the differentiation – togetherness concept of counterbalancing life forces michael e. kerr, m.d
TRANSCRIPT
The Differentiation – Togetherness
Concept of Counterbalancing
Life Forces
Michael E. Kerr, M.D.
Relationships function as if they are governed
by two equally intense counterbalancing life forces.
Bowen family systems theory
Physicists hold that four fundamental forces exist in thephysical world: gravity, the strong force, the weak force,and the electromagnetic force. These forces govern theinteractions in physical systems that appear not to bereducible to more basic interactions.
Biologists distinguish their ideas about fundamental forcesin the living world in that they are the outcome of theprocess of natural selection.
Physicists hold that four fundamental forces exist in thephysical world: gravity, the strong force, the weak force,and the electromagnetic force. These forces govern theinteractions in physical systems that appear not to bereducible to more basic interactions.
Biologists distinguish their ideas about fundamental forcesin the living world in that they are the outcome of theprocess of natural selection.
Many Bowen theorists tend to think of the life forces ofindividuality and togetherness as extending beyond thehuman species to perhaps all other life forms. This viewis more akin to the way physicists think than biologists think.
Physicists hold that four fundamental forces exist in thephysical world: gravity, the strong force, the weak force,and the electromagnetic force. These forces govern theinteractions in physical systems that appear not to bereducible to more basic interactions.
Differentiation of self
“The world will always needdifferentiation of self.”
Murray Bowen, M.D.(Uttered on numerous occasions)
“Why hasn’t differentiationgone viral?”
David PalmerIslesboro, Maine
Differentiation (Bowen theory):
The ability to distinguish between
The intellectual process and the
Feeling process; Between objective
thinking and subjective thinking
Differentiation (Bowen theory):
The ability to distinguish between
The intellectual process and the
Feeling process; Between objective
thinking and subjective thinking
*A mind capable of observing itself*
Differentiation (Bowen theory):
The ability to distinguish between
Fact and feeling Enables people
to choose
Between them—
Differentiation (Bowen theory):
The ability to distinguish between
Fact and feeling Enables people
to choose
Between them—
When that is important to do
Differentiation (Bowen theory):
The degree of integration of self
Differentiation (Bowen theory):
The degree of integration of self
An integrated response is one
informed by both objective thinking
and feelings.
Differentiation (Bowen theory):
The degree of integration of self
An integrated response is one
informed by both objective thinking
and feelings.
It is not a merging of thinking and feeling,
but more like a cooperative team.
If there is one word that best characterizes
differentiation of self, it’s . . .
If there is one word that best characterizes
differentiation of self, it’s . . .
F l e x I b I l I t y
If there is one word that best characterizes
differentiation of self, it’s . . .
F l e x I b I l I t y
If there is one word that best characterizes
differentiation of self, it’s . . .
F l e x I b I l I t y
The less differentiation in a system, the less
flexibility it has
F l e x I b I l I t ya definition
F l e x I b I l I t ya definition
The more functionally interdependent the components
of a system and the more reactive they are to one
another, the more fixed (less flexible) the patterns of
interaction in the system.
The theory postulates two opposing basic life
forces. One is a built-in life growth force
toward individuality and the
differentiation of a separate “self,” and the
other an equally intense emotional closeness. – M.
Bowen (p.424 FTCP)
Processes Governing the Development of a “Self”
BIRTH
LATEADOLESCENCE
Life growth force
toward
individuality
and
the differentiation
of a
separate
“self”
Processes Governing the Development of a “Self”
BIRTH
LATEADOLESCENCE
Life growth force
toward
individuality
and
the differentiation
of a
separate
“self”
Easily observed in other primatesand other mammals
Processes Governing the Development of a “Self”
BIRTH
LATEADOLESCENCE
Life growth force
toward
individuality
and
the differentiation
of a
separate
“self”
Easily observed in other primatesand other mammals
Parents mustseparate from
the child as wellas the child from
the parents
Differentiation of self scale and themultigenerational transmission process
Emotional System:
- instinct- reproduction- autonomic nervous system- subjective states- forces governing relationship systems- in contact with cellular and somatic processes
Emotional System:
- instinct- reproduction- autonomic nervous system- subjective states- forces governing relationship systems- in contact with cellular and somatic processes
Feeling System:
- aspects of emotional functioning register on the cerebral cortex as feelings- a bridge that is in contact with superficial aspects of emotional system functioning and with the intellectual system
Emotional System:
- instinct- reproduction- autonomic nervous system- subjective states- forces governing relationship systems- in contact with cellular and somatic processes
Feeling System:
- aspects of emotional functioning register on the cerebral cortex as feelings- a bridge that is in contact with superficial aspects of emotional system functioning and with the intellectual system
Intellectual System:
- think, reason, and reflect- conscious control over automatic reactivity
“The emotional system isthe force that motivates; the relationship system isthe way it is expressed.”
