselves? Depersonalization, derealization. We remove ourselves from reality, psychosis. We remove ourselves from reality. All the solutions that remove you from reality are solutions where the inner objects are all bad and the external objects are all good. It's a splitting solution.  Derealization is when you feel that you exist but not in reality. So, you are a devotion to reality. You are not affecting reality. You are not contaminating reality. You are not contagious.  So, all these solutions, these psychotic solutions are splitting solutions that render the subject all bad and the mother world all good. The other solution is amnesia. Now, in this solution, the subject is all good. We are all good. Our inner voices are all good. The environment is all bad.   The environment is all bad. Mother world is all bad. I am all good. Subject all good. The opposite, splitting solution. So, the first splitting solution, I am all bad. The world is all good. The second splitting solution, I am all good. The world is all bad. And in this solution, we need to kill, we need to eliminate, we need to destroy the all bad environment.  We are good. There is no problem with us. There is nothing we can do. Nothing we should do with us.  How? By forgetting. Forgetting is when we remove ourselves, all good subjects that we are from the environment. Amnesia, now, depersonalization, derealization, amnesia, these are known as dissociative phenomena. They are forms of dissociation. The ultimate solution to an inner dialogue that is disrupted to the point that it becomes overwhelming and creates disregulation. Is actually splitting. And splitting leads to dissociation. An internal modification in the first case. I am all bad. The world is all good. An external modification in the second case. I am all good. The world is all bad. Now, of course, cluster B personality disorders all use this on a pretty regular basis. But even people without cluster B use this. For example, alcoholics, drug addicts. Why do people use substances? Abuse substances. Why do they drink? Why do they do drugs? Why do they develop other addictions? Like sex addiction, short capitalism, work capitalism, to forget. Addictions main role is to allow dissociative processes to operate. It fosters amnesia. It fosters depersonalization and derealization. Anyone who ever got drunk knows what I'm talking about. So addiction is the splitting solution of people who are not psychotic or narcissistic or borderline or psychopaths or people who are not mentally. People who are essentially neurotypical. They use addictions to induce the very same state. And that's why I consider depression, anxiety, disruption in a dialogue. Depression and anxiety are symptoms of disrupted inner dialogue. Addiction and dissociation. Narcissism. Psychosis. Other cluster Bs, especially borderline, I consider all these manifestations, different facets of the same hypercube. It's the same thing. Absolutely the same thing. The inner dialogue is disrupted. We choose psychotic solution, narcissistic solution. We choose psychotic, narcissistic solution. We need to split, we split, we dissociate. Dissociate this way, we dissociate that way. And we use substances to dissociate. And all this to reduce depression, anxiety, dysregulation, which are simply the way we experience disrupted inner dialogue. All chickens come home to roost. Yes, siri.


Ahead on early birds the Falcons have had their fill of Starbucks turn down the nirvana It's time to cap a week in Seattle with a win over the Seahawks We'll break it down and rev our engines with Atlanta's big man who's picking up speed plus An eye-opening eardrum shattering visit to a military base you've got to see that much more ahead on early birds Falcons football on early birds presented by Mercedes Benz Good morning and welcome into a Transcontinental edition of early birds we got DJ Shockley back in Atlanta I'm with the Falcons here in Seattle and let's kick things off with the opening drive and shock We got the Falcons and the seahawks tomorrow afternoon right here on fox 5 and we'll start things off with where I am right now Seattle the Falcons have spent the entire week here They actually made the trip up to Washington state right after the game against the Rams in la and I'll tell you They've been practicing all week at the University of Washington and my ears are still ringing They were cranking pearl jam getting ready for the 12th man and hey shock nothing like a road trip to bring everybody together, right? Yeah, no doubt it's happening early in the season twos because there's a lot of new faces on his team So it takes time to get to know each other not just on the field but off the field as well They got dinners they got playing cars. They can really jump in the room. No no kids. No, you know families to worry about So this is a great bonding time for all these guys and hopefully it translates onto the field Yeah shock everybody else's remote working the Falcons hoping it works for them There's a lot of benefit especially early in the season Uh, I think it's you know kind of where we're at the timing couldn't be better We're not to eat when they're shopping and seeing a few views so but yeah Close give us opportunity, you know to continue to burn as a group a lot of guys their families are back home You know, you're going out to dinner you're hanging out a change in scenery a change in routine I think guys kind of have to adjust and being able to do that all together I think is where that is going to build that chemistry that we need As we continue on the opening drive finish finish finish Two close losses in the first two games of the season for the Falcons They happen in different ways though the common denominator a chance to win at the end That just falls short. So DJ, what do you see similarities in these two losses? You know what I I think it comes down to you mentioned