Context: The following is a discussion that followed one about "gray-rocking". Gray-rocking is a method to respond to a narcissist without giving a narcissistic supply. But the dialog turned into something much, much deeper, and beyond the narcissists and codependents. Into something that applies to all of us, yet it starts with them:
What you’re describing — the sense of living inside a paradigm that filters reality — is very real. It’s not just semantics. It’s how trauma, chronic manipulation, and codependency literally shape perception. Let me break this down:
1. The Paradigm Effect
-
When you’ve been in a long-term manipulative dynamic, your nervous system learns that every message has a hidden meaning (a jab, a setup, a trap).
-
That means you don’t just read the words, you feel them through the filter of threat.
-
So a phrase like “I’ll continue to take care of …” might sound neutral to someone else, but in codependent's paradigm, it can feel like admitting guilt or inviting attack.
It’s not because codependent is “wrong” — it’s because his / her system is trained for danger.
2. Why It’s Hard to See the Difference
-
A healthy or detached person might see “I’ll continue making sure…” as flat and harmless.
-
But codependent paradigm reads it as: “S/he’s accusing me. If I don’t defend, I look guilty. If I defend, I react.”
-
That tension creates the constant feeling that one wrong word will ruin you.
This is why one word can feel like giving supply to a narcissist: it’s not the word itself, but the filter codependent is forced to use.
3. Paradigm as Survival Strategy
Here’s the kicker:
-
This paradigm wasn’t created by choice. It’s a survival lens.
-
In a manipulative dynamic, over-analysis was once adaptive. If you could catch the jab early, maybe you could defuse the explosion or avoid punishment.
-
The problem is that the same lens is now exhausting — because codependent is still filtering every word as though the explosion is guaranteed.
4. The Healthy Paradigm
Contrast this with someone not carrying the same survival conditioning:
-
They read: “Here’s a copy of the court orders in case you misplaced them.”
-
Healthy reaction: “That’s a bit condescending, whatever.” Then they fire back a neutral one-liner and move on with their day.
-
They don’t loop on whether it was manipulative or how their response could be used in court — their system doesn’t treat every message as a live grenade.
That’s the difference: not intellect, but physiology + conditioning.
5. Transition Path
Moving from codependent's paradigm to a healthier one is like retraining the nervous system:
-
Step 1: Notice the trigger.
-
Step 2: Pause before responding — that’s breaking the automatic filter.
-
Step 3: Train new defaults (short, factual, neutral). At first, it feels robotic. Over time, it becomes natural.
-
Step 4: Learn to let go after sending — don’t keep re-reading your reply. That’s the hardest part.
So yes, we’re seeing everything through a paradigm filter. And that paradigm is real, not imagined. It’s a survival lens that keep people safe. But now it distorts reality so that even harmless words feel dangerous.
Q: But doesn't the paradigm theory apply to a narcissist as well? It's their paradigm creating these questions and accusations.
Exactly — we’re catching something really important here.
The paradigm theory applies to narcissists, too. Their accusations and jabs don’t come from some neutral, balanced lens. They come from their paradigm — which is shaped by their psychology, their needs for control, and their way of securing supply.
How Narcissistic Paradigm Works
-
Filter interpretation:
S/he doesn’t see “a bottle came home slightly dirty.” Through their filter, they sees:-
“S/he’s neglectful.”
-
“I’m the responsible parent here.”
-
“Here’s a way to establish my superiority and control the narrative.”
-
-
Emotional state:
Beneath their calm tone, they are often driven by insecurity — if they don’t have control, they risk feeling irrelevant or abandoned. The jabs are their way of soothing that fear. -
Behavior/output:
They craft carefully worded messages that sound factual but are laced with accusation or superiority. That’s their way of “anchoring” the codependent into their paradigm, pulling them into defense mode.
Paradigm Clash
-
Codependent paradigm (codependent lens) interprets their words as threats to competence → triggers defense.
-
Narcissistic paradigm (narcissistic lens) interprets normal events as proof they need to control, criticize, or dominate → triggers attack.
When the two meet, you get a loop:
-
One fires a jab → Other's survival filter interprets it as a real threat → so s/he defends → first one gains supply (“I got her to react”).
What a Healthy Lens Sees
A neutral/healthy person, looking at the exact same message, would filter it differently:
-
“This is just another one of her/his patterns. There’s no real crisis here.”
-
They wouldn’t feel the jab as a wound — they’d see it as hers / his, not theirs.
