YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → The Psychology of Elizabeth Holmes in You Can See Everything: Narcissism, Autism, or Manipulation?

The Psychology of Elizabeth Holmes in You Can See Everything: Narcissism, Autism, or Manipulation? — Transcript

by Psychofarm · 11,613 words · 1,747 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:00This episode is independent educational
0:02commentary based on publicly available
0:04material which may be incomplete [music]
0:05or inaccurate. We have not evaluated
0:07Elizabeth Holmes, Billy Evans, or anyone
0:08discussed in this podcast. All
0:10psychological interpretations are
0:11speculative. They're certainly not
0:12diagnoses. They're not factual findings,
0:14and they're certainly not any
0:15allegations of wrongdoing. We do not
0:16claim knowledge of anyone's private
0:17thoughts, motives, or mental health.
0:19>> Good morning, [music] Dr. Malber.
0:20>> Good morning. How's it going?
0:23>> Not too bad. I've [music] been kind of
0:25thinking about whether we should turn
0:27this podcast into a Nathan Fielder
0:29podcast. After this, we should do direct
0:33analysis of the YouTube comments
0:35themselves and the personalities of the
0:37YouTube comments because I got to say
0:39there are some interesting things
0:40floating around in there.
0:41>> Yeah. And I think what's what's funny is
0:42uh at the beginning you talked about how
0:44the movie is a projective test and then
0:47you
0:48that came so alive in some of the
0:50comments. [laughter]
0:53Yeah. Well, it's certainly a lot more
0:54popular than our last attempt at uh pop
0:57culture stuff, you know, film and
0:59culture stuff, which was Seinfeld. Uh
1:01you know, you thought that one was going
1:02to be a little more popular, but no one
1:03really listened to that one.
1:04>> Yeah. Well, let's, you know, this one is
1:06we're doing a part two of you can see
1:08everything. Um, I think we're just gonna
1:09kind of
1:10>> as requested by many in the comments,
1:12>> continue on just some random, you know,
1:15uh, nothing we're doing is is a
1:18diagnosis or actual truth of what we
1:20think of the actual people. Uh, I think
1:22we're just having fun introducing some
1:24psychological concepts that can help
1:25give people a lens in a way of
1:27interpreting a wonderful movie.
1:31Yeah, I think probably the main thing I
1:34wanted to put at the outset based on
1:36just the impressions that people are
1:38having from the film uh is that people
1:42seem to wonder whether criminal or very
1:46bad behavior can be explained through
1:50the lens of things like trauma, neurode
1:52divergence,
1:54etc.
1:56I'd like to issue a warning here. Uh I
1:59think that here trying to medicalize
2:02human behavior that falls within the
2:04range of normal even when it's an
2:07extreme in the range of normal or human
2:10behavior that's rationally driven.
2:12Turning that into a medical diagnosis is
2:14a mistake because then there's this
2:16implicit philosophical understanding or
2:18belief that it's out of control. And
2:21whether or not something is part of a
2:23mental disorder or a diagnosis is
2:26different from whether or not someone
2:28does it willfully or that they don't
2:30have control over it. And even that is a
2:32separate question from whether or not
2:33someone should be responsible for it in
2:35some way.
2:36>> Absolutely. And I think we, you know,
2:38just to explain what we saw in the
2:39comments, I I saw comments saying that
2:42um could this all be explained by
2:44Elizabeth Holm's uh neurode divergence
2:46or autism? Could this be entirely
2:48explained uh could her character be
2:50entirely explained by the the uh sexual
2:53assault that her father described? Um
2:56could this entirely be explained by
2:58being narcissistic? And I think uh I
3:01want to go into yeah your description
3:03you mentioned of of of normal versus
3:05extreme versions of normal versus
3:07pathological. Um before we jump into
3:09that, there was one thing on the last
3:12podcast that I wanted to go into a
3:14little bit more detail on. Is that is
3:15that okay?
3:17I I wish you wouldn't ask me if that was
3:19okay. I think there's already enough
3:20people who think I'm this tyrant uh you
3:23know, grandiose person who's just
3:25controlling everything. But anyway, go
3:26on.
3:27>> We both we both took a few hits in the
3:28comments, but listen, that's that's
3:29that's how the world works. So, I want
3:31to go into a little bit more detail
3:33about the repetition compulsion because
3:35I think it's so important and I want to
3:37talk a little bit about transactional
3:38analysis and how it relates to
3:40repetition compulsion. Now, I actually
3:43when I look at that
3:44>> that's that's I think a great topic. I
3:46just don't like using the term
3:47repetition compulsion. I feel like it's
3:49smacks of psychoanalysis and it it's
3:52kind of unnecessary. Uh saying
3:54repetition compulsion implies that
3:56people don't control over it, you know,
3:59and I think it's difficult to control
4:01certainly. I think we repeat
4:03automatically. Uh I like to just talk
4:05about the tendency to repeat. That's my
4:07little nitpick. But let's go on.
4:08>> Yeah, I totally agree. And actually one
4:10thing I caught when we were talking
4:13about it, you said like that's the
4:14thesis of the film. That's so obvious.
4:16Um, and I think one thing you miss is I
4:18think we think about this stuff so much.
4:20Every therapist or every psychiatrist
4:22I've talked to, it's immediately obvious
4:24that that what this was a theme of the
4:26film. And I I think we don't we actually
4:28lose sight of the fact that for a lot of
4:30people this isn't an obvious uh this
4:32isn't an obvious thing. And a lot of
4:33people actually miss this this aspect.
4:36Um, so the point I want to talk about,
4:38so
4:40you know, Billy in the film talks about
4:42how him and Elizabeth never argue and
4:45and that they're just perfectly aligned.
4:47And as I kind of mentioned in in the
4:49last podcast, Elizabeth just supern like
4:52supernaturally desires exactly what
4:53Billy's desires and this makes it so
4:56that they never have conflict. And then
4:57Nathan obviously challenges this and
4:59says, "Uh, I I love the line. And it was
5:01just like, do you think that when you
5:03look at the other her previous
5:04relationships, do you get the sense that
5:06she's comfortable expressing her needs
5:07and opinions? Uh, obviously referencing
5:10the the the relationship with her and
5:11Sunny.
5:12>> Um, so the way that I make sense of of
5:17her and her relationships is
5:21I'm going to keep calling it the
5:22repetition compulsion. I guess I'll talk
5:23about it a little bit. It's an
5:26unconscious unconscious tendency to
5:28recreate painful experiences from the
5:30past even if they come at a cost or harm
5:33to ourselves in the current. Uh a good
5:36example I can think of is I I have a
5:38friend with a a very absent dad and she
5:41always mysteriously finds herself in
5:44relationships with uh very distant or
5:46very unavailable men. uh more recently
5:49she started dating a guy that he was on
5:52vacation from France and [clears throat]
5:53then they met on Tinder and uh he he
5:57lives in France and she's in New York
5:58and they get to see each other once
6:00every few months. It it almost seems
6:03like it's she she it just she keeps kind
6:05of finding these relationships. So Freud
6:08felt that we repeat our patterns uh
6:11often traumatic patterns and it's very
6:15typically in relationships. Um
6:18now there's a few ways of understanding
6:20why do we do this? Why why do we repeat
6:22things from the past? Some people say
6:24that these are the things that are
6:25familiar to us. So um we have a
6:28preference for things that are familiar
6:30rather than the things that are make us
6:32feel good. An a better way to explain it
6:35is that we're trying to gain mastery
6:38over something that originally we felt
6:40helpless and we felt like uh it was
6:42happening to us. And by recreating it
6:45ourselves, we're actually the one who
6:47has the power and who has the control.
6:49So in the distant father example, the
6:51unconscious desire to to master the
6:53experience of the absent father is, you
6:55know, this time I'm going to get this
6:57distant person to actually realize how
6:59important I am and actually uh love me
7:01and and change their ways. So the big
7:05the tragedy of the the need to repeat is
7:08instead of mastering the experience
7:11usually what we do is we repeat the same
7:13things over and over endlessly. Um you
7:16know it's important stuff. It's
7:18classical stuff. The way you've
7:19described it is very uh consistent I
7:22would say with mainstream psychoanalytic
7:26understanding of repetition. But I I got
7:29to take issue with some of it.