something that happened in the ball game I think it's turnovers, but also execution The guys are not finishing off what they think what should be good plays or bad plays and not finishing the right way And turn the ball over is always a big deal Especially in the ball game gives the team the extra confidence going forward So you have to make sure you do that and then play together and execute when no times matter Marcus Mario is optimistic that the script is ready to change for the Falcons in these close games We do our best to simulate it out here. I think when we put ourselves in practice situations that are tough I think when we get to the game guys feel very comfortable in the situation So it's just continue to line up and do those things repetitions I think is the mother of learning and when we're able to do that guys will feel comfortable and those those points were coming And as we wrap up the opening drive It's time to let Gino cook. Yeah for the first time in a decade It's not going to be Russell Wilson under center for the seahawks. It's gino smith now russ of course Sent to denver in the offseason gino smith off to a pretty good start. He's completing 80 percent or so of his passes Mostly short game those shots. So what have you seen out of the sea isle quarterback? Yeah, that's kind of been his mo is he wants to take care of the football Give his offense give his team a chance to win the ball game He's only thrown one interception in 58 attempts. So that tells you he's careful with it He's very methodical about how he runs this offense So it's going to be interesting to see if the falcus can one get to him But also rattle him because you know doesn't take many mistakes and this is his kind of second Opportunity to be the guy here. So he's going to be excited and make sure he does that the right way Yeah, both teams now with veteran quarterbacks trying to steady these new look offenses Well, good morning and welcome into early birds. We've got the big map out here to show you It's transcontinental today shock back in atlanta I'm here in seattle and dj one things for sure. Whatever time zone you're in Nobody wants to start oh and three. No doubt about it. Oh and three is not where you're going to be And especially early in the season it kind of is a downer for your team So try to get a win here early But get the momentum the confidence going so that hey you can finish this season and start going in the right direction Not oh and three Yeah shock, you know, it's a breezy day out here in seattle, but what's that odor? It smells like film room. I see you over there in just a few you like that one I do I do that's good See you there in just a few minutes But first the falcons d-line right now is off to a pretty Not so bad start to the season Just look at the numbers right now The team is in the middle of the pack in the nfl in both sacks and rushing yards allowed Nothing too much to brag about but an improvement in both areas on last season One reason is second-year player taquan graham We spoke one-on-one with tq out here in seattle and as much as he's loved getting his engine going with this season There's one other thing he loves going fast in as much as he does love getting to the quarterback And that's with cars.  I got a track car I sold my hill cat Definitely definitely like the speed a little bit. So are you following it or how do you kind of like geek out about it? Um, you know how dodge just came out with you know, they're new models of electric vehicles I've seen that I kind of watched it when you hit a big get that Grady contract one day. What is that dream car on the ultimate down the line bucket list? I necessarily don't even have a dream car right now because you know dream contract I definitely say buying, you know, my brother his dream car and buying my mom her dream car That definitely something I look forward to one day The defensive line has shown some horsepower to start the season How do you look at how your group has done through the first two games? I feel like we play pretty solid I feel like we definitely got to the qb a few times and for sure I've gotten qb hits and pressures and all that other stuff We've heard from grady We've heard from coach peas they've they've named you as a guy that they're looking to take a big step forward this year Were there anything specifically you changed training or eating like cut out any foods add some kind of different, you know pilates Something like that. Uh, definitely did a little bit of pilates. I always got throwing yoga in there And stop eating water burger, man. Oh, how's that been? It was hard, but you know in Atlanta There's no water burger. So I'm pretty good on that two real close games How do you wrap your head around that right both those games you had such good stretches But ultimately didn't get the finish. How do you look at those games? um, honestly Breaking it down simple two of them in the l column But I feel like we can learn from both of those losses And there's good and bad to everything in life, you know, I mean, I feel like just looking at our team We definitely have the team that we thought we did And looking ahead to the seahawks, it's a different quarterback under center for the first time And it seems like forever what stands out when you pop in the seattle tape I feel like they're definitely going to try to establish the run game penny and uh, you know, kenneth walker I feel like they're definitely like, you know, two great backs and they're young And they're definitely made made lean on them. You know, just upcoming game All the conversation this week has been about can we get cow piss to football? Where is cow piss? Why is he not involved in the offense? Well, I'm gonna show you why he is exactly where he should be and is involved in his office Now, of course, we're gonna give him the football everybody wants to do that That's gonna happen