Being a dignified and law-abiding citizen, I take respective stances on the social scene. Dealing and interacting with individuals of a multitude of ethnicities, faiths and political ideology. But what draws the line between a dignified citizen and a self-indulgent narcissist is the very prowess they exhibit socially. The narcissist having composed a grandiose portrayal of themselves on the personal platform and on the social front. The citizen having approached every instance with at least a kernel of humility, chastity and modesty. Society thrives with an expansive population growth and a substantial density of individuals. Interaction is indiscriminate; it is a critical facet of citizenship, concerning the likes of the very young and the elderly. From the very instance one leaves the sanctuary of their home or dwelling, they are bombarded with cliché remarks of salutation from their fellow citizen. I, as an individual of rigor and dignity instigate and provoke such mentioning. A gleeful attitude is indicative of a promising and courteous psyche, whereas one exhibiting that of a manipulative and gluttonous gaze is promising of an undesirable encounter. Instigating a conversation starter is one phase, mastering the art of speech and articulation is another. One’s individual dexterity and capacity to compose a logically sound frequency of speech is profound to a colossal extent. The quality and ambiguity of vocabulary is critical, for the selection of individual terms evoke individual emotional and psychological reactions. Citizens that repeatedly apply colloquialism into their social linguistics are prone to immediate rebuttal by their fellow man, whereas one that utilises a strategic arsenal of terminology is endowed with respect and fortitude by their fellow citizen. The narcissist tends to be of a professional orientation, thus their articulation can be dubbed as strategic. The addition of voluntary gestures adds to the momentum and energy of the encounter for the citizen aims and is determined to disseminate their passion and enthusiasm. The narcissist displays his majesty and authority, evoking inferiority in the consciousness mind of the individual that is interacting with him. The citizen strives to conquer common ground and propagate vibes of equality, equity and egalitarianism. These two adverse psyches are the pinnacle of social interaction, a pair of chief classes that consume every member of society. But is it viable to restrict the mechanics of the social scene to physical and emotional facets, while disregarding the fundamentals? For the sake of simplicity, it becomes affirmative, but when acknowledging the interconnections the facets of the social scene make, one would be foolish to indulge in the elementary to try to achieve a concise observation. This doesn’t go to say that social engagement is a philosophical concept, just as my other conjectures, rather a faction of human nature. The need to interact, share and assimilate ideas is at the cutting edge, rather than a conundrum probed by an eminent figure in modern philosophy. The division between narcissist and citizen emulated in every way, shape and form on the social scene.