The Circumpunct Theory of Narcissism

A Complete Research Framework

Theory • Research • Analysis • Treatment

Circumpunct Framework v1.0 — January 2026

Contents

Framework Status & Scope

What This Is

This is a theoretical framework — a geometric model for understanding relational dynamics in narcissistic abuse. It is not a diagnostic tool, not a replacement for clinical assessment, and not established science. It is a hypothesis with preliminary validation, presented with falsifiable predictions.

The framework models relational geometry, not DSM categories. Having narcissistic traits ≠ having NPD. Exhibiting these patterns ≠ being evil. The goal is to explain behavior structurally — to make dynamics visible and nameable — not to moralize or pathologize.

On the Formal Notation

This framework uses mathematical notation (operators, equations, theorems). This may trigger "pseudoscience" concerns. Clarification:

The formal notation is not presented as empirical proof. It is a structural language for relational dynamics — analogous to early systems models prior to measurement. This places the work in the lineage of:

In each case, the math does work before full empirical validation: it provides precise vocabulary, generates predictions, reveals structural relationships, and enables falsification. The equations here function as scaffold, not proof. They are tools for thinking, not claims of measurement.

This is pre-empirical modeling — the stage where formal structure is proposed and tested against observation. The math earns its keep by making predictions that can fail. If the predictions hold, the notation is validated. If they don't, the framework is revised or abandoned.

What This Covers

This framework addresses relationally-acquired narcissistic patterns — dynamics that install through power-imbalanced relationships (parent-child, early romantic, institutional). It explains:

What This Does Not Cover

Validation Status

Current: Preliminary validation from three independent sources (inflater first-person data, victim longitudinal journal, community pattern synthesis). Convergent support for core predictions. Not peer-reviewed. Not replicated in controlled studies.

Required: Formal qualitative studies, clinical validation, controlled intervention trials.

Appropriate use: Conceptual lens for survivors and practitioners. Framework for generating testable hypotheses. Not self-diagnosis. Not clinical protocol without professional guidance.

The Geometry at a Glance

HEALTHY DYAD
[ • Center ]
↕ resonance ↕
[ • Center ]
———————
Φ Field (shared, clear)
———————
○ Boundary ↔ ○ Boundary
(mutual, permeable)
Both channels open
Bidirectional flow

virus
installs

PATHOLOGICAL DYAD
[ • Inflated ε₊ ]
↓ extraction ↓
[ • Severed ε₋ ]
———————
Φ Field (distorted, gaslighting)
———————
○ Weaponized → ○ Collapsed
(one-way valve)
Resonance channel closed
Unidirectional extraction

Key insight: The virus doesn't destroy the victim's capacity for resonance — it retunes it to the abuser's frequency. The aperture still works. It's just pointed at the wrong signal. This is why recovery is possible.

PART I: THEORY

The Geometric Foundation

1. Foundational Axioms

Core Axiom

Parts are fractals of their wholes.

This is not metaphor. It is an operational statement with measurable consequences.

Definition 1.1: The Circumpunct (⊙)

The fundamental unit of conscious structure is an irreducible trinity:

\[ \odot = \bullet + \Phi + \bigcirc \]
Definition 1.2: Field Mediation Requirement

Center and boundary cannot interact directly. All exchange must pass through the mediating field:

\[ \bullet \nleftrightarrow \bigcirc \quad \text{(direct interaction forbidden)} \]
\[ \bullet \leftrightarrow \Phi \leftrightarrow \bigcirc \quad \text{(mediated interaction required)} \]

2. Healthy Geometry

Definition 2.1: Circumpunct Integrity

A circumpunct has integrity when:

  1. Boundary Coherence: The boundary accurately distinguishes self from not-self
  2. Field Clarity: The field transmits information without systematic distortion
  3. Center Sovereignty: The center maintains autonomous orientation
  4. Proper Nesting: Recognition of being both whole (containing parts) and part (nested in larger wholes)

2.1 The Two Channels of Love

Love flows through shared fields on two distinct channels:

Definition 2.2: Functional Love (Boundary Channel)

Love as doing. Provision, protection, logistics, competence, problem-solving.