7:30>> Absolutely. Um why referring it to Freud
7:34only I think is going to bias people
7:37this is an observation only from Freud I
7:39think every philosopher human human
7:42studier ordinary person they know we
7:46tend to repeat habit is extremely
7:48powerful habit is basically how our
7:51brains and neurons work uh you know
7:54neurons that repeatedly fire together
7:56wire together uh what we do gets
7:59stronger what we won't do gets weaker,
8:01right? That's just neur learning and
8:04neuroscience and we know that's true.
8:06So, uh when we translate into a therapy
8:09context, that's where we see repetition
8:11compulsion, but it's a fundamental human
8:13thing. The other thing that I would say
8:16is that, you know, Freud always wrote
8:18hypotheses and then his followers would
8:21then say this is what's happening,
8:23>> you know,
8:24>> and then it they they overstate things.
8:26I think they attribute too much meaning
8:28to repetition like saying it's a desire
8:32for mastery just like how certain old
8:35school psychoanalysts and older not just
8:37older newer psychoanalysts that still
8:39say things like oh uh people commit
8:42crimes because they have a desire to be
8:44punished to me that's a projection of
8:46the thinker to the criminal. Okay,
8:48that's not why they do that in my
8:50opinion. We can get into that later.
8:52Okay. Uh why do people repeat? I think
8:54simply because it's so hard to change
8:56that biological
8:58uh systems tend to find a pattern and
9:01stick to it. It's homeostasis.
9:02Homeostasis is the most preserved
9:04evolutionary uh state. Homeostasis is
9:08what's natural in the world, right? Uh
9:10it takes energy to change. And so uh
9:13it's painful and discomforting then for
9:15any biological system that has
9:17subjectivity to try to do any change.
9:19And that's simply it. There's no uh
9:22unconscious desire to do anything in
9:24particular other than to remain the
9:25same. That's what I think.
9:27>> I'm going to take this one step further
9:28and I'm
9:28>> and that's Freud, too, by the way.
9:30That's death drive. But gone.
9:31>> Um uh because I actually wanted when I
9:33wanted to talk about transactional
9:34analysis, which is considered a post
9:36Freudian concept. Um have you ever read
9:39the the games people play by Eric Burn?
9:42It's sort of like a
9:43>> I I've always meant to, but I only know
9:45it uh in second order for my training,
9:47but go on. So, it's something it kind of
9:49is defunct like it never actually took
9:50off clinically. Uh, but the the the main
9:54concept I think is really helpful for
9:55for formulating kind of ideas that are
9:57going on. And it kind of talks about I
9:59heard it was really big back when it
10:00came out. And then I think that's where
10:03the I'm okay, you're okay stuff comes
10:05from. I think you can see that in the
10:07old Simpsons episodes. I know you don't
10:09watch the Simpsons, Dr. Msbury. Uh, but
10:11yeah, one of the first three seasons of
10:13the Simpsons. It's the one where Bart
10:15goes to therapy, group therapy or
10:17something. Uh, be like the boy if anyone
10:20is a big fan. I think that's actually a
10:21reference to Eric Burns games people
10:23play. Anyway, go on.
10:24>> So, the important part is, as you said,
10:25it's not it's not like there's just one
10:27dynamic that the person is after in any
10:29sort of complex uh behavioral sequence.
10:32So, the unit of analysis in
10:34transactional uh transactional analysis
10:36isn't a single behavior. It's not a
10:38single interaction. It's the entire
10:40recurring sequence of interactions each
10:42which have in a sense their own dynamic
10:44and their own psychological uh
10:46unconscious benefits. So um you know any
10:50sort of interpersonal relationship or or
10:53interaction or pattern it's not it's not
10:55an isolated event but it's a part of a
10:57larger predictable pattern. um in this
11:01pattern a lot of it has to do with like
11:03uh the childhood uh object relation kind
11:06of things but the the gist is each
11:08person occupies a role uh the
11:10interaction follows usually a
11:12recognizable sequence and then the big
11:13part is that there's some sort of
11:14psychological payoff in each kind of act
11:18but also a big payoff at the end and it
11:20almost plays off the the way they kind
11:22of the way my brain understands it's
11:24almost like a little play where there's
11:25like a part one part two part three and
11:27then you know the big finale Right. So
11:30the dynamic that I see Elizabeth stuck
11:32in and again I think this is the kind of
11:34thing that's obvious to the
11:36psychologically minded and but for the a
11:39lot of people this probably wasn't that
11:40obvious. Part one is she idealizes a
11:44powerful controlling partner. Part two
11:48she experiences this control as
11:50something that's protective as
11:51beneficial. It serves a function. the
11:53relationship is is is wonderful, magical
11:55and and that each person is getting a
11:58lot of benefit out of it. Part three is
12:00her own needs become subordinated to the
12:03partner in increasing degrees. So at
12:05first it's probably as simple as he
12:07makes helpful decisions with regards to
12:09the money, but then it kind of it grows
12:11and it grows and it grows and it grows.
12:13Part four is resentment accumulates. So
12:19as a result of constantly subordinating
12:21their own needs, their own desires,
12:22their own wishes, uh the without being
12:24consciously aware of it, this person is
12:26becoming more and more and more
12:28resentful.
12:29Part five is the relationship
12:31deteriorates in a very spectacular
12:34fashion like how we saw it with with
12:35Theronos and Sunny. And then part six,
12:38which is what I would consider the
12:39payoff, the partner is reinterpreted as
12:43controlling, abusive, and entirely
12:46responsible for the giant mess that's
12:47been made. And in this whole structure,
12:50we see two very opposing self- states.
12:53And I think we see different selfates.
12:55People occupy different self states. Uh
12:57this is a very common thing, but the the
12:59flavor and and what the self states are
13:01differ. The first state,
13:04>> now hold on. I want to raise a bit of an
13:06objection. You've described an accurate
13:10and extremely classical set of stages in
13:13a particular type of relationship
13:15dynamic. I don't know if we really have
13:17the evidence for that in the objective
13:19evidence from either real life or the
13:23structure of the film. I think it's
13:25strongly implied
13:28in a bit of the film. You can see
13:30everything. And I absolutely think that
13:32many many people online and offline
13:35viewers are projecting this
13:37understanding into the film because this
13:41is actually really common. This kind of
13:44uh if you want to call it a game,
13:45>> yeah,
13:46>> if you want to call it a pattern, I
13:48think you see this a lot in
13:49relationships where people have uh
13:52weakness or uh problems with their
13:55personality and emotional development.
13:57That's true, right? But can we actually
13:59say that's what's happening? I'm not
14:01entirely sure about that.
14:03>> Yeah, and I agree. I think this is uh
14:05definitely an interpretation. This is
14:06taking, you know, a small amount of
14:08evidence. And I I think what I'm seeing
14:10is I'm really mapping what I saw with
14:14the her and Sunny's relationship from my
14:16very uh superficial understanding of it
14:18and seeing just the first half of the
14:20play kind of play out for in the
14:22documentary. Um do I have perfect
14:24evidence? No. This is this is how I
14:27think it it maps pretty well in my
14:29opinion.
14:31>> Well, this is what I'm going to say.
14:34If this is a true pattern,
14:38I want to see it more than twice. I like
14:40to say twice is a coincidence. Three
14:43times is a pattern. That's a little
14:44conservative, but I I want to see more
14:48because the step you talk about where
14:51the rel the resentment accumulates
14:54unconsciously and that causes some kind
14:56of blow up. I don't think you
14:58necessarily see that. Uh and I don't
15:00think that's necessarily happening here,
15:02right? That happens when you have
15:03someone with more emotional instability.
15:06that happens when somebody is
15:07essentially more classically borderline
15:09as people like to talk about it and that
15:11there's a lot of aggression and I'm not
15:14sure that's what's happening. Right? If
15:16we take the film for what it is, there's
15:19not much aggression at all. There's just
15:21sort of humming along, right? Um the
15:24blowup happens externally. If we want to
15:26pretend that what's portrayed in, let's
15:29say, the dropout is accurate, right? the
15:31blowup happens because of external
15:32factors, not internal factors within
15:34that diad, the relationship. So anyway,
15:38um I'd like go ahead and get to that
15:39point that you were going to get to.
15:40>> Yeah, what's interesting is I I I agree.
15:42I think it like if there weren't
15:44external factors, if the company took
15:46off, if XYZ I think the first half of of
15:50the structure would have been prolonged
15:51for a very a much longer period of time.