Murray Bowen
Genetic Pedigree Chart
birtheducationoccupationhealthdeath
birtheducation
occupationhealthdeath
birthschoolsocialhealthdeath
The Family Diagram (Murray Bowen)
age age
ageage
birthschoolsocialhealthdeath
geography
marriage date
birtheducation
occupationhealthdeath
birthschoolsocialhealthdeath
The Family Diagram II
age
birtheducationoccupationhealthdeath
age age
birtheducationoccupationhealthdeath
birtheducation
occupationhealthdeathgeography
marriage date
geography
marriage date
birtheducation
occupationhealthdeath
birtheducationoccupationhealthdeath
birthschoolsocialhealthdeath
geography
marriage date
birtheducoccuphealthdeath
birtheduc
occuphealthdeath
age
age
age age age age
age
birtheducation
occupationhealthdeath
birthschoolsocialhealthdeath
The Family Diagram II
age
birtheducationoccupationhealthdeath
age age
birtheducationoccupationhealthdeath
birtheducation
occupationhealthdeathgeography
marriage date
geography
marriage date
birtheducation
occupationhealthdeath
birtheducationoccupationhealthdeath
birthschoolsocialhealthdeath
geography
marriage date
birtheducoccuphealthdeath
birtheduc
occuphealthdeath
age
age
age age age age
age
Assumption:variationslinked to
emotionalfunctioning;capacity to
adapt tostressors
The Family Diagram (Bowen)The Fact of Variation
The Family Diagram (Bowen)The Fact of Variation
Variation in overall life adjustment
Differentiation of self is roughly
equivalent to emotional maturity.
Emotional maturity is defined by the ability to control your emotions and take full responsibility for your life along with its opportunities and dramas. A large part of being emotionally mature is having the ability to handle anger, disappointment, guilt, resentment, fear, jealousy, grief, insecurity, and a myriad of other feelings appropriately. Emotional maturity is defined when you have the ability to experience these emotions and then quickly let them go. People who are immature seem to remain stuck in these negative emotions, unable to get past them.
One definition: http://www.heartspiritmind.com/about
The Family Diagram (Bowen)The Fact of Variation
Multigenerational emotional system (organism)
Increase and decrease inemotional functioning
over generations (continua) - BFST
Increase and decrease inemotional functioning
over generations (continua) - BFST
STRONGERWEAKER
Increase and decrease inemotional functioning
over generations (continua) - BFST
continuum
Increase and decrease inemotional functioning
over generations (continua) - BFST
Less functionallyinterdependent:-stable-cooperative-cohesive-productive-little polarization
Increase and decrease inemotional functioning
over generations (continua) - BFST
Less functionallyinterdependent:-stable-cooperative-cohesive-productive-little polarization
Very functionallyinterdependent:-unstable-uncooperative-tends to fragment-low productivity-much polarization-helplessness
Functional interdependence (emotional fusion):
The degree to which a person’s sense of well-being
and
functioning are in reaction to what others say and
don’t say or do and don’t do; i.e., in automatic
reaction to how others are functioning; reflects a lack
of “self.”