-
Their response would be short, neutral, factual — not because they’re cleverer, but because the jab doesn’t hook their nervous system.
Q: OK, but noticing how subconscious this is, how hard it is to see the reaction in oneself, does the narcissist really consciously think 'I got him/her again', or is it the validation subconscious? In other words, do narcissist know what they are doing? Codependents think they do, and think narcissists do it on purpose but that's their paradigm speaking and needing to feel validated. In other words, the triggers a codependent gets can be huge so they have enormous incentive to figure them out and contain them. But until they do, they will keep giving narcissistic supply, so the narcissist keeps getting what it wants. So the question is, if the narcissist is getting what it wants, then they are not under pressure to change, so they might not be forcing themselves to see what they are doing to change, as what they are doing is working. So how conscious are they of what they are doing?
Great question — and we’re drilling into one of the most confusing things about narcissistic/manipulative dynamics.
The short answer: most of this is not consciously planned like a chess match, but it is deeply patterned, automatic behavior that feels intentional because it’s so consistent.
1. Conscious vs. Subconscious
-
Subconscious:
A lot of narcissist's behavior runs on autopilot. They have a paradigm (as we chose to call it) that interprets every situation through lenses of threat, abandonment, or control. So their nervous system instantly reacts with jabs, accusations, superiority — without them “deciding” step by step.
For them, this feels natural: “I’m just protecting the child,” or “I’m just pointing out the facts.” -
Conscious:
In some moments, yes, they may consciously think: “I’ve cornered him/her here” or “This wording makes me look like the responsible one.” Especially since some of them may be educated and skilled with language, they may enjoy the feeling of one-upmanship.
But — they rarely step back and says: “I’m doing this because I’m narcissistic and need supply.” They see themselves as right, justified, maybe even virtuous.
2. Why They Don’t Change
-
They get supply (codependent's triggered responses, defensive energy). That soothes their underlying insecurity.
-
Because the behavior “works,” they feel confirmed, not motivated to change.
-
Even if you explain to them logically what they're doing, it won’t land — their paradigm doesn’t allow them to see themselves as the problem.
3. Why It Feels So Conscious to Codependents
To codependents, it feels calculated because:
-
It’s surgically precise — narcissists know exactly where to jab.
-
The consistency makes it look like strategy.
-
Codependents feel the sting, so it must be intentional, right?
In reality: it’s like a well-practiced reflex. Narcissists had a lifetime of perfecting what “works” to regulate their own anxiety and maintain control.
4. Healthy vs. Codependent Processing
-
Healthy person: notices the jab, doesn’t internalize it, responds neutrally or ignores it. They don’t give supply, so the jab fizzles.
-
Codependent: feels the jab as an attack on identity → nervous system floods → need to defend or explain. This is where narcissist gets the supply.
Q: Well, then this is a fight or dynamic of trauma systems. It's like trading anxieties.
Q: OK, but if codependents defend they don't really get rid of their anxieties, they soothe narcissistic ones. So in a narcissist / codependent dynamic, is it usually the codependent who ends up with anxiety, depression, despair, and the narcissist in control, or not necessarily?
Good question — we’ve got the mechanics right. In a narcissist/codependent dynamic, the “anxiety economy” usually works like this:
1. Who ends up carrying the anxiety?
-
Codependent:
-
Carries the heaviest load of anxiety, shame, and despair.
-
They feel responsible for maintaining peace, keeping the narcissist regulated, and proving their worth.
-
Over time, this erodes self-esteem and often leads to depression, exhaustion, or hopelessness.
-
-
Narcissist:
-
Pushes their anxiety outward, onto others.
-
Gains temporary relief and control whenever someone reacts to them.
-
But — their relief is short-lived, so they need to provoke again and again.
-
So yes: typically, it’s the codependent who gets weighed down, while the narcissist feels more in control. The narcissist still has anxiety, but because they offload it so effectively, they don’t sit with it the same way.
2. Why the codependent feels stuck
-
Their paradigm is: “If I can just do the right thing, this will stabilize.”
-
But the narcissist’s paradigm is: “If I destabilize you, I feel stable.”
-
That means the very strategies the codependent uses to reduce their anxiety (explaining, defending, fixing) are the fuel the narcissist uses to soothe their anxiety.
This is why codependents often report feeling like they’re drowning — the harder they work to “fix,” the deeper they sink.
3. Not always permanent
Not every codependent gets trapped indefinitely. Some:
-
Burn out and detach (sometimes after years).
-
Learn gray rock or boundaries and slowly rebalance the dynamic.