15:55Um
15:55>> yeah, but then in a couple where one
15:57person is much more classically
15:59borderline emotionally unstable, uh that
16:01will happen even if everything is peachy
16:03king. Correct. Even if everything's
16:04perfect. And I think that uh often the
16:07opposing partner, let's call them
16:08opposing, uh can try to make things
16:11right when really it's not an external
16:13problem, it's a dynamic interpersonal
16:15problem. And there's the mistake.
16:17>> Absolutely.
16:17>> Just a little note there. And the uh the
16:20two different self states I actually
16:21agree these are self states that we
16:23typically see more often in borderline
16:24personality disorder which we very
16:26explicitly said um we we don't we this
16:30is not how we view Elizabeth Holmes.
16:31Again we're not making any diagnoses but
16:33we're especially not making that one. Um
16:35but the
16:36>> but I am implying something about people
16:38who are reading into this strongly when
16:40they view the film a certain way. Sorry
16:42folks,
16:43>> that another thing that you did last
16:46time is uh you you talked about how it's
16:48a projection
16:50and what you see is a reflection on you
16:52and I was like dude I'm about to talk
16:55about narcissism, psychopathy, uh
16:58manipulation. Uh I'm going to feel a
17:01little odd talking about these things
17:03knowing it's a projection. But anyway,
17:04the two different self states.
17:05>> Yeah, it's only human.
17:06>> The first selfate is idealized
17:08submission. uh you know like that the
17:10other person takes care of me. Uh I I
17:13it's good that they make decisions for
17:14me. In return, I think as Elizabeth puts
17:16it, I'm going to build monuments of
17:18love. You know, it's this this this
17:20beautiful union. Uh the second
17:23self-state is is righteous resentment.
17:26Uh you know, like he controlled me, he
17:28took advantage of me, he blew up my
17:30life, this was an oppressive
17:32relationship. um th those are the those
17:34are pretty common self states that we
17:36see as as we're kind of saying in in
17:38particular types of pathology. So if you
17:40were to say, you know, oh Elizabeth is
17:44just submissive to controlling men,
17:46she's being taken advantage of. Uh
17:48you're really missing Elizabeth's
17:50participation in in the whole the whole
17:53shebang.
17:56>> I agree. I also think that's going to be
17:59an unpopular take. I think the theme
18:04uh in at least modern western society is
18:07to pick out one submissive victim and
18:12one controlling actor.
18:14>> Yes,
18:15>> that we tend to deemphasize or even
18:18ignore the passive participants.
18:22And I'm not going to just right out say
18:25that that's right or wrong necessarily
18:28from a societal standpoint. What I will
18:30say is that clinically it's unhelpful
18:34when we only view a subject clinically
18:38as a receiver of
18:42all kinds of negative things. We and we
18:45don't see how they either passively or
18:48actively continue their circumstances or
18:52fail to improve their circumstances.
18:53There is no hope for change. There is no
18:55hope to stop that repetition.
18:59Now, another thing I wanted to add is as
19:01you talked about this, I thought, you
19:04know, it's interesting. It's the same
19:06sequence but stops at some point for
19:09stable relationships that are maybe a
19:11little too inshed and dependent. And
19:14whether or not that's normal or not or
19:17healthy or not probably depends on
19:18culture, right? If people have this
19:21idealization and kind of a dynamic of
19:24one person in charge and the other
19:26person is submissive. And by the way, if
19:28you actually pay attention, this happens
19:30across gender lines. Uh you know, the
19:32man or the woman or uh it can happen in
19:35same-sex couples where one person is
19:36very submissive and one person is very
19:38controlling. But if they just never
19:40develop any kind of resentment or
19:42fighting about it, then you just get
19:44probably a lot of couples. Where can you
19:47draw the line between what's normal and
19:49what's pathological? It's very
19:51dangerous, I think, and it's very easy
19:53for a clinician to impose their own
19:54values.
19:55>> Absolutely. I think and one of the the
19:57big themes of transactional analysis is
19:59that a successful relationship isn't two
20:01people who aren't playing games. A
20:03successful relationship is two people
20:04who are playing the same game on the
20:07opposite side of the coin or they
20:08develop a stable game. you know, the the
20:10game can have uh uh minor problems or
20:14minor uh you know, quote unquote payoffs
20:16that are that are negative, but they're
20:18stable and uh they work for the
20:20individual. So, I actually you keep
20:23talking about this concept of um
20:26essentially, you know, pathizing,
20:29whereas I think you're trying to
20:30interpret these things as normal may
20:33maybe relatively extreme versions of
20:34normal, but normal.
20:37In the beginning you talked about uh you
20:40know the the normal neurode divergence,
20:44normal autism, normal uh narcissism. Can
20:48you kind of explain a little bit more
20:50detail in terms of what you mean by
20:51that? What do you mean by that? This is
20:53not uh it's there's danger in saying
20:56that this is pathological. This is
20:57something different.
20:59>> I think we need to give a little
21:00context. If you're a clinician today
21:02working in the western world or maybe
21:03even outside of the western world, I
21:06think we are in the apex time right now
21:08since the advent of any kind of
21:10psychiatry or psychology dealing with uh
21:14pathology, you know, abnormal mental
21:16states or harmful mental states. We are
21:18in the first time that it has become
21:21popular, very very popular to have and
21:24identify with certain mental conditions
21:27and to have certain diagnosis. We just
21:29have a different culture about it today
21:32and we've probably tipped over into a
21:35lot of overdiagnosis that causes harm.
21:40And why might that happen? It's because
21:43over the last few decades we as a field,
21:46a professional field have created
21:50certain diagnostic categories that were
21:53originally
21:54uh capturing very very severe and
21:59divergent and impairing
22:02aspects that were basically stuff that
22:06most people could have. And then we were
22:08saying for example only the top 10% of
22:11having problems with this is something
22:13of clinical interest. And then slowly
22:16and gradually over several decades and
22:19then suddenly very quickly after uh
22:22modern mass media and the internet we
22:24started to say even if you have a little
22:26bit of this you have the fullon
22:28disorder. I don't know if that's
22:30comprehensible to an average listener
22:33but clinicians I think most of them know
22:35what I'm talking about. I think and the
22:38big thing that I see more and more often
22:40is I think diagnostic labels initially
22:43can kind of help people understand
22:45themselves better because it's putting
22:46words to an experience that before they
22:49didn't have words to. And what we've
22:50seen more and more is that the
22:52diagnostic label is actually allowing
22:55less insight and and less self-standing
22:58because when the diagnostic label covers
23:02so many broad extreme it's just like
23:05this extremely broad umbrella covering
23:07so many different things it actually
23:09hides what the important the important
23:12thing kind of going on in a sense and I
23:15I think that's kind of what I've see
23:17with um you know does does neurode
23:19divergence alone explain this. Well,
23:22you're making it such a a broad category
23:25as to really miss the understanding of
23:27what's kind of going on.
23:29>> Yeah, I guess autism is actually a good
23:32place to start. And I like to kind of
23:34give this example. I have two different
23:38patients. They both have the same
23:40diagnosis, autism spectrum disorder,
23:42even under my more stringent way of
23:45viewing this. One of them essentially
23:49works,
23:50does everything that they need to do, uh
23:54has friends, family, and you know,
23:57partners, right? The other one, all he
24:00does is spin around and hit people.
24:03Completely non-verbal. Needs 100% around
24:06the clock care. If this single diagnosis
24:10accurately describes both these people,
24:13then that makes that diagnosis kind of
24:15useless, right, as a category. If you
24:18make your diagnostic category super
24:20broad, then it doesn't tell us anything
24:22at all. So, what should we do instead?
24:25Well, I think instead we should be
24:28talking about traits versus disorder. We
24:30should be saying people can have certain
24:32traits, certain behaviors, and certain
24:34problems, but those are present to a
24:37greater or lesser degree across the
24:39whole population. And we're going to
24:41leave it to the clinic and professionals
24:43to talk about when it gets to a level of
24:46disorder. But if we're going to do
24:48ordinary rational understanding and
24:50analysis of ourselves and other people,
24:53we should just simply understand the
24:55traits and the behavioral patterns that
24:58people can get into. Yeah, you provide a
25:00great example because I think for anyone
25:02who's listening and trying to, you know,
25:05give what's it called when you uh the
25:07opposite of steel man? They're trying to
25:08make us uh hear that as negatively as
25:11possible. You're you're not saying that
25:13one does have autism and one doesn't
25:14have autism. What you're saying is that
25:16there's a lot more. Autism is a very
25:19very very very small slice of what's
25:22going on in each person in that person's
25:23life and doesn't fully explain the
25:25entirety of what they do uh what their
25:28behaviors are, what their symptoms are.