Functional love is necessary. Without it, survival is threatened. But it is not sufficient.

Definition 2.3: Resonant Love (Center Channel)

Love as being-with. Presence, delight, genuine wanting, seeing, attunement.

Resonant love is what the aperture was designed to receive. It's the signal that says: you are wanted, not just tolerated.

Theorem 2.1: The Helped-But-Not-Wanted Wound

Function without resonance creates the core wound:

\[ L_{function} - L_{resonance} = \text{"I am helped but not wanted"} \]

The child is fed, clothed, sheltered—and starving for something they can't name.

This is why functional love cannot heal resonance wounds. They operate on different channels.

3. The Two Fundamental Errors

Definition 3.1: Inflation (ε₊)

Believing or claiming MORE than what is.

\[ \varepsilon_+ : x \to x^+ \quad \text{(more than actual)} \]

Signatures:

Definition 3.2: Severance (ε₋)

Believing or claiming LESS than what is.

\[ \varepsilon_- : x \to x^- \quad \text{(less than actual)} \]

Signatures:

Theorem 3.1: Error Complementarity

Inflation and severance create stable pathological dyads:

\[ \varepsilon_+ + \varepsilon_- \to \text{stable(pathological)} \]

The inflated one needs supply (external validation). The severed one needs someone to tune to. They lock together in mutual dysfunction.

4. The Noble Lie Virus

Definition 4.1: The Noble Lie Virus

A transmissible pattern that:

  1. Installs complementary errors in host and victim
  2. Propagates through power-imbalanced relationships
  3. Self-conceals by attacking the perception that detects it
  4. Weaponizes functional love against resonant love
\[ V_{NL} : (\odot_H, \odot_V) \to (\varepsilon_+[\odot_H], \varepsilon_-[\odot_V]) \]

4.1 Installation Mechanism

The virus installs through systematic attack on all three circumpunct components:

Component Attack Vector Installation Result
○ Boundary "You're too sensitive" / boundary violations Victim cannot trust protective responses
Φ Field Gaslighting / reality distortion / DARVO Victim cannot trust perception
• Center "I know who you really are" / identity override Victim cannot trust self-knowledge
Theorem 4.1: The Weaponization of Functional Love

The virus teaches: "This (functional love) is what love is. Your hunger for more (resonance) proves something is wrong with you."

When functional love isn't enough, the victim experiences their need for resonance as evidence of personal defect.

5. Clinical Manifestations

Condition Geometric Translation Installed Belief
Narcissistic Personality Inflation error (ε₊); aperture closed to genuine resonance "I am the center; others exist for supply"
Codependency/Echoism Severance error (ε₋); aperture open but tuned to abuser frequency "I exist to meet others' needs"
Trauma Bonding Counterfeit nesting; aperture tuned to harm source "This painful connection is better than none"
Depression Severance from larger wholes "I am cut off from meaning/belonging"
PTSD Boundary rupture + frozen field state "The violation is still occurring"
Dissociation Center displacement; aperture closure "I must not be here to survive"

5.1 The Internalized Lies Catalogue

Surface Statement Geometric Operation
"I'm too sensitive" Accurate perception → personal flaw
"I'm overreacting" Proportional response → excessive
"I don't deserve [X]" Legitimate needs → illegitimate
"If I were better, they'd treat me better" Their behavior → my responsibility
"I can't trust my judgment" Foundation for all other lies

Key Insight: These lies share a structure—they take something done to you and make it something wrong with you. Once internalized, they no longer feel like lies. They feel like self-knowledge.