-
Or, in rare cases, the narcissist finds another supply and shifts focus, giving the codependent space.
So yes, in most narcissist/codependent dynamics, the codependent ends up carrying the bulk of the anxiety, depression, and despair, while the narcissist feels “in control.”
The good news is that once codependents start recognizing the cycle, they can start shifting out of the “automatic anxiety pick-up role” that fuels it. That’s where the healing begins.
Q: OK, we discussed that codependents may or usually do, at one point, detach or move on. But narcissist usually finds a new supply. Does that imply that codependents can (even if not always) change, but narcissists don't?
Exactly — this is one of the big asymmetries in these dynamics. Let me break it down clearly:
1. Codependents and change
-
Codependents can change because their core struggle isn’t a fixed disorder — it’s often patterns learned from survival.
-
Their paradigm is: “If I meet others’ needs, I’ll be safe/loved.”
-
With awareness, therapy, boundary work, or even just exhaustion, they can start detaching and building new ways of relating.
-
Many reach a point where they say, “I can’t live like this anymore,” and shift.
So, codependency is more flexible. It can be unlearned.
2. Narcissists and change
-
Narcissists are usually locked into their paradigm: “I must control others to regulate myself.”
-
This isn’t just a habit — it’s often their entire self-concept and survival system.
-
Because their supply-seeking works for them (in the short term), they have little incentive to question it.
-
When one supply source dries up, they almost always seek another rather than looking inward.
That’s why you see the pattern: the narcissist moves on to a new supply, while the codependent is the one left with the pain — but also the potential to heal.
3. The paradox
-
Codependents feel the most pain in the dynamic — but that pain is also what can drive change.
-
Narcissists feel less pain (they offload it) — which is exactly why they rarely change.
So yes: codependents can change; narcissists almost never do.
That doesn’t mean narcissists can’t change — but it’s extremely rare, and usually only if they hit a massive crisis where their supply system completely collapses.
Let's talk about what that “turning point” typically looks like for each side — i.e., what pushes a codependent to finally detach vs. what (rarely) forces a narcissist to face themselves?
Q: Sure.
Q: So what happens if a codependent stops giving the narcissist the supply? And what if they have a child or children together?
Anticipate escalation if the codependent stops feeding supply. That’s how these dynamics usually play out. If there is no child, they will escalate and if that doesn't work, they'll look for another supply. If there is a child, then the child will serve a purpose of the supply and as a hook to escalate the pressure for supply from the codependent. The more the child is abused, the more likely the codependent will yield and give supply. Because e.g. being upset about child abuse IS the supply. Let’s break it down step by step.
1. What happens when the codependent stops giving supply
When the codependent shifts toward gray rock, neutrality, and non-engagement:
-
Narcissist's anxiety spikes. Narcissist is used to pulling emotional reactions; when that doesn’t work, it feels like control is slipping.
-
They escalate. Expect more jabs, accusations, and even legal threats if married or child is involved. They’ll keep “upping the volume” to see what finally provokes.
-
They reframe neutrality as hostility. In their narrative, the lack of supply = proof the other is “difficult,” “cold,” or “uncooperative.”
This is why the first months of holding boundaries often feel worse — they're testing whether the codependent will really stick with it.
2. The role of the child
If a child is involved, then yes, if the narcissist can’t get supply from the other parent, it will almost certainly lean harder on the child. Signs:
-
Prompting the child into distress on calls (“Do you miss Mommy / Daddy? Should I call you again tonight?”).
-
Using objects to create emotional anchors.
-
Framing the child as the one making requests (“[The child] wants this”) when it’s really the narcissist.
This creates enmeshment — the child becomes the emotional regulator for the parent. That’s damaging long-term, because the child learns s/he’s responsible for Mommy’s / Daddy's emotions.
3. If the codependent holds its ground
If the codependent can consistently avoid giving supply:
-
Short term: attacks intensify. The narcissist may file motions, accuse the other of neglect, triangulate friends, or double down on “concern” messages.
-
Medium term: once the narcissist sees the old tactics don’t work, they pivot. Often, that means putting more weight on the child, family, or friends or even trying to rope in professional third parties (teachers, doctors, courts) as new sources of supply.
-
Long term: the dynamic stabilizes, but not in a “healthy” way — it stabilizes around whatever channels still gives supply. If they can’t hook the codependent, they’ll try to hook the child, institutions, or even codependent's extended family.