25:30It's it's a small slice. And when we
25:31make that slice the entirety of an
25:34individual's identity, that's when we
25:35get into what you're describing of like
25:37these these two people uh who who live
25:39entirely different lives, the the the
25:42label just isn't that helpful to kind of
25:44understand what's going on. Um, so you
25:47mentioned so the answer to whether a
25:48single trauma, even a full PTSD, neurode
25:51divergence, or autism can explain a
25:55situation like what's seen in the film.
25:57I would say the answer is flatly no. And
26:00why? Well, I'm hoping we'll explain a
26:03little bit right here.
26:04>> Well, yeah. Let's so let's let's start
26:05with autism. You mentioned kind of
26:07thinking about traits. Uh, can you give
26:10us just a little bit more color so we
26:11can understand what you mean by that?
26:12What what are the different traits? Uh
26:15yeah, talk to us a little bit about
26:16that.
26:17>> You know, we actually have another
26:19episode talking about this in more
26:20detail if people are interested, but
26:22very briefly, I would say that there are
26:24levels of autistic traits that can
26:28essentially exist within the population.
26:31Some might pick on this and say, "Hey,
26:32those aren't autistic traits. Those are
26:34systematizing traits, or those are other
26:36traits." But let's just agree to
26:39disagree if that's the case. I would say
26:41that people who tend to have very
26:43specific and constrained interests,
26:46people who struggle with social
26:48communication and understanding social
26:50cues, uh people who like to organize
26:53their understanding of the world into a
26:56very uh predictable system, people who
27:00are sensitive to uh certain types of
27:03stimuli, uh who like routines, who don't
27:06do well with change. These are all
27:09people who might have autistic traits,
27:12right? It doesn't mean you have autistic
27:14disorder. It doesn't mean necessarily
27:16that you should be diagnosed with autism
27:18spectrum disorder, even if you can find
27:20a large group of psychiatrist psych
27:22psychologists who would do so with the
27:24right funds. You can find these ads on
27:26Reddit. Uh but what does it mean for
27:30you? Well, that kind of depends on what
27:32else is going on in your life, right? If
27:33you create an identity entirely around
27:36having this set of traits and having a
27:38disorder, you might create an entirely
27:41different life for yourself and the
27:42people around you compared to 30 years
27:45ago where maybe someone would have
27:47thought this is a little bit of an
27:48oddball. This is a nerd because he's
27:51doing exactly the same things that today
27:53we would call a medical disorder. Right?
27:56There are pros and cons to each
27:57approach, but there are more dangers, I
28:00think, than we realize to taking the
28:02latter modern approach than the
28:04classical approach.
28:05>> Well, let's let's bring this back to uh
28:07the movie. You can see everything. If
28:09you like the show and want to support
28:11us, the easiest way is through the
28:12Psychoarm membership. Just head on over
28:14to psycho.farm, psych ho.farm,
28:19f a rm. The URL is a little silly. The
28:21membership includes a lot of awesome
28:23resources as well as a great community
28:25forum, a book club, and access to our
28:27live Q&As's. We have awesome prescriber
28:29guides that help make prescribing the
28:30medications much easier. We have awesome
28:32patient handouts that helps communicate
28:34the important information of the
28:36medications to the patients. We put
28:38together an awesome guide builder for
28:39patients that allows you to add the
28:41medications the patients are taking, add
28:43some really relevant skills for the
28:44patients, and then add important
28:46resources for the patients. You also get
28:48access to our community, our live
28:50Q&As's, and we're starting a book club
28:51this month. Separate from the
28:53membership, you can go to
28:53psycho.farm/resource
28:55plan. That is a helpful little tool to
28:57help you find the highest yield book or
28:59resource. So, head on over to
29:00psycho.farm and check all that stuff
29:02out. Let's get back to the show. You
29:04know, I saw in the comments a lot of
29:06people saying like, isn't this an
29:07example of just neurode divergence? That
29:10there was some inability to understand
29:12as a result of the way her mind works.
29:14Um, and then other people are saying
29:16like, you know, you're you're projecting
29:17psychopathy onto this this uh neurode
29:20divergent female. Um, now there's I kind
29:23of want to talk about a few of these
29:24examples and kind of see how you make
29:27sense of them or how you think about
29:29them. I think
29:29>> Yeah, let's go for it.
29:30>> The big one that I saw in our comments
29:32was the Abbott and Castello's who's on
29:35first.
29:36>> Um, you know, quickly recap. She thinks
29:40that it's funny because they're just two
29:43people talking past each other. She
29:44misses the heart of the joke that that's
29:46the name of the players. And in the
29:49scene, Billy protects her and does the
29:52uh running away, but he says like, "Oh,
29:53she just thinks differently." Uh you
29:55don't get that she thinks differently.
29:56This is an example that like her brain
29:58is a different type of brain. Um
30:00obviously undertones there of of neurode
30:02divergence.
30:06>> Yeah, it's that's an interesting one.
30:09First of all, if we stipulate that there
30:11was no fakeness, if she wasn't putting
30:14on any kind of falseness at that moment,
30:17I would say one moment like that alone
30:20again only tells us about traits, right?
30:24It doesn't tell us anything about
30:25disorder and it particularly does not
30:27allow us to come to much in terms of
30:29conclusions about why someone did what
30:31they did in terms of a criminal charge
30:33or some kind of a behavior. Right? You
30:36shouldn't try to conflate one
30:39observation in a context to an unrelated
30:42context. Now, in the film, they connect
30:45it to a different context in talking to
30:47investors, and I think we'll talk about
30:48that in a bit. But for me, I don't find
30:52that convincing as evidence, the who's
30:55on first moment. Like we talked about in
30:57the first episode, every single moment
30:59on film is involving subjects who know
31:02they are being filmed. And what's more,
31:05these are subjects who know that there
31:07are a lot of stakes on the line. So just
31:09like in a forensic psychiatry analysis
31:11of a moment of any person's behavior, we
31:15need to con consider all the different
31:17possibilities, not just the
31:18possibilities that are medical diagnoses
31:20like autism or neurodeiversity, right?
31:23We want to consider rational behaviors.
31:25So, first of all, there's a strong
31:26rational uh component there that simply
31:31being seen as confused or weak will make
31:36people sympathize with you. Right?
31:38That's one possibility. Bald-faced uh
31:41acting or lying. The other possibility
31:44is that um it could have been normal in
31:47attention.
31:48>> Mhm.
31:49>> Or again normal variation in the ability
31:52of people to be interested or understand
31:54jokes, right? Uh there is no requirement
31:58that everyone actually understands this.
32:00This is actually a older cultural joke
32:03that I think requires some kind of
32:06context and introduction. And you know,
32:09you you didn't do some kind of a big
32:11survey of everybody out there with or
32:13without diagnosis and say how many
32:15people understood this joke or not. I
32:17actually thought about uh this in
32:19foreign audiences
32:22when they show this to other languages,
32:24how is it going to be possible to
32:26understand, right? So there could just
32:27be normal misunderstanding of jokes
32:29involved as well.
32:30>> I think I think that one's severely
32:31underappreciated. I actually remember
32:33being in middle school and showing this
32:36joke being shown to people. And I
32:38literally remember half the people got
32:40it and half the people didn't. And I
32:42think now, you know, the people who are
32:44interested in this film tends to be, you
32:45know, the 30-year-old plus crowds. Uh
32:48nerds. Yeah. We're all we're all nerds.
32:50And and and I remember showing this to
32:52people and like being like, "You don't
32:54get it." like the Yeah, it actually I
32:57think it's a lack of uh mentalization
33:00that like this actually most people
33:02didn't get it originally. I I remember
33:04like as a kid it was a running thing of
33:06like half you would show it to people
33:07and they didn't get it and it was funny
33:08because they wouldn't get it. Uh
33:10>> yeah.
33:11>> Yeah.
33:13>> And then that is linked in the film,
33:15right? To another moment.
33:17>> So he links it to the I think it was
33:20earlier in the film. Uh yeah. Yeah.