PART II: RESEARCH

Field Data and Developmental Psychology

6. Data Sources

Three independent data sources were analyzed to test framework predictions:

Subject A (Inflater)

Type: Self-identified NPD

Position: ε₊ (inflation)

Data: Reddit comments + 5-hour structured conversation

Value: First-person internal experience from inflater position

Subject B (Victim)

Type: Partner of narcissist

Position: ε₋ (severance)

Data: 9-year journal (2016-2025)

Value: Longitudinal tracking of installation and awakening

Community Data

Type: Survivor community patterns

Position: Multiple ε₋ perspectives

Data: r/NarcissisticSpouses synthesis

Value: Cross-validated patterns across thousands of cases

7. Community Pattern Analysis

7.1 The Manipulation Playbook

Survivors describe remarkably consistent tactics across independent cases:

Tactic Description Geometric Effect
Gaslighting "That didn't happen," "You're imagining things" Attacks CENTER, destabilizes FIELD
DARVO Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim & Offender Inverts all dimensions simultaneously
Love Bombing Overwhelming early affection Creates counterfeit agreement, bypasses boundary
Devaluation Systematic criticism, contempt Attacks CENTER, withdraws recognition
Word Salad Circular, exhausting non-arguments Prevents cause-effect tracking, exhausts center
Projection Attributing own flaws to victim Installs false content in victim's center

7.2 The Narcissist's Prayer

"That didn't happen.
And if it did, it wasn't that bad.
And if it was, that's not a big deal.
And if it is, that's not my fault.
And if it was, I didn't mean it.
And if I did, you deserved it."

7.3 Constructor vs. Consumer Dynamic

The community independently identified asymmetric relational patterns:

Constructor (Empath) Consumer (Narcissist)
Generates resonant connection Generates transactional connection (often skilled at it)
Creates warmth, attunement, openings Creates charm, impression, positioning
Builds relationship through mutual investment Extracts supply; cannot sustain without it
Sustainable (regenerates through giving) Unsustainable (depletes sources, moves on)

8. Developmental Research

8.1 Children's Lying: Developmental Stages

Age Type Cognitive Skill
2-3 Primary lies Can make false statements but don't consider listener's mental state
4-5 Secondary lies Understand others have different beliefs; can manipulate those beliefs
6-8 Tertiary lies Can maintain consistency between initial lie and follow-up statements
8+ Sophisticated deception Complex manipulation; full moral awareness

Key Research Finding

Talwar & Lee (2011): Children in punitive environments are significantly more likely to lie AND better at maintaining lies. The environment teaches that lying is adaptive.

Implication: Lying frequency is not a character trait but an environmental adaptation.

8.2 Children of Narcissistic Parents

What children learn from narcissistic parenting:

Intergenerational Risk: Children of narcissists may either develop narcissistic traits themselves OR become excessively people-pleasing (echoism). Both patterns transmit to the next generation.

PART III: ANALYSIS

Cross-Case Validation

9. Cross-Case Validation

9.1 Two-Channel Love Distinction

Framework claim: Love operates on two distinct channels. Narcissistic dynamics collapse to functional-only.

Subject A

"I was good at acquiring love but never enjoyed receiving it."

"I can't feel compassion for the people I've hurt, but I can see they have been wronged."

Cognitive channel intact, resonant channel absent.

Subject B

"The feeling is never forced, it flows from the heart of the giver... into the heart of the receiver."

"Best friend, roommate, and Mother! Not wife; Not lover."

Articulated distinction years before framework.

Community

"Like vampires who are dead inside, narcissists exploit and drain those around them."

Formalized as "narcissistic supply" — one-directional extraction.

✓ STRONGLY CONFIRMED

All three sources independently describe the two-channel distinction without shared vocabulary.

9.2 Complementary Error Pairing

Framework claim: Pathological dyads exhibit complementary errors — inflation pairs with severance.

Subject A (ε₊)

"I am not delusional, what if I am just better?"

"I'll pump a new person dry in days or weeks"

Claims more centrality than actual.