Defining -
Increase and decrease inemotional functioning
over generations (continua)
not random
Increase and decrease inemotional functioning
over generations (continua)
not random
“genetic-like”
Increase and decrease inemotional functioning
over generations (continua)
not random
“genetic-like”
RELATIONSHIP TRANSMISSION
Increase and decrease inemotional functioning
over generations (continua)
not random
“genetic-like”
RELATIONSHIP TRANSMISSION
(unresolved emotional attachment / emotional fusion)
Increase and decrease inemotional functioning
over generations (continua)
not random
“genetic-like”
RELATIONSHIP TRANSMISSION
(unresolved emotional attachment / emotional fusion)
(not explained by attachment theory)
Basics of Relationship Transmission
non-anxiousinvestment;more matureinteractions
Basics of Relationship Transmission
non-anxiousinvestment;more matureinteractions
anxiousinvestment;less matureinteractions
Basics of Relationship Transmission
non-anxiousinvestment;more matureinteractions
anxiousinvestment;less matureinteractions
Moregoal directed
More obligatoryrelationship oriented
Basics of Relationship Transmission
non-anxiousinvestment;more matureinteractions
anxiousinvestment;less matureinteractions
more“self”
less“self”
People are attracted to spouses at same basic level
People are attracted to spouses at same basic level
Thus, better differentiated spouses tend, on average,to raise somewhat more differentiated children
(with sibling variation)then do less differentiated spouses
(with sibling variation)
Differentiation of self depends on a growth force that
is anchored in a person’s biological systems, but the
basic levels developed by the members of each
generation are linked to a relationship system process.
Differentiation of self depends on a growth force that
is anchored in a person’s biological systems, but the
basic levels developed by the members of each
generation are linked to a relationship system process.
It is not a trait that is transmitted directly from a parent
to a child.
Differentiation of self depends on a growth force that
is anchored in a person’s biological systems, but the
basic levels developed by the members of each
generation are linked to a relationship system process.
It is not a trait that is transmitted directly from a parent
to a child. It develops in the context of multiple people.
Differentiation of self depends on a growth force that
is anchored in a person’s biological systems, but the
basic levels developed by the members of each
generation are linked to a relationship system process.
It is not a trait that is transmitted directly from a parent
to a child. It develops in the context of multiple people.
This raises the question of if—and how—natural selection
acts on differentiation.
Differentiation of self and evolution
BRAINSTEM
First appeared inthe fossil record500 mya.
Jaak Panksepp, Ph.D.Affective Neuroscience
The centromedial areas of the midbrain (are) an excellentcandidate for the basic integrative framework that provideda neural scaffolding for a primitive neurodynamic ofemotional SELF-awareness . . . this may have been achievedby the ability of the SELF-map to establish a characteristicresting tone within the somatic and visceral musculatures.The establishment of such a tone throughout the body andthe brain, along with a variety of reafferent processes, mayhave provided each organism with thefeeling of individuality—of “I-ness.”
Do animals have a spontaneous senseof themselves as active creatures inthe world?
Primary-process consciousness: thatineffable feeling of experiencingoneself as an active agent in theperceived events of the world.
A neural principle of self-representation emerged early inbrain evolution, and it became rooted first in brain areas aslow as those situated in ancient midbrain regions . . . Althoughthis neuropsychic function emerged early in brain evolution, itdid not remain primitive. It continued to evolve as brainsbecame increasingly encephalized, which allows us morebehavioral flexibility and the ability to have complex thoughtsand internal images.
Degrees of awareness (Panksepp):
Awareness of awareness – Humans
Self awareness – Great apes
Cognitive awareness – Primates (folded cortex)Affective awareness – Lisencephalic mammals (smooth cortex)
Reflexive behavior – Reptiles
Fish
con
tinu
um
Center for Brain and CognitionDirector
U.C. – San Diego
Center for Brain and CognitionDirector
U.C. – San Diego
“Humans are truly uniqueand special, not ‘just’another species of primate.”
“ . . . Sometime about 150,000 years ago there was anexplosive development of certain key brain structures andfunctions whose fortuitous combinations resulted in themental abilities that make us special . . .
“ . . . Sometime about 150,000 years ago there was anexplosive development of certain key brain structures andfunctions whose fortuitous combinations resulted in themental abilities that make us special . . . we went througha mental phase transition.
“ . . . Sometime about 150,000 years ago there was anexplosive development of certain key brain structures andfunctions whose fortuitous combinations resulted in themental abilities that make us special . . . we went througha mental phase transition. All the same old parts werethere, but they started working together in new ways thatwere far more than the sum of their parts.