33:22Yeah, cuz he he talks about it. The
33:24Theronos machine, she says this machine
33:27can run analysis on pretty on every
33:30single uh blood test. And Nathan points
33:34out like what what like Elizabeth, we
33:37know that's not true. This is the whole
33:38this is the whole shebang in terms of
33:40why you got in trouble. And what she was
33:42sticking to was that theoretically it
33:45can it has the capacity once those blood
33:48tests are figured out. And the whole
33:50thing is like any ordinary person uh
33:53hears that sentence and interprets uh it
33:55can do those blood tests as uh it has
33:58the ability right now.
34:00Yeah, that's an interesting moment to me
34:02because I think there's not a small
34:04amount of people who bought it bought
34:08that moment. To me, I think that moment
34:10is boldface law. [laughter]
34:12>> Okay, that's my conclusion on that one.
34:14And that doesn't require a diagnosis.
34:16>> And that's that's not a psychological
34:17that's that's an opinion to be honest.
34:19>> Like why do I think that? Why do I think
34:21that? It's because uh I think a moment
34:23like this actually shows me more
34:26convincingly that neither Nathan Fielder
34:28nor Elizabeth Holmes have anything
34:31approaching an autistic disorder. Okay?
34:33Because the concrete use of language in
34:35autism should actually do the opposite.
34:38In general, people who have autistic
34:41disorders and uh use language in a very
34:44concrete way tend to be particularly
34:47detailed about their use of language and
34:49they don't have this kind of uh
34:51metaphorical or abstract theoretical way
34:55of thinking. They are concrete. They are
34:57being very direct. uh the level of
35:00mental steps that it takes to translate
35:03that the machine can do all these tests
35:06into some kind of a futureoriented
35:09maybe whatif kind of thing. That to me
35:11is the talent of an artist. Okay. Or the
35:15talent of someone who's a little bit
35:17more open to experience, dissociative,
35:19dreamlike, okay, or a liar. Okay? So
35:23those kind I'm not buying that one. I
35:25don't see that as plausibly related to a
35:28uh neurodedevelopmental condition.
35:31>> Absolutely. I I I agree. And I think
35:33there there was almost like a to me in
35:35that moment there was a showiness to uh
35:37the lack of understanding. I I whereas
35:39the a Castello felt I don't to me it
35:42just felt a little bit more uh
35:43authentic. Uh where whereas the like
35:46>> because you you you gotta compare the
35:48apparent level of impairment at one
35:51moment to the global functioning of a
35:53person, right? I could maybe believe it
35:56if you see a person whose general level
35:58of functioning is extremely low and that
36:01they are uh essentially a very low
36:04intellectual functioning. But
36:06unfortunately uh you know for Holmes
36:10there's a lot of evidence that she's
36:11very high functioning, understands
36:12language quite well and is able to be
36:14very sophisticated with it and uh is
36:16interpersonally very soph sophisticated
36:19as well. Uh you know that that's my
36:21understanding of it.
36:22>> You know what you know what it felt like
36:23to me? Um cuz it felt like I feel like
36:25Billy in the Abbott and Castello thing
36:28jumped on the ability to like present
36:30this to the world. In my head, I
36:32pictured the Spongebob like look at it.
36:34If like do you know what I'm talking
36:35about where Patrick's holding Spongebob
36:37to the crowd being like look at it like
36:39I feel like this was uh Billy's
36:41opportunity to like say like yeah see
36:43this is her brain just can't get these
36:45concepts everyone see you could see
36:46this. Uh that's that's how I felt.
36:49>> I I think people are going to doubt that
36:52you could be so prepared. I would say
36:54don't underestimate the power of acting
36:58techniques and improv. If you inhabit
37:01and live a character and the opportunity
37:04arises, people will be able to come up
37:06with all kinds of acts, lines, and
37:08demeanors that correspond to that. It's
37:10a matter of improv and method acting
37:12essentially. Uh instead of coming up
37:15consciously readily with specific lies
37:18and lines, you let the mind act itself.
37:22How can this not lead us to narcissism?
37:25>> Well, that depends on what you mean by
37:27narcissism. So, we should talk about
37:28that.
37:28>> Yeah.
37:29>> Uh, one more thing about autism. Uh, I
37:31will acknowledge that it is easy to
37:35conflate and confuse personality
37:37conditions with autistic uh problems,
37:40autistic traits and spectrum stuff. This
37:42is always a challenging area I think for
37:45child and adolescent psychiatrists to
37:47try to tease out uh because some people
37:51might seem callous as a person not
37:55caring about the feelings and outcomes
37:57of other people. Right? This is
37:59traditionally something we see in people
38:01of psychopathic traits. Uh a little
38:03narcissism can cause that as well. But
38:07is that personality or is it simply that
38:10they lack conscious understanding or
38:14have a lot of difficulty understanding
38:16the emotions of others? Right? Is it
38:19inability or lack of interest? That's
38:22the dividing line. We want that dividing
38:25line between autism and uh personality
38:28disorders, right? And I will emphasize
38:30again most people with autism are not
38:33personality disorder. They're generally
38:35pretty nice people. Uh, aggression too,
38:38right? We definitely see in more severe
38:41autistic conditions aggressive outbursts
38:44and that's usually due to poor emotional
38:46regulation, right? Often triggered by uh
38:49things like changes in routine,
38:50unexpected outcomes uh or simply mood
38:53problems are secondary to the autism.
38:56But that's hard to differentiate in some
38:59cases from the general aggressive
39:02temperament. Yeah. Uh that you see in
39:04people with borderline type problems,
39:06narcissistic problems and types of
39:08psychopathy, right? Where they will act
39:10on aggression because they enjoy it or
39:13because they don't feel negative
39:15consequences uh that most people do like
39:17guilt and remorse. These are very
39:19difficult things to tell apart in many
39:21cases.
39:22>> Yeah. from from the outside because I
39:24think what you're describing is you know
39:25calculated aggression versus um you know
39:28instinctual aggression as a result of of
39:30uh difficulties
39:32>> but even the antisocial psychopath can
39:34have noncalculated aggression right so
39:37it just gets very murky is my point
39:39>> yeah and you know we're not going to be
39:41talking about this today but right now
39:42there's a cultural bias towards certain
39:43diagnoses that are looked at uh much
39:46more positively than than other ones.
39:48Um, all right. Let's move a little bit
39:49into to narcissism and how how that's at
39:51play here.
39:54>> Right. So, there's ordinary and healthy
39:59narcissism. I think that's something
40:01that is hard or uh something that's more
40:04challenging for people to acknowledge or
40:06feel about today because narcissism has
40:08been solidly picked as uh a villainous
40:12tendency for many people today. And yes,
40:14pathological narcissism is definitely a
40:16big problem that that it's just that we
40:18want to separate again ordinary traits
40:21from disorder.
40:24And the same argument can be made for
40:26psychopathy actually. Uh that one gets a
40:29lot more uncomfortable I think because
40:31uh psychopaths tend to have a lot more
40:33negative effects on individuals in
40:36society. But it's arguable that some
40:40degree of psychopathic traits uh rather
40:42than disorder are adaptive both for
40:45individuals and groups.
40:48What are the ordinary aspects here?
40:50Well, grandiosity,
40:52pride, ambition, and a willingness to do
40:57what it takes to be the best. Right?
40:58These are not necessarily pathological
41:01and these are not necessarily the result
41:02of uh path uh pathological narcissism
41:05and psychopathy. Uh same thing with
41:08attention seeking, being very concerned
41:11about your self-pray image status, uh
41:15being less concerned about other people
41:18or being more comfortable with lies and
41:20aggression.
41:22These are all potentially adaptive
41:25alongside the ways they hurt people. I
41:28think the thing that we see more and
41:29more today is people think of narcissism
41:31as it's just this one thing. Like
41:33there's a monolithic I forget who I
41:35heard talk about this, but there's like
41:36a monolithic the narcissist and every
41:39person who's the narcissist therefore is
41:42they don't care about other people. They
41:43only care about themselves. It's all the
41:45same thing. Now narcissism in itself
41:49has every person has degrees of
41:52narcissism. There's healthy narcissism.
41:54Uh there's there's so many different
41:55like terms that we kind of need to
41:57differentiate to actually understand
41:58kind of what's going on. I personally
42:00don't think of it as much as in traits
42:03as much as it's uh degrees and different
42:06uh flavors of of narcissism. Um but I
42:11guess what what makes you bring up the
42:13the you know talking about ordinary
42:15narcissism versus what we're talking
42:17about is when people are saying you know
42:18the narcissism in the film.