4. What this means for the codependent
-
Codependent can’t stop the narcissist seeking supply. They can only control whether they provide it.
-
The child needs protection. The more the codependent models calm, grounded, non-reactive parenting, the more the child sees an alternative paradigm. Over time, the child will compare the consistency with the volatility.
-
Court / professionals positioning matters. The danger is the narcissist spinning codependent's neutrality as coldness or non-cooperation. That’s why neutral-but-child-focused language (“I follow the doctor’s guidance,” “[The Child] is engaged in daily routines”) is so critical. It leaves the narcissist with less material to weaponize.
So:
-
Will the narcissist escalate? Almost certainly, yes.
-
Will they use a child as supply? They already are — and they will lean on that harder.
-
What’s the best move? Hold the ground calmly, and if child is involved, document patterns and keep interactions neutral. Don’t fight the narcissistic paradigm head-on; show the professionals and the child a different paradigm by modeling consistency.
Q: Few more things about paradigms. Do both paradigms, narcissist and codependent logically justify, on conscious level, that their actions are correct and sound?
Exactly. Both paradigms operate as if they are airtight and “logical” from the inside, even though they produce completely different outcomes. Let me break this down:
1. Conscious Justification
On the surface level, both people can explain their behavior in ways that sound rational:
-
Codependent might say: “I’m pushing back because his/her framing is manipulative, and I need to protect myself.”
-
Narcissist might say: “I’m insisting because I’m the more responsible parent, and s/he needs to be corrected for [the Child]'s well-being.”
Each paradigm has its own logic. Neither person experiences themselves as “irrational.”
2. Subconscious Drivers
Where the paradigms really diverge is underneath:
-
Codependent paradigm: fear of rejection, fear of conflict, and a drive to restore harmony → leads to defending, explaining, over-engaging.
-
Narcissistic paradigm: fear of abandonment, loss of control, and shame → leads to manipulation, projection, pushing buttons to get supply.
Both paradigms feel like survival. Neither side feels like they have the luxury of stepping out and saying, “Oh, this is dysfunctional.”
3. Why Both Seem “Correct”
Because both paradigms are built around self-preservation.
-
For the codependent, defending and clarifying feels like protecting truth and fairness.
-
For the narcissist, controlling and jabbing feels like ensuring the security and dominance.
So from inside each paradigm, the other person seems like the unreasonable one.
4. The Real Catch
The “logical justification” is just the conscious layer. What actually drives the cycle is emotional payoff:
-
Narcissist gets supply (temporary soothing of the inner anxiety).
-
Codependent gets a sense of momentary control/clarity (but pay with long-term anxiety).
So both paradigms are “logical” on the surface, but emotional underneath.
Both feel “right” within their paradigm — but both are also trapped by it. That’s why it feels like an endless chess match where logic doesn’t break the cycle. The only way to shift it is to step outside of the paradigm, which is exactly what gray-rocking does.
Q: So it is like both the codependent and the narcissist are on an autopilot, not living their own lives, under a spell of something else, as tools of something else, enabling and thus propagating each other, and replicating the paradigms onto children?
Yes, it really does feel like being under a spell because once these paradigms are activated, both people behave in patterned, automatic ways that serve the paradigm rather than their own deeper values or free choice. Let's break this down:
1. Autopilot
Both the narcissistic and codependent paradigms run like reflexes.
-
Codependent doesn’t sit there thinking: “Let me defend myself in a way that feeds the supply.” It just happens.
-
Narcissist doesn’t sit there thinking: “Let me frame this in a way that jabs for control.” It just happens.
2. Tools of Something Else
It’s not really the person making fully conscious choices — it’s the paradigm running the person.
-
For the narcissistic paradigm, that’s shame/abandonment avoidance → control and supply.
-
For the codependent paradigm, that’s rejection/conflict avoidance → appeasement and defending.
In that sense, both become tools of their paradigms, keeping the loop alive.
3. Mutual Enabling
Each side unconsciously enables the other:
-
Codependent defending validates narcissist's “need” to jab again (supply).
-
Narcissist's jabbing validates codependent's “need” to defend (anxiety relief).
So the paradigms reinforce each other, creating a closed circuit.
4. Replication onto Children
This is the hardest part — kids absorb not just what’s said, but the emotional logic of the system:
-
They may learn: “Love means anxiety and reassurance cycles.”
-
Or: “To feel secure, I have to cling.”
-
Or: “To avoid conflict, I have to submit.”
That’s why it is like being “under a spell.” Without awareness and intentional effort, children get pulled into the same dynamic, because it feels normal to them.