But this is the touchdown here by drake london I'm gonna show you and it's an interesting play that happened here and it's because of number eight It's because of cow pits that drake london is able to get his first career touchdown Let's talk about what happens on this particular play here from the falcons day That's a great design by author smith now the most important thing is cow piss He comes out and he attacks this defensive back and then he gets vertical He has him and man coverage. This safety over the top has cow pits and man coverage Now, this is only just a one step slant by drake because he goes take one step and he's gonna attack it right now But the reason that this works so good is because Cow goes at this defensive back and when he goes at him It forces this guy to go over the top or he has to go underneath He has to make that decision So i'm gonna let it run to see show you exactly what he does at the snap He goes at him now. You see the way he goes at him here now this defensive is at a disadvantage already He has to go over the top here or underneath but because he's behind him Now he already has him beat and he beats him to the front of this Touchdown here and it's a nice job here of coming across and it's an easy touchdown for drake london This all came about because cow piss ran his route correctly and drake london was able to get under him And now you get the first career touchdown and how about this his quarterback get him in the football Late and you can see him say thank you. This is what it's all about creating those memories But cow piss is the big reason why drake london got his first career touchdown Thanks shock. I know falcons fans begging for some more targets But pit's doing more than meets the eyes still to come big college football saturday Including the question of how hot is the coaching seat getting down on the flats plus Just extend my arms out in front of me and squeeze the ball Hey, we were just talking about kyle pit's and he's talking about catching tough passes with defenders closing in We'll explore how he does it coming up next in going deep Falcons fans score a touchdown with low tire prices at mavestyre's embrace the official tire retailer of the elana falcons Visit mavestyre.com to find a store near you Then if i'ma say these bends Ports you by georgia lotter The sky fox drone flew over lake washington This is right next to huskies stayed in with the falcons practice all week Just a wee back with more from seattle in just a minute Ports you by truist bb and c and suntrust are now truist And welcome back to early birds i'm myles garrett here with dj to talk a little college ball shock Your dogs huge matchup today against kent state no disrespect against them Barring something absolutely miraculous or disastrous if you're a dogs fan. Yeah, they're gonna stand defeated today, right? Yeah, I think they will this is a game that you expect the dogs to handle their business and come out on top of it And be a team that continues to play the level that they've been playing Now it's fun to watch your team and it's been interesting to see what they can do But I think they come out on top miles now. I've been around this team. I've been around them for a year You're gonna have now I love for you to give me your take Do you think this team is better than it was last year if possible now? I think it's a really interesting question. You bring it up because going into this season I thought there was no way that georgia could repeat the success they had with all the losses you see on defense Jordan davis and a kobe dean all these guys It's kind of weird to to figure out that they are able to repeat that production almost to a better degree You have stetson benet playing like a heisman candidate. I don't think anyone saw that coming People thought that stetson benet might not be quarterback one He's a walk on beating out all these guys But here he is throwing a brock bowers that tight end room looks like it's Pretty much unstoppable at this point darnell washington all those guys. They're doing all this without eric gilbert even talent all over the board It's crazy. So in that regard, they do look better It looks like the top monkey offense has taken that next step for the dogs And they might be on their way for another national championship I'm with you man It's gonna be an interesting season and they could put up better numbers in a day last year But I think a more pressing topic appears to be on a lot of minds of the people around here in the 404 area with the guys down on a plane with the yellow jackets It's jeff collins on the proverbial hot seat after losing 42 to nothing. Oh miss. I think a more telling Discussion about this whole jeff collin situation is the fact that their last four FBS opponents we're not going to count western carolina because that was an fcs opponent But their last four fbs opponents georgie tech has gone 183 And 10 oh wow that can't be acceptable if you're a georgie tech fan losing in that fashion to those opponents It's okay if you lose this was going to be a rebuilding program from the start Moving from the triple option to a more pro style offense But now are you getting to the point where georgia state and georgia southern are blowing past you now? This was never a reality for georgie tech football So in that regard you have to ask some questions. Well, let's be real I mean this is a program that he's done a great job of marketing He did a great job of talking about the waffa house in the 404. We talked about that But now it's time to produce you have to go out and you have to win ball games And I think that's what matters the most is you got to go out and you got to Try to win these ball games against some quality opponents in this and it's going to be it's going to be fun But I appreciate you're doing a man.  