42:22I guess the reason why I'm bringing it
42:24up is just to say that there are degrees
42:28and it can exist in a adaptive way even
42:31if we personally dislike it. I know
42:34there are people out there who genuinely
42:36believe that human society can exist
42:38without things like profit, selfishness
42:41and uh hurt and sacrifice and that
42:46everyone can be kind. Uh I would refer
42:49to an evolutionary theory here. If you
42:51have one group in a uh environment that
42:56is willing to lie, cheat, steal, attack,
43:01and is very motivated to give themselves
43:04resources over others. And then you have
43:07another group that feels uh strongly
43:10about being fair and not hurting other
43:13people.
43:16Depending on the environmental context,
43:18one group will win over another, right?
43:20And so probably the reason why all these
43:23traits persist within our societies is
43:26because there are circumstances where it
43:29actually benefits groups even if it can
43:32hurt individuals. Right? I just don't
43:34believe that we can live in a utopia
43:36where there are no politicians, CEOs, uh
43:39or uh you know, you could argue
43:41surgeons.
43:42[laughter]
43:43Well, so you're talking about, you know,
43:46there's almost like a you're talking
43:48about ordinary narcissism, how it's it's
43:50present in every every kind of
43:51individual and there's there's degrees
43:53to it. But then I I think, you know,
43:56something you made kind of you kept
43:57talking about the last one is that by
43:59making it as if it's something that is
44:02totally different from the rest of us,
44:03we're not acknowledging that it's kind
44:05of everywhere. But there's also, you
44:07know, clinical narcissistic personality
44:09disorder. There's also um you know
44:12something can happen where there's such
44:13a high degree even if there's a spectrum
44:16that it is categorically a different
44:18thing in a sense. So how do we know I
44:20guess when it kind of crosses into
44:22pathology? I I think it would be uh you
44:25know naive to also say that because
44:27there it's present in everyone that it's
44:29never to a degree that it's you know
44:31pathology. What what are the signs,
44:32symptoms, what do we see in the person
44:34that it is uh what you would categorize
44:36as pathology?
44:38Yeah, that that gets us into that
44:40difficult question again about where we
44:41draw the line between a medical
44:42condition and another. And that's a very
44:44deep philosophical debate we can have.
44:46But I would say that practically it kind
44:48of depends on the context because just
44:50because something is not a medical
44:52disorder in the clinic doesn't mean that
44:55it's not a problem for the people around
44:56them, right? Or that it's not a problem
44:59for a person in the relationship. So you
45:01have to consider the context when we
45:03talk about that. But broadly speaking
45:05for a for a clinical level of
45:07narcissistic personality I would
45:10generally want to see that there is such
45:12rigid preservation and defense of an
45:15identity that has been chosen by the
45:18subject uh that it defeats their own
45:21long-term goals and functioning that
45:24their ego and their emotions is so
45:26fragile I'm using ego in the ordinary
45:28lay person sense of the word uh that
45:30they suffer that they feel depressed and
45:33empty when they're not validated or
45:35admired. Uh and that they have such a
45:38poor understanding
45:41uh of other people's motivations and
45:43desires that they only attune themselves
45:47to the ones that matter to their
45:50identity or the well-being because that
45:52keeps you from working well, living well
45:54with others.
45:56You might see also problems in work
45:59functioning. basically they they won't
46:01be able to do well in work and studies
46:02or they'll do really really well until
46:04they collapse, right? Because of this
46:08strong tendency to do all or nothing
46:09stuff to totally idealize or devalue
46:12certain aspects of themselves or others.
46:14Uh and that's basically the vein that
46:18we're going to see for clinical
46:19narcissistic personality disorder rather
46:21than healthy or ordinary narcissism. To
46:23me, the key to understanding narcissism
46:26is that underneath the, you know, what
46:28we see, the grandiosity, the arrogance,
46:30the need for admiration, there's a a
46:33deeper psychological injury, what we
46:35call like the the narcissistic injury.
46:37And at at its core, that injury is the
46:40experience that who you really are is
46:43somehow unacceptable. Now how this
46:46develops it can occur in a bazillion
46:47different ways but the basic idea is
46:50that early in life the environment
46:52typically the parents need you to be
46:54substantially different from who you
46:55actually are. Uh you know the maybe the
46:58parents need you to be successful. They
46:59need you to be uh they need you to not
47:02show any weakness. Um there's something
47:05something that tells you that the parts
47:06of who you really are you need to
47:08suppress. So you you learn that that
47:10there's parts that are unacceptable.
47:12So the individual starts to bury these
47:15parts and develop what we call the false
47:17self. So rather than becoming and
47:21showing to the world who you really are,
47:23you become who you think you need to be
47:25in order to be loved and valued. Now the
47:29problem here is that the person deep
47:32down inherently feels like they're not
47:34valuable and the solution is to earn the
47:38value. So, you know, if I can just be
47:41successful enough, powerful enough, etc.
47:44enough, um, then I'll be worthwhile. So,
47:47relationships for individuals like this,
47:50it's not another person who has their
47:52own sense of identity. It's they're just
47:55extensions of of their own selfworth.
47:58Now, the important thing to know is the
48:00grandiosity and the worthlessness are
48:02two sides of the same coin. So the
48:05appearance of excessive love of
48:08excessive grandiosity in a psychonamic
48:12formulation is better understood as just
48:14like a profound suppression push down uh
48:17inability to accept the who the person
48:20truly is. So yeah, that's that's kind of
48:22how I think about narcissism and then
48:24the difference between, you know, this
48:25this all happens to small degrees in
48:27everyone and narcissistic personality
48:29disorder is when there's a a severe
48:31detriment to the person's identity and
48:34there's probably no awareness of of
48:36their real self.
48:37>> I think you filled in the gap very
48:39nicely there and emphasizing how the
48:42narcissistic personality has dysfunction
48:44in its orientation towards other people.
48:47Right. I sort of went after the traits
48:49maybe but uh you're getting a little
48:51closer to the core there and that is
48:53actually an area of ongoing debate right
48:55now in the personality disorder
48:57literature and research you know whether
48:59we should define disorders as traits
49:02only severe traits or whether it's a
49:05matter of interpersonal functioning I
49:07think a hybrid approach is best but you
49:08know I tend to try to split the
49:10difference I suppose we should also talk
49:12briefly before we get into uh specific
49:15moments from the film uh antisocial
49:18personality, uh, which is not the same
49:20as but is very related to psychopathy.
49:22Where do we draw the line? Well, I don't
49:25want to get into DSM rules. That's a
49:26little boring. I would say that some
49:29degree of being a cutthroat and
49:32aggressive person that doesn't care
49:34about other people will probably help
49:36you along. At least if you compare it,
49:38let's say, to someone who's
49:39pathologically guilty, right? We can
49:42understand probably intuitively that
49:44someone who always blames themselves,
49:46always takes it upon themselves to help
49:48others and never acts even an iota of
49:51selfishness throughout their life, that
49:53actually would be very dysfunctional,
49:54right? Uh especially trying to navigate
49:56social situations where people have
49:58different degrees of selfishness. But
50:00where can we consider that it's probably
50:02getting clinically socially problematic
50:05when people simply cannot rather than uh
50:08selectively in a nondisruptive way when
50:12people cannot follow the rules or
50:14control their aggression to the degree
50:16that it's just getting the attention of
50:19the law. Right? The fact is uh societies
50:23they enforce the law selectively because
50:25there's limited resources and when
50:27someone starts to enforce the law more
50:29that's a sign of something. Now you can
50:31get into the cultural and uh different
50:34impact aspects of that that's a
50:36different debate. We also look at
50:37functioning right uh there are high
50:39functioning psychopaths and then there
50:41actually are mostly low functioning
50:44psychopaths. Most psychopaths are low
50:46functioning. They're probably
50:47incarcerated. They're very impulsive.