“ . . . Sometime about 150,000 years ago there was anexplosive development of certain key brain structures andfunctions whose fortuitous combinations resulted in themental abilities that make us special . . . we went througha mental phase transition. All the same old parts werethere, but they started working together in new ways thatwere far more than the sum of their parts. This transitionbrought us things like full-fledged human language,artistic and religious sensibilities, and consciousness andself-awareness . . .
“ . . . Sometime about 150,000 years ago there was anexplosive development of certain key brain structures andfunctions whose fortuitous combinations resulted in themental abilities that make us special . . . we went througha mental phase transition. All the same old parts werethere, but they started working together in new ways thatwere far more than the sum of their parts. This transitionbrought us things like full-fledged human language,artistic and religious sensibilities, and consciousness andself-awareness . . . A handful of brain regions that havebeen so radically elaborated that at the functional (orcognitive) level they actually can be considered novel anduseful.”
Giacomo Rizzolatti
“Mirror neurons show how strong and deeply rootedis the bond that ties us to others.”
Discovered mirror neurons in the frontal and parietalcortex of the macaque monkey. (published 1996)
Humans, unlike monkeys, can both react to themovement and understand the goal of it.
The conscious mind emerges within the history of life regulation.
NeuroscientistAntonio Damasio, Ph.D.
The conscious mind emerges within the history of life regulation. Life regulation, a dynamic process known as homeostasis for short, begins in unicellular creatures, such as a bacterial cell or a simple amoeba, which do not have a brain but are capable of adaptive behavior.
The conscious mind emerges within the history of life regulation. Life regulation, a dynamic process known as homeostasis for short, begins in unicellular creatures, such as a bacterial cell or a simple amoeba, which do not have a brain but are capable of adaptive behavior. It progresses in individuals whose
behavior is managed by simple brains, as in the case withworms, and it continues to march in individuals whose brains generate both behavior and mind (insects and fish beingexamples).
The conscious mind emerges within the history of life regulation. Life regulation, a dynamic process known as homeostasis for short, begins in unicellular creatures, such as a bacterial cell or a simple amoeba, which do not have a brain but are capable of adaptive behavior. It progresses in individuals whose
behavior is managed by simple brains, as in the case withworms, and it continues to march in individuals whose brains generate both behavior and mind (insects and fish beingexamples). I am ready to believe that whenever brains begin to generate primordial feelings—and that could be quite early in evolutionary history—organisms acquire an early form of sentience.
The conscious mind emerges within the history of life regulation. Life regulation, a dynamic process known as homeostasis for short, begins in unicellular creatures, such as a bacterial cell or a simple amoeba, which do not have a brain but are capable of adaptive behavior. It progresses in individuals whose
behavior is managed by simple brains, as in the case withworms, and it continues to march in individuals whose brains generate both behavior and mind (insects and fish beingexamples). I am ready to believe that whenever brains begin to generate primordial feelings—and that could be quite early in evolutionary history—organisms acquire an early form of sentience. From there on, an organized self process could develop and be added to the mind, thereby providing the beginning of elaborate conscious minds.
The conscious mind emerges within the history of life regulation. Life regulation, a dynamic process known as homeostasis for short, begins in unicellular creatures, such as a bacterial cell or a simple amoeba, which do not have a brain but are capable of adaptive behavior. It progresses in individuals whose
behavior is managed by simple brains, as in the case withworms, and it continues to march in individuals whose brains generate both behavior and mind (insects and fish beingexamples). I am ready to believe that whenever brains begin to generate primordial feelings—and that could be quite early in evolutionary history—organisms acquire an early form of sentience. From there on, an organized self process could develop and be added to the mind, thereby providing the beginning of elaborate conscious minds. Reptiles are contenders for this distinction, for example; birds make even stronger contenders; and mammals get the award and then some.
Antonio Damasio, Ph.D.
I hypothesize that the first and most elementary product of the protoself is primordial feelings, which occur spontaneously and continuously whenever one is awake. They provide a direct experience of one’s own living body, wordless, unadorned, and connected to nothing but sheer existence.
Self Comes to Mind (2010)
Antonio Damasio, Ph.D.
I hypothesize that the first and most elementary product of the protoself is primordial feelings, which occur spontaneously and continuously whenever one is awake. They provide a direct experience of one’s own living body, wordless, unadorned, and connected to nothing but sheer existence.