All right. Well, it's been pretty quiet so far But everyone knows it's only a matter of time before the unicorn breaks out this season We're talking of course about cow pits and how he makes those tough catches in traffic He shows us how this week's going deep Just extend my arms out in front of me and squeeze the ball How tough is that how satisfying is that when there is a guy who's got good coverage making the catch It's just something you you do during the week and you get those contested catchers during the week And you try and you know get their repetition to try and make your body just acquainted to it So it's it's easy in the game. How do you practice that? I mean because it's not like guys are constantly draped all over your practice A lot of time you're open. I mean are there drills for that? Uh, it's different drills you make on a drug machine. Just have somebody push you or Pull the arm down different things like that. No, a lot of Falcons fans want to see more of that from Kyle Pitts this week We've got more to come here on early birds There were some Falcons players earlier this week who thought they were just going to be shaking hands and signing autographs They did not know there would be machine guns and hand grenades in their future That story you're going to want to see it next on early birds Great view of the Seattle skyline from the Sky Fox drone. We got the space needle in there We're in the queen and neighborhood a little north of downtown Seattle in shock Falcons players only got one full day off here in Seattle I don't know if it was me out of slept in gone to pike place. What about you? I'm in the room. I'm chilling. I'm finding something to watch on tv I may go see a little sightseeing or something every now and then, but I'm enjoying my little relaxation time. I'll be honest I hear you DJ, but one group of Falcons players did something about as different as you can get. Take a look Hi Two strong we swear That I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States On board a c-17 transport aircraft atlanta falcons and seattle seahawks players watched as new service members took their oath of enlistment starting their military careers and starting the football stars tour of joint base luis mccore Please join me in a round of applause for our newest It's pretty cool, man. This stuff is heavy. Yeah, I can see it running back avry. Williams and his teammates dove right in Or should I say climbed right in like to this apache helicopter? Wow, this is cool. God, it's awesome. Hey, this is too cool Get yourself in the base is about an hour south of seattle where the falcons are spending the week before facing the seahawks and Serves multiple branches of the military mostly army and air force. I'm from a london, georgia I've been a falcons fan since I was six. This is a great experience. I got chills and everything running down It really does boost everybody's morale here and they're making a lot of money It really does boost everybody's morale here and then being able to come see what we do Us being able to get to talk to them part of what I love about being in the military autographs photos a stop for some camouflage face paint if it looks cool, you're doing it wrong Then a ride in striker armed vehicles to the interactive part of the day NFL players are used to coming under fire from coaches or critics in the media, but not like this Get down prep your grenade. Look make sure your target's still there hop up and throw What's going to be your big takeaway from this experience?  Just getting a chance to be hands on with stuff like this It was awesome, man I'm definitely thankful for them and you know, it's an honor to have them guys on our side Falcon players we spoke to said they didn't know what they're in for on the trip to joint base Louis McCord and they left the base with quite a few new experiences and a new appreciation for our country's military Yeah, that was such a fun day And I'll tell you what we met a lot of falcons fans on the base Especially among the army service members the men and women because many of them trained at fort benning in columbus Georgia a lot of falcons fans more to come from seattle more early birds after the break It's been presented to you by Mercedes Benz the best or nothing Welcome back to early birds from a beautiful breezy day in seattle Well, the falcons are hoping that none of their players bring an injury back with them when they travel to the east coast Tomorrow night if someone does get hurt There's a very specific process in place from the moment the player hits the turf Falcon's team doctor. Dr. Kyle Hammond takes you behind the scenes in this week's emory road to recovery If somebody gets hurt we have to come off the field You know, sometimes it's in a cart If it's a little more substantial injury or sometimes we can walk off the field There's going to be usually myself or and or another one of the physicians helping me And then usually at least one of our training staff and then You know coming back here, whether we need to go to the x-ray machine or whether we can go straight for an evaluation We'll be determined based off of the type of injury that there is And then at that point time we kind of just take our time and make sure we're doing a nice safe methodical Evaluation to evaluate the player and the athlete and get them you know to the point of seeing if it's an injury that's Something we can try to manage treat and reassess and then go back out and play or if it's not safe Well shock i'm looking forward to being back in the same state as you next week This has been a fun transcontinental edition falcons looking forward to hopefully their first win of the season What's a matchup you're watching?  He'll get an opportunity for sure tomorrow. All right for dj Shockley in atlanta. I'm justin fielder in seattle. Thanks for joining us here on early birds See you back here next week. Have a good rest of your day and a great weekend