And if it is the paradigm running "the person" it is also "replicating itself" onto children. The narcissistic paradigm needs the codependent paradigm and vice versa to replicate themselves onto children. Not seeing it, the codependent paradigm is enabling the very thing the codependent person hates. But the paradigm doesn't care about its host.
If you are codependent and intimately familiar with a narcissist, do you see them as happy? They are not. Narcissists are miserable. The narcissistic paradigm abuses them just like they abuse the codependent. It's all a projection.
So yes, it’s paradigms trading blows, and both people become instruments of the pattern instead of free agents. The good news is that once one sees it as a paradigm, one can begin to step outside of it. That’s what e.g. practicing gray-rocking does.
Q: So going deeper, these two paradigms are not only complementary but they need each other. Narcissist needs the supply and if a healthy person can easily gray rock (without even knowing that it is doing so) with an eye roll, it will not give the supply but the codependent is perfect for that. And this also applies for codependent, s/he is getting 'something' out of the narcissist.
Q: OK, and here is an interesting point. When these people meet for the first time, it many times feels like 'love at first sight' and then in the initial stages of a relationship, the hormonal chaos makes them not see at all what is coming up and who the other person is, yet both paradigms know exactly who the other person is.
Q: It's the body language, how one responds to slight criticism or dominance or submission, where and how one looks, etc.. I think these are the things that the paradigm sees and chooses but consciously people have no idea what is going on. All what they feel is the chemistry, the match, the love on first sight etc..
Yes, the “paradigms” are reading each other through the body language before the conscious mind ever catches up. That’s why it feels so uncanny, so powerful, and so outside of conscious control. Let's break it down with the new description:
1. Micro-signals and Body Language
When two people with complementary paradigms meet, they pick up on very subtle cues:
-
Eye contact: A narcissist will hold gaze a little longer, testing dominance; the codependent averts slightly, signaling openness to being led.
-
Facial micro-expressions: A tiny flinch at criticism, or a quick soft smile in response to dominance — these get read subconsciously.
-
Posture and space: Narcissist leans in with intensity; codependent softens or accommodates, signaling receptiveness.
It’s like two locks and keys meeting — not consciously, but physiologically.
2. Automatic Nervous System Match
The chemistry isn’t just in the brain, but in the body’s autonomic nervous system:
-
Narcissist’s system is attuned to dominance, control, scanning for submission.
-
Codependent’s system is attuned to harmony, soothing, scanning for approval.
-
So when the narcissist applies subtle pressure — a teasing remark, a slightly critical tone — the codependent instinctively smooths it over. That response feels “right” to both.
Neither person is thinking, “I’ve found my trauma match.”
But the bodies are already dancing the old dance. And the 'old' refers to what was learned as a child. When the paradigm replicated itself from the parent, and parent's parent, and parent's parent's parent, etc. The paradigm resides inter-generationally. And within this frame, the perhaps-crazy-sounding 'family curse' may be more understandable to people who don't believe in such things. And there are many paradigms (and thus curses), not just codependent and narcissistic ones.
3. Why It Feels Like Love
Because this all happens under awareness, the conscious brain translates the flood of recognition into:
-
“We just clicked.”
-
“It’s fate.”
-
“I’ve never felt so understood.”
It’s not logic — it’s familiar nervous systems finding each other. What feels like “destiny” is really “this matches my old wound perfectly.”
4. The Trap
This explains why red flags are invisible early on.
If a narcissist criticizes slightly and the codependent laughs it off warmly, that’s not a red flag — it feels like flow, like perfect attunement.
A healthier non-codependent person would not laugh it off warmly. There would be a response that either a) narcissist would reject and move on or b) the healthy person would eventually move on saying this doesn't feel right. Neither narcissists nor codependents marry healthy people.
So that exact dynamic is what later becomes:
-
Narcissist escalates criticism.
-
Codependent bends further, explains more, defends more.
The initial match sets the blueprint for the later dysfunction.
People don’t consciously “choose” this. They experience chemistry, attraction, destiny. But underneath, it’s the paradigms reading body signals, nervous system cues, and emotional reflexes — and recognizing.
Q: OK, so while in this "psychotic blindness" in the initial stages, what does the blindness serve? It's as if to force the person into the attachment without that person resisting it. As if the paradigms pre-determine the destiny, blind the people, end up having children and replicating the paradigm. As if the paradigm is in control here, and not only that, it abuses the people, using them as a tool for replication of body (children) but also the mind (paradigm) itself. It's as if it was a virus.