50:49They frequently get into conflicts and
50:51they can't maintain good standing with
50:53any sort of community really. Uh they
50:56don't really drive themselves for
50:58reasons beyond domination, winning or
51:01their own boredom and they don't really
51:04have remorse. Uh this is a true group of
51:08people that can be identified. And I do
51:11think part of the problem with
51:12medicalization today is that people are
51:16ignoring antisocial aspects and
51:18psychopathic aspects even in the extreme
51:22versions and essentially letting them
51:25run a muck out in the community back
51:28when we would protect the community and
51:31other people against people with very
51:33strong tendencies like this. And there's
51:35also a matter of gray, right? There's
51:38probably a group of people who have
51:40psychopathic traits who if you gave them
51:42a strict system of punishments and
51:44outcomes, they're high functioning
51:47enough that they would follow those
51:48rules. But if you loosen or blur
51:51boundaries and lines in order to try to
51:54be kind to everybody, then people of
51:56psychopathic tendencies will take
51:58advantage of that. I think I think an
52:00important thing to kind of point out is
52:01uh as we were mentioning earlier, it's
52:03not like there's a category of people
52:04that are narcissistic and then a totally
52:06separate category that are antisocial
52:08and psychopathy.
52:09>> Yeah, we were talking a little bit
52:10before patients with psychopathy or
52:12antisocial personality disorder often
52:14have an underlying narciss narcissistic
52:17personality structure. Now a lot of the
52:19features of narcissism the uh the
52:22grandiosity the manipulation the
52:24self-involvement the constant need for
52:26achievement for presenting an amazing
52:29you know view of themselves. What that
52:31is serving with regards to my previous
52:33formulation is it defends against that
52:36the true self. It defends against the
52:39crisis of desperate feelings when the
52:41person feels that vulnerable uh that
52:44vulnerable true self that when it comes
52:46out it's it's it's crippling. Now
52:49psychopathy is not a totally separate
52:51thing. Psychopathy often has this
52:53structure and then often what we call
52:55like super ego deficit. So there's
52:58absolutely no guilt. There's uh often on
53:00top of this a desire to kind of get over
53:02on other people to manipulate to use
53:04other people. Um yeah.
53:07>> So then why do many people feel or think
53:11that Billy from the film is
53:13narcissistic?
53:14So, you know, I we had a few comments
53:16and I'm actually I want to I'm really
53:18curious. I think we disagreed on the one
53:21of the first scenes of the movie is
53:23Billy takes the eggs out of Elizabeth's
53:25hands. And I'm curious how you think
53:27about it.
53:28>> Yeah. Well, before we even talk about
53:29each scene, just a quick note. I I think
53:32there's a big problem today in that
53:35people only want to apply personality
53:38disorder diagnosis to the people they
53:39dislike. and they think that the people
53:42they like should not have a diagnosis. I
53:46don't like Billy
53:48and how he's portrayed in the film. But
53:50I just always keep that in mind. I think
53:51as human beings, we have a tendency to
53:53try to vilify others. So, we want to be
53:55fair and balanced the best we can. I
53:56suppose the term fair and balanced is
53:58also infected uh in our culture. So, I
54:00should use something else. But anyway,
54:02uh the eggs I I just as someone who has
54:05some enthusiasm for cooking, I think
54:08it's factual that Elizabeth Holmes was
54:10not beating the eggs, right? And we we
54:12had a text exchange about this, right?
54:14>> Yeah. I think it was pretty funny
54:15because as someone who makes eggs very
54:18crappily, I thought it was a very
54:20wonderful demonstration of um of
54:23narcissistic pathology. [laughter]
54:26Well, I think maybe it could be a sign
54:28of my obsessive and compulsive nature,
54:30but you got to beat the eggs with the
54:32right tool and fast enough so you can
54:34get them to emulsify and you get nice
54:36and fluffy eggs in the pan every time.
54:38And then I think you told me that you
54:40actually mix your eggs in the pan with a
54:44uh silicone spatula. Completely
54:46impermissible. Terrible.
54:48>> Uh yeah. So I sent the picture. I was
54:49like, "Oh, no. I just use this little
54:51spatula and I I mix it in the pan and
54:53and Dr. Fu acted as if what I said was
54:57complete psychosis. [laughter]
54:59>> It's a culinary set. But anyway, tell me
55:02what you noticed about the uh egg scene.
55:04The egg bowl scene.
55:05>> So, yeah. And did you say the eggole?
55:08>> Egg Bowl?
55:09>> Ah, I heard I heard egg Freudian slick
55:11there. Anyway, go on.
55:13>> That's terrible. Uh, all right. So, um,
55:16in terms of what I how I you know what
55:18my brain was kind of running while it
55:19happened. So she's she's she's mixing up
55:22the eggs and then he takes it out of her
55:24hand. Nathan looks and is like, "Wait,
55:27what was that?" And he said like, "Oh, I
55:29just wanted to help her. Uh so she could
55:30focus on talking to you." And then she
55:32clarifies like, "No, I don't mix them
55:34correctly. Uh I you need to do it more
55:37vigorously." The in terms of how what
55:40I'm thinking while I'm watching that is
55:42you know you're being filmed. you know
55:44that this is your whole purpose is to
55:46show like we have this healthy look how
55:48normal our live life is and he can't
55:52even help himself from seeing that she's
55:55mixing the eggs like even for a minute
55:57he can't hold it back. What to me was
56:00really telling was just his instant
56:02like, "Oh, no, no, no. I just wanted to
56:04help her focus." Like, his brain could
56:06instantly come up with a reason as to
56:07why this was a harmless, this was
56:09nothing. This is I'm actually helping
56:11her. And then she kind of reveals the
56:13the the cracks in terms of the
56:15relationship. She reveals that like, no,
56:17he, you know, I he needs his eggs done a
56:19particular way. I I thought it was
56:20pretty I don't think it's controlling to
56:22a a massive degree. And kind of as we
56:24were saying before, I don't think you
56:25can point to one situation and say like
56:28this is evidence of anything, but I do
56:30think it's uh a bit of it's it's on the
56:33red flag spectrum.
56:36>> I think it's an interesting roshack
56:37because to me it's kind of normal. You
56:40know, I think it's normal for couples to
56:42uh spongely disagree on how one of them
56:45does a certain task, right? And I'm sure
56:48if you followed things around enough, uh
56:50you'd probably see the opposite happen
56:52at some point. Uh, if anything, it would
56:55be more narcissistic
56:57uh for someone to completely control
57:02their behaviors in front of somebody in
57:05a camera. It was almost a humanizing
57:07moment to me, uh, the egg thing. But of
57:10course, I'm absolutely sure that the
57:13moment arouses certain types of feelings
57:15and memories that are going to be very
57:16different in different people. So, we're
57:18all going to come to different
57:19conclusions, just like a roar shack
57:20test.
57:21>> Absolutely. Now I the thing is like in
57:24isolation I think that this was a
57:26harmless thing that you know every
57:28couple I'm sure I have tons of examples
57:30that another person could point out and
57:32say like look how controlling that is
57:33but as we were kind of talking before it
57:35works in our relationship it's not you
57:37know every single couple kind of has
57:38something like that. Our next few
57:40examples are not things that every
57:42couple has just these little quirks.
57:44>> That's true. My next example is uh
57:47invoking his power of attorney over
57:49Elizabeth.
57:52>> I can literally do anything
57:55>> is how he says it.
57:57>> And it was about I think him posting as
58:00well on Twitter.
58:02>> So he was posting on Twitter uh angry
58:04things that are clearly not Elizabeth's
58:06voice. And then he points out that he
58:08actually has power of attorney over.
58:11>> Yeah. you know, uh the I think that one
58:15most people can more easily agree is
58:16problematic, but to play devil's uh
58:19advocate, you know, um when you're in
58:21prison and you're trying to accomplish
58:23certain business needs, uh it's probably
58:26reasonable to have a power of attorney
58:28assigned to somebody so they can take
58:29care of things for you, right? Uh why
58:32might you post on behalf of someone? You
58:35know, that was a puzzler more for me.
58:38And why would you do it in such a poor
58:40fashion? I think that probably reflects
58:43a couple things. I think it reflects a
58:46uh the use of a person as a brand or a
58:50social media entity rather than a human
58:52being. And I I think we got to
58:54acknowledge that the moment someone
58:56enters the field of social media, you
58:59are no longer just a person. You have
59:01become an entity of some kind. You have
59:03become some kind of a brand or at least
59:05you could have that potential. A lot of
59:07people probably don't post in their own
59:09Twitter accounts, right? a lot of people
59:11probably have a team or at least a
59:13person who handles that. That's a job
59:15today. So, in a sense, that's normative.
