Not to put words into her mouth, but it reads to me like she’s trying to save him, in both a Christian and a secular sense. So she encourages him to keep talking, so she can understand him and help him understand himself. I have my critiques, but it seems like she’s trying to help.
This reminds me of the Buddhist idea of Nirvana. Have you tried letting go of your attachments?
And it’s interesting that I see a Buddhist influence, where @Ichthus77 sees a different tradition:
I mentioned earlier about a “taxonomy of delusions”, and in such a taxonomy I would expect to find certain delusions to be common across cultures and traditions, because ultimately the delusions are generated by human brains that have a lot in common.
I was explaining pareidolia to my daughter yesterday, in the context of a conversation about ghosts. I suggested that people see ghosts because we’re hard-wired to find meaning, and in particular to find agency, to find other humans. Delusions probably make use of some of these hard-wirings. Delusional beliefs often involve pareidolia-like misattributions of meaning and agency.
The fact that we find patterns that can be interpreted as aligning with many religious traditions could just be pareidolia all over again, or it could be that the delusions are triggering a hard-wired spirituality module, so the delusions have the shape of things common to human spirituality.
I see where you’re coming from, and I agree to an extent, but this seems harsh. For one thing, even taken at face value, calling self-absorption theft is too strong. It’s bad cooperation, it’s a bit parasitic, but it’s not taking anything that isn’t freely offered.
But also, compare the behavior to that of a child. Children demand a lot, they’re frequently self-absorbed in remarkable ways, but they aren’t stealing. They see the world differently, and often their self-absorption is just a failure to properly model others or the world. They’ll selfishly demand that you lie still on the floor while they play pretend to put you to bed, but in their lives the routine of bedtime and being put into a cozy, safe bed by a loving parent may be one of their best experiences, and in their play they are giving you that experience. They are self-absorbed in failing to see how much they’re asking of you, or how differently you see the world, but in the context of their understanding, their actions are kind and generous.
So too here. Taken at his word, Ecmandu is teaching and caring and protecting the people he talks to. The only humanity he explicitly denies is his own. It’s a love language, misguided as it is.
I’m not defending the behavior per se, I agree with the gist of your criticisms. But I don’t see them as a moral failing in the way you seem to (please correct me if I am misunderstanding you on that point).
I’ve used this technique as well. I noticed that a friend had made their fears a part of their identity, like “I’m so scared of X, it’s one of my quirks that makes me me!” And it was easy to see how that line of thinking was self-reinforcing, spinning up a genuine fear reaction because they identified as someone who is scared right now.
Noticing it in others was easy, but it helped me to notice that I was doing similar things, and to get over them.
But related to what I describe in Rational and Arational Emotions, I think this method has its limits. Getting over minor fears, giving up a moderately unhealthy drinking habit, and in particular breaking the feedback loops that cement them in your life, those can be reached by a conscious reidentification. Other issues arise at a lower level, at best you can catch them in conscious thought and struggle against them, but the change never becomes natural and you can’t be rid of them just by identifying differently. (I recognize the danger in this thought: identifying as someone who can change is important to changing. Still, it’s true, and recognizing it can help find a different way to address the things that can’t be changed)