These primordial feelings reflect the current state of the body along varied dimensions, for example, along the scale that registers from pleasure to pain, and they originate at the level of the brainstem rather than the cerebral cortex. All feelings of emotions are complex, musical variations on primordial feelings.
Self Comes to Mind (2010)
Antonio Damasio, Ph.D.
Feeling is at the heart of what being conscious is. Emotions, such as fear or joy, can allow rapid answers to problems facing an organism; one can respond without thinking; emotions trigger behaviors that can save us by avoiding threat or endorsing the pursuit of food or sex. We emote continuously: “We are feeling machines that think.”
Antonio Damasio, Ph.D.
Feeling is at the heart of what being conscious is. Emotions, such as fear or joy, can allow rapid answers to problems facing an organism; one can respond without thinking; emotions trigger behaviors that can save us by avoiding threat or endorsing the pursuit of food or sex. We emote continuously: “We are feeling machines that think.”
When we acquire minds, images can combine with emotions/feelings (the images of emotions). This makes it possible not to just respond with stock answers, animal responses, but also with reason, knowledge, and logic, thus to construct responses, therefore different than emotional ones. Human beings can have thinking with emotions, in parallel with emotions, and can even control the emotion. Despite thinking, emotions/feelings are still present.
Antonio Damasio, Ph.D.
Mind + Self = Consciousness
The intellectual system(as described by Bowen theory)
Self Comes to Mind (2010)
The self I envision as capable of rebelliousness is a recent development, on the order of thousands of years . . . That self draws on features of the human brain likely acquired in Pleistocene(2.588 mya to 12,000 ya)
“The primary task of every organism in nature is to
regulate itself in response to the environment.
John T. Cacioppo, Ph.D.Loneliness: Human Nature and the Need for Social Connection (2008)
“The primary task of every organism in nature is to
regulate itself in response to the environment. For social
animals, a highly significant part of that environment
is each other, and thus members of families, tribes, and
villages regulate themselves as individuals while also
influencing one another through what we have called
co-regulation.
John T. Cacioppo, Ph.D.Loneliness: Human Nature and the Need for Social Connection (2008)
“The primary task of every organism in nature is to
regulate itself in response to the environment. For social
animals, a highly significant part of that environment
is each other, and thus members of families, tribes, and
villages regulate themselves as individuals while also
influencing one another through what we have called
co-regulation. The system of checks and balances
involves physiology as well as behavior.”
John T. Cacioppo, Ph.D.Loneliness: Human Nature and the Need for Social Connection (2008)
other-regulate
self-regulate
other-regulate
self-regulate
other-regulate
self-regulate
other-regulate
self-regulate
other-regulate
self-regulate
other-regulate
self-regulate
other-regulate
self-regulate
other-regulate
self-regulate other-regulate
self-regulate
other-regulate
self-regulate
other-regulate
self-regulate
other-regulate
self-regulate other-regulate
self-regulateParallels to cellular interactions
Development of a code of civility/morality
Frans de WaalEmory University
“Our ancestors began to understand how topreserve peace and order--hence how to keeptheir group united against external threatswithout sacrificing legitimate individual interests.
Frans de WaalEmory University
“Our ancestors began to understand how topreserve peace and order--hence how to keeptheir group united against external threatswithout sacrificing legitimate individual interests.They came to judge behavior that systematicallyundermined the social fabric as “wrong” andbehavior that made the community worthwhileto live in as “right.”
Frans de WaalEmory University
“Our ancestors began to understand how topreserve peace and order--hence how to keeptheir group united against external threatswithout sacrificing legitimate individual interests.They came to judge behavior that systematicallyundermined the social fabric as “wrong” andbehavior that made the community worthwhileto live in as “right.” Then they kept an eye onone another. Conscious community concern isat the heart of human morality.”
Lawrence Kohlberg, Ph.D.(1927 – 1987)
How individuals justify
their actions if placed
in a moral dilemma
Stages of Moral Development
Lawrence Kohlberg, Ph.D.(1927 – 1987)
Stages of Moral Development
Much based insolid self
Much based inpseudo-self
Much based inno self
A moral code describes how people should behave.
A moral code describes how people should behave.
Bowen theory describes how people do behave.
Bowen theory does not say what people should do,but . . .