Subject B (ε₋)

"Was it me? Was I not attractive? Was I a burden?"

"I feel weak and useless"

Claims less validity than actual.

Community

"It then becomes the empath's job (as victim) to plug the culpability gap."

When narcissists externalize blame, empaths absorb it.

✓ STRONGLY CONFIRMED

Three sources provide complementary views of the same dyad structure from different positions.

9.3 Quantitative Summary

Framework Prediction Subject A Subject B Community Overall
Two-channel love distinction ✓ STRONG
Complementary error pairing ✓ STRONG
Three-component attack (○ Φ •) ✓ STRONG
Functional love weaponization ✓ STRONG
Power imbalance requirement ✓ STRONG
Aperture retuning (not destruction) ✓ STRONG
Internalized lie installation
One-way valve topology ✓ STRONG
Predictions Confirmed: 8/8
Strong Confirmation: 7/8

10. Longitudinal Findings

Subject B's 9-year journal (2016-2025) provides longitudinal tracking of virus installation and awakening.

10.1 Timeline

Year Phase Key Pattern
2016 Installation begins Early warning signs ignored; "you won't find anyone else" statement; transactional framing
2018 Pattern solidifies Still frames as mutual problem: "We are both the cause and effect"
2019 First ultimatum Partner cries and twists words
2021 Pattern named First documentation of gaslighting, humiliation, "nobody else will want you"
2023 Forgiveness attempt Partner response: "What do you hope to gain by showing me this?"
2025 Awakening "I matter too. My heart, my needs, my dignity—they matter."

10.2 Novel Findings

Finding 1: Pre-Verbal Framework Knowledge

Subject described the resonance/function distinction in 2016—years before encountering formal vocabulary. The framework formalizes experientially accessible structure, not arbitrary theory.

Finding 2: Wedding Night as Diagnostic Marker

Wedding night avoidance appeared 4 times in the dataset as touchstone moment. If resonance was absent at maximum symbolic availability, it was likely never present.

Finding 3: 9-Year Awakening Trajectory

The progression from "maybe it's me" (2016) to "you cannot distort my reality anymore" (2025) suggests installation can be reversed through sustained confrontation with documented evidence.

11. Falsifiable Predictions

Prediction 1: Complementary Error Dyads

Claim: In pathological relationships, partners will exhibit complementary errors (inflation/severance) rather than matched errors.

Falsification: Systematic finding of stable pathological dyads where both partners exhibit the same error type.

Status: ✓ SUPPORTED by cross-case data

Prediction 2: Power-Differential Requirement

Claim: The virus can only install through power-imbalanced relationships.

Falsification: Documentation of virus installation through truly equal-power relationships.

Status: ✓ SUPPORTED — all cases show power imbalance (parent-child, early relationship positioning)

Prediction 3: Retuning Requires Resonant Signal

Claim: Recovery from resonance corruption requires exposure to genuine resonant signal, not just functional support or insight.

Falsification: Equal recovery outcomes with functional-only support vs. resonance-inclusive support.

Status: ○ PARTIALLY SUPPORTED — Subject B has insight but incomplete recovery while still in relationship

Prediction 4: Treatment Differential

Claim: Pathologies caused by internalized lies will respond better to lie-extraction therapies than to symptom management.

Falsification: Controlled trials showing no difference between identifying root lies versus pharmacological symptom suppression.