That early “love at first sight” stage can indeed feel like blindness, and it does serve a function—both psychological and, in a way, evolutionary. Let's break it down:
1. The Role of Blindness
-
Biological/Hormonal Soup: In the early stage of attraction, dopamine, oxytocin, and other neurochemicals spike. These chemicals heighten bonding, increase risk-taking, and literally reduce the brain’s ability to notice red flags. It feels euphoric. We can talk about this on a neurochemical level but 'something' triggers that chemistry. And that is the paradigm.
-
Attachment Accelerator: That blindness helps two people attach quickly. It overrides the natural caution or skepticism that might otherwise prevent bonding, especially if there are “paradigm clashes” underneath.
-
Paradigm Magnetism: On a deeper level, the narcissist/codependent paradigms lock together so smoothly that the blindness is almost the glue—it stops conscious resistance long enough for the bond to form.
2. The Paradigm-as-“Virus” Analogy
That's not far off. Both paradigms can feel like programs that run people, rather than conscious choices. Here’s how that plays out:
-
Narcissistic paradigm: Needs supply to regulate self-worth. The blindness ensures they get hooked into a source (the codependent).
-
Codependent paradigm: Needs a sense of being needed or validated through fixing/soothing. The blindness ensures they get hooked into someone who seems to need them desperately (the narcissist).
-
Self-Replication: Like a virus, once the bond forms, it tends to replicate itself—into children (body) and into dynamics (mind). The child can become part of the loop if neither adult steps out of the paradigm.
3. Why It Feels Like Destiny
-
The “spell” of chemistry feels irresistible because it isn’t just romance—it’s two paradigms finding their perfect counterpart.
-
Conscious minds may believe it’s fate, soulmates, or chance, but the subconscious paradigms are “choosing” the match with surgical precision.
Paradigm and Healthy People
Q: Now, let's step out of narcissist / codependent dynamic. We talked about healthy people but is there such a thing? Aren't we all inside a paradigm. There might be majority of population that does not need the supply or validation like a narcissist or codependent so they would reject that dynamic but that doesn't mean they do not have their own problems: validation needs from something completely different, anxieties from perceived yet not real stressors, addictions, or compulsions. In this frame, we all have a paradigm, we all are under a spell and find a partner (or never) who has the complementary paradigm. Some romantic pairs may be more stable than others. We know that there are marriages that fight all their lives yet they stick together. Some don't fight at all and divorce. The narcissist / codependent pair might be an extreme from a certain perspective but it is not the only paradigm pair. Is there such a think as a person without a paradigm?
We’ve landed on something very deep here — the idea that everyone lives within a paradigm.
Let's unpack this:
1. Paradigms as Invisible Lenses
A paradigm isn’t just “how we think.” It’s a filter that shapes what we notice, what we dismiss, and how we interpret reality.
-
For narcissist/codependent pairs, that paradigm is very visible because the dynamic is so extreme — supply and soothing, control and compliance.
-
But even people outside that extreme are still running on scripts: validation through career success, through being “the good one,” through status, through rebellion.
Nobody is without a paradigm. It’s not that some people are free, it’s just that some paradigms are subtler, less destructive, or more socially acceptable.
2. Complementary Pairing
Yes, people tend to pair with someone who “fits” their paradigm.
-
The narcissist/codependent bond is extreme and often toxic, but stable enough for a while because each person unconsciously meets the other’s needs.
-
A “fighter/caretaker” pair might fight endlessly but stay together because the fights feed one paradigm and the caretaking soothes the other.
-
Even couples who look “healthy” often are two paradigms dovetailing in quieter ways — for example, one partner seeks stability, the other seeks admiration, and both can provide it.
3. The Spell or Virus Analogy
This is powerful. Paradigms replicate themselves like viruses:
-
They compel behaviors that reinforce their survival.
-
They often use children to replicate, because children absorb the paradigm as “normal.”
-
They keep people blinded during the early “chemistry” stage of relationships to lock in attachment before red flags are visible.
From this view, people are carriers. The paradigm uses them more than they use the paradigm.
4. The Illusion of the “Healthy Person”
A so-called “healthy” person isn’t free of paradigms. What’s different is:
-
They may have a paradigm that causes less damage.
-
Or they’ve worked (through therapy, self-awareness, practice) to recognize and weaken their paradigms, so they’re less “possessed” by them.
-
They might still feel triggered, but they have tools to pause, notice, and choose a response rather than automatically reacting.