59:18Uh what I can criticize is I don't think
59:20he was doing a very good job. I kind of
59:22feel like he had poor estimation of his
59:24own tweet quality and whether or not it
59:27would go over well. And I think I saw
59:29something I don't know if it was a fake
59:30tweet or something. Didn't he just
59:32recently decide to get off Twitter? I
59:33thought I saw something about that. So
59:35for me uh I have more objections to that
59:38in terms of uh how well it's executed
59:40rather than the fact that it's
59:41happening.
59:42>> Yeah. And I think um the tweets that
59:44they showed like it was clear clear
59:47aggression that was kind of being put
59:49out on a Twitter. I feel like it was he
59:50replied like you to someone um
59:53things things that that we were kind of
59:55talking about before. Elizabeth Holmes
59:57doesn't have that type of aggression. Uh
59:59so it really was not a reflection of of
1:00:01how her voice.
1:00:04>> Um now our next example was um how he
1:00:09responded to Amanda Seaff freed's uh
1:00:11criticism. Um you know I think he was
1:00:14talking about someone doing something
1:00:16bad to them. And I I got this feeling
1:00:18that like someone different kind of came
1:00:20out. He's like I'm going to ruin their
1:00:21lives. I've got vengeance in my heart.
1:00:24Uh he says how I'm very strategic. I'm
1:00:26well resourced and I know people who can
1:00:28do just about anything to harm people.
1:00:30To me, that was something coming out. I
1:00:33I would love to hear you interpret this
1:00:35as a cutesy wootsy uh [laughter]
1:00:39well, you know, uh that's a little
1:00:42clearer and it's interesting that he
1:00:45would display that, you know, on film.
1:00:48It's a bit of a moment especially in our
1:00:50society today where uh we frown a lot on
1:00:53aggression perhaps to much yeah
1:00:57>> to an extreme degree.
1:00:59>> It does also bring to mind some
1:01:03commentators speculate about substance
1:01:05use for him.
1:01:06>> Uh they found him to be a sniffler. Uh
1:01:09calling back to Seinfeld, if we will. Uh
1:01:11I don't have a good explanation for that
1:01:13one. People get angry, you know. Uh, it
1:01:15was kind of like a late night around the
1:01:18dinner table moment. Would I say
1:01:19something like that? No. Uh, would most
1:01:22people I know say something like that?
1:01:23No. Would most people say things like
1:01:26that while they're intoxicated? Entirely
1:01:28possible. I don't know what he was on.
1:01:30So, uh, that's the only devil's advocate
1:01:32uh, normal explanation that's coming to
1:01:34mind for me. Uh, otherwise, it probably
1:01:37does reflect some level of uh, greater
1:01:39aggression uh, feelings that people are
1:01:42after you. Oh, yeah. He also carries a
1:01:44gun around, huh? And also a willingness
1:01:46to and a desire to exact revenge. Now, I
1:01:50don't know his context. I don't know his
1:01:52personal situation. Maybe there could be
1:01:54some pretty wild things going on uh that
1:01:56would justify that kind of response and
1:01:58that kind of thinking as a rational
1:02:00response. Who knows?
1:02:02>> Uh this is going to be unrelated to
1:02:03anything in the film. This is just this
1:02:05small tidbit. I'm going to describe some
1:02:07features of narcissistic and antisocial
1:02:09personality structures. Grandiosity,
1:02:12interpersonal exploitation, treating
1:02:14others as extensions of the self or
1:02:17instruments for gratification, lack of
1:02:19guilt in regards to exploiting others
1:02:21without remorse, paranoid traits of
1:02:24suspiciousness or defensiveness beneath
1:02:26controlling or grandio behavior that was
1:02:29unrelated. Feel free to take make any uh
1:02:31connections that you want to. Um, you
1:02:33mentioned you mentioned Seinfeld. Uh, I
1:02:35actually had another Seinfeld
1:02:36connection, George. Um, well, I I think
1:02:41a lot of people are questioning like,
1:02:42oh, is Elizabeth just controlling Billy?
1:02:45Uh, what is Billy getting out of this
1:02:46relationship? And I don't actually think
1:02:48this is what's occurring, but do you
1:02:49remember when George uh is talking about
1:02:52how the ideal I think he actually dates
1:02:54a woman who's in prison and that the
1:02:56ideal relationship is uh a woman who's
1:02:58in prison. [laughter]
1:03:00>> That's got to be season eight or nine,
1:03:02right? I don't really remember that.
1:03:03>> Uh that like at all times he knows where
1:03:05she is. He's got limited obligations. He
1:03:07doesn't need to go on dates. Uh there is
1:03:11like a a
1:03:13>> to him it's the perfect relationship.
1:03:17>> And then, you know, I'm going to say
1:03:18George is a relatable guy. We've all got
1:03:21a little bit of madness, you know,
1:03:23hatred, aggression, and awfulness within
1:03:26us. Uh be wary. We we we got to be able
1:03:29to uh you know recognize and control uh
1:03:33for the safety of ourselves and others
1:03:35these kinds of things when they show up.
1:03:37But if we live our lives thinking we're
1:03:40these angels and nobody else uh is like
1:03:43us and people who are bad are bad and we
1:03:45got to do everything we can to stomp
1:03:47them out. Well uh that's how we create
1:03:50uh a more chaotic and split up uh
1:03:54society in my opinion. So sorry going to
1:03:56be a little kumbaya about it.
1:03:58>> Yeah. And so I I mean I heard you say
1:04:00you're playing the devil's advocate. I
1:04:02think there is an important role in
1:04:03terms of um humanizing and and
1:04:06normalizing these features when when we
1:04:08make this stuff about us versus them. Uh
1:04:10we really miss that all these aspects
1:04:13are a part of ourselves. As you know the
1:04:15best the best writers in regards to
1:04:18understanding personality are the ones
1:04:20who can find the pieces inside of them
1:04:23that are in the other people. Um
1:04:27yeah, it doesn't like Yeah. So I I think
1:04:29that's such an important part is is
1:04:31really trying to see ourselves in other
1:04:34people and see that we are they are not
1:04:36different from us that we all have these
1:04:37capacities for for evil for for good. Um
1:04:41and and by othering other people uh we
1:04:43actually reinforce the problem.
1:04:45>> Yeah, it's all about balance in the end.
1:04:49Well, I think that's our time for today.
1:04:51Uh not sure if we left a lot of
1:04:53lingering questions or not, but I think
1:04:55I've exhausted my capabilities on this
1:04:57topic unless we want to go into more
1:05:00naval gazing as we mentioned and uh
1:05:02analyze each people's individual
1:05:03comments, which would probably be a bit
1:05:05cruel. So I I don't know if we'll do
1:05:07anything like that really.
1:05:09>> I think we'll wrap it up here. But um I
1:05:11hope people enjoy our our less clinical
1:05:13episodes. Um yeah.
1:05:16>> Yeah. Apologies to those who want more
1:05:18uh you know clinical content. Don't
1:05:20worry, [music] more will be coming.
1:05:21>> I don't think anyone wants more clinical
1:05:23content, but uh yeah, we'll see.
1:05:25>> We'll see.
1:05:25>> See, have a good one.
1:05:26>> All right. Bye.
1:05:28>> Thanks for listening. If you enjoy our
1:05:30show, please leave us a review on Apple
1:05:32Podcast or Spotify. I know it seems like
1:05:34a small deal, but it actually helps us
1:05:36out a lot. And if you want to support
1:05:37the show or get more content, head on
1:05:39over to psycho.farm,
1:05:42not.com, psycho.farm. Psych ho.f ARM.
1:05:47There I have a very comprehensive
1:05:49video-based anti-depressant course. You
1:05:52can also get access to our memberships
1:05:53[music] which include a community forum,
1:05:55very awesome prescriber guides, patient
1:05:58medication sheets on Amazon. I also
1:06:00wrote a book which is a guide to
1:06:01medications on Amazon. Just search
1:06:03Psychoparmm and Maulsburg and it should
1:06:05pop up. So if you want to support
1:06:06[music] us, please do leave a review and
1:06:08then check out psycho.farm. Um we really
1:06:11appreciate it. Thanks for listening.

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of The Psychology of Elizabeth Holmes in You Can See Everything: Narcissism, Autism, or Manipulation? by Psychofarm, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 11,613 words across 1,747 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.