I would say that realization of a compelling
sense of responsibility to work at increasing
one’s basic level of differentiation emerges from
comprehending the degree of human emotional
interdependence and its positive and negative
impacts on human emotional functioning.
Bowen theory does not say what people should do,but . . .
I would say that realization of a compelling
sense of responsibility to work at increasing
one’s basic level of differentiation emerges from
comprehending the degree of human emotional
interdependence and its positive and negative
impacts on human emotional functioning.
Bowen theory does not say what people should do,but . . .
Primordial morality: don’t abandon? respect boundaries?
Relationships function as if they are governed bytwo equally intense counterbalancing life forces:
Individuality
“Derived from the driveto be a productive,
autonomous individual, asdefined by self ratherthan the dictates of
the group.”
Murray Bowen’s Societal Papers
INDIVIDUALITY
plead for principle
autonomy of self
staying on a predetermined
course despite anxiety
rights of the individual to
determine his own life course
How to make sense out of the following
Murray Bowen, M.D.(1913 – 1990)
“. . . a family leader with the courageto define self, who is as invested in thewelfare of the family as in self . . .”
Family Evaluation (pp. 342-343)
Murray Bowen, M.D.(1913 – 1990)
“. . . a family leader with the courageto define self, who is as invested in thewelfare of the family as in self . . .”
Family Evaluation (pp. 342-343)
“Differentiation is capable of a genuine concern forothers without expecting something in return.”
Murray Bowen, M.D.(1913 – 1990)
“. . . a family leader with the courageto define self, who is as invested in thewelfare of the family as in self . . .”
Family Evaluation (pp. 342-343)
“Differentiation is capable of a genuine concern forothers without expecting something in return.”
Do these statements conflict with the idea of twodistinct life forces: differentiation and togetherness?
Murray Bowen, M.D.(1913 – 1990)
“. . . a family leader with the courageto define self, who is as invested in thewelfare of the family as in self . . .”
Family Evaluation (pp. 342-343)
“Differentiation is capable of a genuine concern forothers without expecting something in return.”
Do these statements conflict with the idea of twodistinct life forces: differentiation and togetherness?
NO
Point #1:
Point #1: The higher a person’s basic level ofdifferentiation and associated discrimination of factand feeling, the more accurate his perception ofreality, of what is required to sustain harmony andcooperation in human relationships and what isnecessary to maintain an adaptive relationship betweenhuman beings and planet Earth.
Point #1: The higher a person’s basic level ofdifferentiation and associated discrimination of factand feeling, the more accurate his perception ofreality, of what is required to sustain harmony andcooperation in human relationships and what isnecessary to maintain an adaptive relationship betweenhuman beings and planet Earth. This perspectivebecomes the basis for developing and adhering toprinciples that guide us to treating others unselfishlyand living in harmony with nature.
Point #1: The higher a person’s basic level ofdifferentiation and associated discrimination of factand feeling, the more accurate his perception ofreality, of what is required to sustain harmony andcooperation in human relationships and what isnecessary to maintain an adaptive relationship betweenhuman beings and planet Earth. This perspectivebecomes the basis for developing and adhering toprinciples that guide us to treating others unselfishlyand living in harmony with nature. Principles anchoredin solid self and feeling-driven togetherness urges canfunction as a working team.
Point #2:
Point #2: The higher a person’s basic level of
differentiation, the less threatened he feels about the
needs, upsets, and expectations of others.
Point #2: The higher a person’s basic level of
differentiation, the less threatened he feels about the
needs, upsets, and expectations of others. He is clear
about his realistic dependence on others and vice
versa, and clear about his responsibilities to self and
others.
Point #2: The higher a person’s basic level of
differentiation, the less threatened he feels about the
needs, upsets, and expectations of others. He is clear
about his realistic dependence on others and vice
versa, and clear about his responsibilities to self and
others. This allows for expression of the feeling/
togetherness process with its associated investment in
the welfare of others along side an equal investment
in one’s own welfare.
Point #2: The higher a person’s basic level of
differentiation, the less threatened he feels about the
needs, upsets, and expectations of others. He is clear
about his realistic dependence on others and vice
versa, and clear about his responsibilities to self and
others. This allows for expression of the feeling/
togetherness process with its associated investment in
the welfare of others along side an equal investment
in one’s own welfare. A high level of “self” permits
action for oneself without being selfish and action for
others without being selfless.