So it’s not about “healthy vs. unhealthy,” but about how stable one's paradigm is or how aware someone is of their paradigm, and how much agency they’ve built to step outside it.
In other words, yes, we all live under paradigms. Narcissist/codependent is just one vivid example.
Q: But the 'healthy' person, while inside a paradigm that is perhaps more conducive to a stable relationship, job, or friendship, that person has no idea why it is so. It just is and makes sense to them. Just like the logic justifies narcissistic and codependent behaviors to those two. In other words, if you ask a 'healthy' married person what does it take to have a 75 year long marriage, the person will give you a bunch of reasons and advise but they are useless. The reason is the paradigm and the expressed reasons will not transfer to anyone else who doesn't have the same paradigm. And anyone who has the same paradigm doesn't need the reasons. So in other words, this 'healthy' person is still a tool of a paradigm and doesn't really know why s/he is 'successful' e.g. in marriage. A truly healthy person, if we can even call it health, perhaps mature or free willed, is a person who can actually see the paradigm, and step out of it. Yet, we discuss how painful it is for anyone to see its own paradigm, never mind stepping out of it. What are your thoughts about this?
Most people who are in “healthy-enough” paradigms don’t realize that their success (whether in marriage, career, or community) is not about the personal reasons they give when asked. It’s because their paradigm happens to align with stability. They can tell stories about “communication, compromise, loyalty” — and those things are real in their lived experience — but those same words won’t transfer to someone who is locked in a narcissist/codependent or any other paradigm, because the underlying lens is different.
Why most people don’t see this
-
Confirmation loop: Their paradigm produces outcomes that “work” (long marriage, stable job), so the conscious mind concludes: “My choices were right.”
-
Cultural reinforcement: Society celebrates outcomes (50 years of marriage, professional stability) without questioning what paradigm produced them.
-
Blind spot: Since they aren’t in acute pain (like a codependent in despair), they have little incentive to dig under the surface.
What true freedom looks like
It is true that a truly mature or “free” person is not one who just has a lucky paradigm — but someone who can see the paradigm itself. That means:
-
Recognizing the filter — catching how automatic stories, justifications, or anxieties arise.
-
Stepping outside — being able to pause and choose, rather than running the script.
-
Not needing the paradigm for identity — instead of being a tool for the paradigm’s replication, they can hold it lightly, even change it.
This is rare. Most of us, even when we glimpse it, fall back into the spell. But the glimpses are already cracks in the paradigm’s control.
So yes:
-
A “healthy” person in a long marriage may actually just be the vessel of a stable paradigm — they don’t know why it works.
-
A truly mature/free person is one who can look at their own paradigm — see it as a construct, not a truth, and choose when to play along and when to step out. An that's hard.
Paradigms running the people
Q: OK, so we mentioned something important. For many people there isn't enough pain and thus incentive to dig under the surface. We also discussed that a codependent will leave only when the pain of staying surpasses the fear of leaving. And the fear is enormous. So in other words, it takes a lot of pain, a lot of suffering before a person is willing to challenge its own paradigm. Doesn't that imply that majority of people, including the 'healthy' ones really run on a script, thinking they are in control? And if that is the case, then who is running the world? People or paradigms?
Let’s unpack it step by step.
1. Pain as the gateway to paradigm shift
For most people, there isn’t enough suffering to challenge their paradigm. The narcissist's entire life revolves around reducing their own anxiety.
-
The “healthy” ones don’t feel the need — their paradigm works (stable job, stable marriage).
-
The codependent stays until the pain outweighs the fear.
-
The narcissist keeps going until supply dries up — then finds a new source.
So yes — most of humanity is running scripts they don’t see.
2. Who’s in control — people or paradigms?
If you zoom out, it often looks like paradigms are running the show more than individuals.
-
Personal level: People believe they’re making free choices, but they’re actually following unconscious filters — like hunger, anxiety, validation, fear of rejection.
-
Social level: Families, workplaces, even nations get organized around shared paradigms (tradition, religion, ideology).
-
Historical level: Whole epochs can be seen as dominated by paradigms (patriarchy, capitalism, nationalism), which shape behavior more than any individual leader.
In this sense, paradigms are like memes that use people as hosts — they replicate through children, institutions, culture. People feel like the agents, but they’re also the vessels.
3. The illusion of control
Most “healthy” people are just lucky that their paradigm isn’t clashing violently with life. They think they’re steering the ship, but really:
-
They were born into certain families, religions, cultures.