Status: Requires formal study

11.1 Framework Falsification Criteria

If You Observe These, This Framework Fails

The following observations would falsify core claims. We actively invite this data:

Observation What It Would Falsify
Stable ε₊/ε₊ dyads
Two inflaters in sustained pathological bond
Complementary error requirement — framework predicts these should be unstable (no supply source)
Virus installation without power imbalance
Pattern transmission through truly equal-power relationship
Power-differential requirement — framework claims imbalance is necessary for installation
Full recovery via functional support alone
Complete resonance restoration without any resonant witness
Two-channel model — framework claims resonance wounds require resonance healing
Narcissistic patterns without internalized lies
Full syndrome with no detectable false beliefs about self/connection
Lie-based etiology — would suggest purely neurological or other non-cognitive mechanism
Victims without complementary severance
Sustained abuse without ε₋ installation in victim
Dyad lock mechanism — framework predicts severance is required for stable exploitation
Resonant channel present in clinical NPD
Genuine aperture-to-aperture attunement capacity intact
Channel closure claim — framework predicts inflaters have functional but not resonant capacity

Note: Apparent exceptions require careful analysis. "Stable ε₊/ε₊" may actually be covert ε₋ misidentified. "Equal power" may have hidden asymmetry. "Functional-only recovery" may include unrecognized resonant contact. But if these observations hold under rigorous examination, the framework requires revision or abandonment.

PART IV: TREATMENT

Recovery and Prevention

12. Recovery as Geometric Restoration

Definition 12.1: Recovery

Recovery is the restoration of circumpunct integrity and proper nesting awareness:

\[ R: \varepsilon_{\pm}[\odot] \to \odot \]

12.1 Recovery Sequence

The Five-Stage Recovery Process
  1. Exit: Remove from active virus environment (necessary but not sufficient)
  2. Name: Identify the specific lies that were installed
  3. Witness: Receive resonant presence that contradicts the installed lies
  4. Restore: Rebuild boundary, field, and center integrity
  5. Reconnect: Establish proper nesting with authentic wholes

Critical: Leaving removes you from the person who collapsed you. But you might still be acting like a part—looking for a new whole to orbit, forgetting you were complete before them.

12.2 The Witness Requirement

Theorem 12.1

Recovery from resonance corruption requires a witness who provides a genuine signal to tune to:

This is why healing happens in relationship—you need center-channel contact to retune a center.

12.3 The Naming Operation

Theorem 12.2

A lie that has been named begins to lose power:

\[ \text{name}(L) \Rightarrow \text{power}(L) \downarrow \]

The lie can no longer operate in the dark, shaping behavior while remaining unaware. Recognition is the first step of recovery.

13. Breaking Intergenerational Patterns

13.1 The One Healthy Parent

Research Finding

One healthy, attuned parent can serve as a significant protective factor against the damage of the other parent's dysfunction. Children don't need perfect circumstances—they need one relationship where they are seen, heard, and safe.

13.2 What the Safe Parent Provides

13.3 The Two Systems Problem

When children navigate two different parenting systems:

System A (Narcissistic)

System B (Healthy)

Children respond differently to each system. This isn't character—it's adaptation.

13.4 Making Truth Work Better

The Truth-Safe System

The question isn't "how do I stop lying." The question is: What happens when truth is told?

14. Treatment Protocols

14.1 For Survivors

Modality Function
EMDR Process trauma without verbal retelling; break trauma bonds
Somatic Therapy Address body-stored trauma; restore boundary awareness
DBT Build emotional regulation and interpersonal skills
IFS (Internal Family Systems) Work with parts; restore center sovereignty

14.2 Protective Strategies

14.3 What Doesn't Work

Couples therapy with narcissists is actively contraindicated.

Narcissists weaponize therapy through:

The National Domestic Violence Hotline does not recommend couples therapy with abusers.

14.4 For Children in Two-System Households

Strategy How It Works
Respond, don't react Pause before responding from triggers; model regulation
Repair after rupture When you mess up, own it and reconnect—teaches accountability
Validate emotions first Acknowledge feelings before addressing behavior
Separate behavior from identity "You did something wrong" not "You are wrong"
Clear, communicated boundaries Child knows where the edges are before hitting them
Tell your child exactly this: "I love you because you are you. I want to see the real you, and if you lie, I just see a mask. It makes me sad when I see the mask, because I want to love the real you."