Speculation on the Evolution of Differentiation of Self
Self-regulation Other-regulation
Individuality Togetherness
(DOS)Individuality Togetherness
P H
Y L O
G E
N Y
Speculation on the Evolution of Differentiation of Self
Self-regulation Other-regulation
Individuality Togetherness
(DOS)Individuality Togetherness
P H
Y L O
G E
N Y
Likely a gradual developmentin the phylogenetic line toHomo sapiens, but a strikingadvance in human beings.
Speculation on the Evolution of Differentiation of Self
Self-regulation Other-regulation
Individuality Togetherness
(DOS)Individuality Togetherness
P H
Y L O
G E
N Y
Likely a gradual developmentin the phylogenetic line toHomo sapiens, but a strikingadvance in human beings.
Many more cognitive elementsin Homo sapiens, stronglylinked to the feeling system.
Togetherness force / process
The theory postulates two opposing basic life forces.
One is a built-in life growth force toward individuality
and the differentiation of a separate “self,” and the
other an equally intense emotional
closeness. – M. Bowen (p.424 FTCP)
Relationships function as if they are governed bytwo equally intense counterbalancing life forces:
Individuality
“Derived from the driveto be a productive,
autonomous individual, asdefined by self ratherthan the dictates of
the group.”
Togetherness
“Derived from theuniversal need for love,
approval, emotionalcloseness, andagreement.”
oneness, sameness, agreement
Murray Bowen’s Societal Papers
INDIVIDUALITY TOGETHERNESS
harmony
togetherness
caring for others
more rights
humanitarian
responsive
sensitive
plead for principle
autonomy of self
staying on a predetermined
course despite anxiety
rights of the individual to
determine his own life course
“Even when we are alone, how often do we think with
pain and pleasure of what others think of us, or their
imagined approbation or disapprobation; and this all
follows from sympathy, a fundamental element of the
social instincts.
p.117 (Quote from Charles Darwin)
Darwin: Probable steps to capacity for team players:
Social instincts (safety in groups)
Reciprocity (golden rule)
Passionate concern with praise and blame of our fellow- men. (manifestation of the togetherness force)
The capacity to treat duties and principles as sacred, which he saw as part of our religious nature. (Can range from pseudoself to solid self)
Is the togetherness life force more akin to
theories in physics or theories in biology?
Is the togetherness life force more akin to
theories in physics or theories in biology?
Has a togetherness force guided life since its
earliest origins or is it an outcome of
convergent evolution? In other words, has it
been selected for in some species but not all
species based on the nature of the context in
which they lived?
Porifera (Sponge)
Multicellular organimsUnspecialized cells that can transform into other typesNo nervous, digestive, or circulatory systemsProteins involved in cell-cell and cell tissue interaction
Oldest metazoan phylumStill extant today.
Fit the loose critera of having self-regulatory andother-regulatory processes that counterbalance each other.
Are we looking at an ancient manifestation of thetogetherness force, albeit less sophisticated?
Ropalidia marginata
Raghavendra Gadagkar, Ph.D.
We-TheyRegression
• Aggressive bite• Attack (dom-sub)• Peck• Chase• Aggressive mutual atennation• Nibble• Crash• Falling fight• Avoiding• Soliciting• Mutual approach with withdrawal• Approach I: the other witdraws• Approach II: the other does not withdraw• Attennation• Mutual attennation Indian paper wasp
(primitively eusocial)
Are there yet to be defined natural laws
that govern both the sponges and the
social wasps or can it all be explained
by natural selection? In other words,
social species in different phylogenetic
lines would reflect convergent evolution.
Eusocial Naked mole rats
Solitary Cape mole rat
Kerr, Michael. 1998.” Bowen Theory and Evolutionary Theory.” Family Systems 4(2): 119-179.
Eusocial Naked mole rats
Solitary Cape mole ratKerr, Michael. 1998.” Bowen Theory and Evolutionary Theory.” Family Systems 4(2): 119-179.
Does the potential to be socialreside in a dormant state withinthe Cape mole-rat or wouldrandom mutations and selectionpressures be necessary. Couldspeciation involve epigenetic orsome other processes? More akinto a natural law?
