Inquiry Critique

Mary Anne Marrero

Mr. Hayes

Eng 100 – 1:10

3/13/13

Inquiry Critique

      Ian Fagerstrom compares three different perspectives on the issue of Narcissism among the young generation. According to his critique, he claims that both Schumaker and Twenge’s views seem to have been a cause of misinterpretation based on the wrong facts leading them to a quite contradicting conclusion towards the young generation, while Greenberg’s view offers a more valid way of analyzing the problem of Narcissism among the youth. He affirms that two of the psychologists agree on the same idea, while Greenberg does not. Although he agrees in some points given out by the two psychologists, Schumaker and Twenge, he takes Greenberg’s side by agreeing that young people cannot be both empathetic and narcissistic and he identifies a few good points stated by Greenberg. Fagerstrom’s critique has deepened my understanding on the three perspectives, comparing it to what I actually understood after going through the readings earlier. Also, Fagerstom’s way of further elaborating the three arguments has helped me to explore the topic and think of my own stand on the issue. The growing number of narcissism shouldn’t be overlooked basing it only on researched data, surveys and high self-esteem, but rather through a young generation’s values. I do agree with his point in the eighth paragraph about Twenge’s flawed reasoning by mentioning that not enough evidence is shown to make such diagnosis; He also states that, “it simply shows their desire for power after being bullied by other students”, which I think is true. Fagerstrom starts of his critique by talking about his own experience on Narcissism and by being a youth himself, he is able to express his own opinion about the three perspectives in an organized way. In the second paragraph, he introduces all the three perspectives by starting with Schumaker’s, He states his sources fairly by stating each writer’s claim and explaining it further using his own words. He also uses questions, just like what is stated in pages 198 & 199 of Aims in order to compare these three perspectives based on their answers. Overall, I think that Fagerstrom uses mature reasoning because he was able to provide credible reasons on why he thinks Greenberg’s view is the most imperative among all three.