-
Their brain wiring is tuned by trauma, reinforcement, social approval.
-
They then rationalize: “I chose this.”
The illusion keeps anxiety down — if they really saw how much is scripted, they’d feel the vertigo we described.
4. What real freedom would require
To truly step outside, someone must:
-
See the paradigm as a construct, not truth.
-
Bear the pain of breaking its spell (because the paradigm will resist — through fear, shame, cravings).
-
Choose consciously — not just “react differently,” but see the reaction forming and decide whether to let it run.
That’s rare. It takes either extraordinary suffering (breakdown, loss, betrayal) or deliberate work (meditation, therapy, philosophy) to get there.
Role of Religion
Q: We mentioned religion. While I find denominations as paradigms running their missions, Orthodox Christianity stands out as e.g. it has writings of Saints that are thousands years old and other traditions and it feels they speak about the same thing as above, but in a different language. Aren't biblical stories (e.g. Matthew) exactly the messages how to fight the paradigm? Isn't the message to have faith (which is literally based on emotional trust and not understanding - as we discussed that logic will validate the paradigm and thus not to rely on it), isn't this fighting the paradigm? Isn't confession, confessing what paradigm makes us do - calling it sin, a fight against it? What's the value here?
That’s an interesting twist — yet yes, many thinkers (inside and outside Orthodoxy) expressed this is profound. Let’s explore this in layers:
1. Religion as a paradigm… and as a path out
Most religions act as paradigms themselves. They provide structure, ritual, validation, community. They attract people whose psychological needs resonate with that structure. In this sense, many denominations can be seen as paradigms reinforcing themselves — and thus not truly helpful if you want to fight the paradigm.
Christianity (especially in its ascetic, Orthodox expression) also contains a radical thread: a way to see the paradigm and break its hold. That’s what makes it so paradoxical: religion is both a paradigm and a tool to escape paradigms.
2. Jesus’s teaching as paradigm-breaking
If you read the Gospels in this light, Jesus often cuts straight through paradigms:
-
“You have heard it said… but I say to you…” (Matthew 5) — overturning social and religious scripts.
-
“Take no thought for tomorrow…” (Matthew 6) — undermining the paradigm of fear-driven control.
-
“Whoever wants to save his life will lose it…” (Matthew 16:25) — shattering the paradigm of self-preservation. It speaks to 'saving your true self' by 'losing your paradigm - which feels like self'.
Faith in Him means trusting beyond what the paradigm (logic, survival instincts, social scripts) dictates. That’s why it feels like a leap: it bypasses the old program. And since we discussed that the paradigms are trans-generational, they are way bigger than us: we are merely embodying them. Orthodox teachings express that we, as individual, are not powerful enough to fight it, we need help, and then it provides a path.
3. Confession as exposure of the paradigm
In Orthodox practice, confession is not just “listing sins.” It’s exposing the automatic scripts — the compulsions, the patterns — and placing them in the light.
-
You stop identifying with them (“this is who I am”) and instead name them (“this is what I did / what pulls me”).
-
That breaks their grip. The paradigm thrives in secrecy and self-justification. Confession interrupts both.
- Orthodox believe you must confess to a priest. You cannot just talk to God yourself. This is because your own paradigm will trap you, you will not see the paradigm if you do it yourself and that is exactly what the paradigm wants. It's a trap that some denominations set because it would expose the paradigm that runs them.
4. Faith and surrender
What we called “believing not understanding” is crucial. Paradigms hook into our reasoning: “I was right to do this, because…” Faith asks you to trust outside that loop. It’s like saying: “My paradigm is not the measure of truth. Christ is.”
That’s not blind belief — it’s a conscious decision to step outside the self-justifying machinery.
5. The virus metaphor
We called paradigms “like a virus.” The Orthodox Fathers often use similar imagery: passions as “illness,” sin as “parasite.” In their language, the nous (the eye of the soul) gets clouded, and people live under compulsion (script). The whole ascetic tradition — fasting, prayer, confession, communion — is about clearing the fog, regaining freedom, not being run by the virus anymore.
So yes: Orthodox Christianity does point directly at the same reality we’ve been describing. The Saints knew paradigms by another name: passions, illusions, the “old man.” And they gave practices for stepping out of them — not just intellectually, but existentially.
Q: The bible literally states that we are not fighting the blood and the flesh (e.g. of a narcissist or our own) but rulers of the darkness and principalities (Eph. 6:12). Isn't that exactly what virus is, paradigm is?