INDIVIDUALITY TOGETHERNESS
The next two species are a fascinating puzzlement:switch hitters
James A. Shapiro, Ph.D.University of Chicago
Chromobacterium violaceum
“Bacteria have sophisticated signal transduction networks for integrating intercellular signals with other information to make decisions about gene expression and cellular differentiation.
James A. Shapiro, Ph.D.University of Chicago
Chromobacterium violaceum
“Bacteria have sophisticated signal transduction networks for integrating intercellular signals with other information to make decisions about gene expression and cellular differentiation. Bacteria benefit from multicellular organization by using cellular division of labor, accessing resources that cannot effectively be utilized by single cells, collectively defending against antagonists, and optimizingpopulation survival by differentiating into distinct cell types.”
Slime mold
Both bacteria and the slime mold retainthe ability to live relatively autonomouslives AND highly social lives that are akinto multicellular organisms.
Both bacteria and the slime mold retainthe ability to live relatively autonomouslives AND highly social lives that are akinto multicellular organisms.
Do all these types of adaptations have yetunidentified common denominators; i.e.,follow some sort of natural laws?Individuality and togetherness could be inthe mix on such an issue.
Both bacteria and the slime mold retainthe ability to live relatively autonomouslives AND highly social lives that are akinto multicellular organisms.
Do all these types of adaptations have yetunidentified common denominators; i.e.,follow some sort of natural laws?individuality and togetherness could be inthe mix on such an issue.
I think it is an open question.
Finally, my conundrum
Edward O. Wilson, Ph.D.(1929 - )
To play the game the human way, it was necessary
for the evolving populations to acquire an ever higher
degree of intelligence. They had to feel empathy for
others, to measure the emotions of friend and enemy
alike, to judge the intentions of all of them, and to
plan a strategy for personal social interactions. As a
result the human brain became highly intelligent and
intensely social. It had to build mental scenarios of
personal relationships rapidly, both short-term and
long-term. Its memories had to travel far into the past
to summon old scenarios and far into the future to
imagine the consequences of every relationship.
The pathway to human eusociality (p. 17):
Wilson’s controversial multilevel selection idea
The dilemma of good and evil was created by multilevelselection, in which individual selection and group selection act together on the same individual but largely in opposition to each other.
Wilson’s controversial multilevel selection idea
The dilemma of good and evil was created by multilevelselection, in which individual selection and group selection act together on the same individual but largely in opposition to each other. Individual selection is the result of competition for survival and reproduction among members of the same group.
Wilson’s controversial multilevel selection idea
The dilemma of good and evil was created by multilevelselection, in which individual selection and group selection act together on the same individual but largely in opposition to each other. Individual selection is the result of competition for survival and reproduction among members of the same group. It shapes instincts in each member that are fundamentally selfish with reference to other members.
Wilson’s controversial multilevel selection idea
The dilemma of good and evil was created by multilevelselection, in which individual selection and group selection act together on the same individual but largely in opposition to each other. Individual selection is the result of competition for survival and reproduction among members of the same group. It shapes instincts in each member that are fundamentally selfish with reference to other members. In contrast, group selection consists of competition between societies, through both direct conflict and differential competence in exploiting the environment.
Wilson’s controversial multilevel selection idea
The dilemma of good and evil was created by multilevelselection, in which individual selection and group selection act together on the same individual but largely in opposition to each other. Individual selection is the result of competition for survival and reproduction among members of the same group. It shapes instincts in each member that are fundamentally selfish with reference to other members. In contrast, group selection consists of competition between societies, through both direct conflict and differential competence in exploiting the environment. Group selection shapes instincts that tend to make individuals altruistic towards one another (but not towards members of other groups). (p. 241)
Wilson’s controversial multilevel selection idea
“We and They,” by Rudyard Kipling (first stanza)
Father, Mother, and Me
Sister and Auntie say
All people like us are We
And every one else is They
And They live over the sea
While We live over the way
But—would you believe it?—They look upon us We
As only a sort of They!
“Reasoning has evolved not to help us find truth, but to help
us engage in arguments, persuasion, and manipulation in the
context of discussions with others. Confirmation bias is a
built-in feature of the argumentative mind.”
Jonathan Haidt, Ph.D.
“Human nature is mostly selfish, but with a groupish
overlay that resulted from natural selection working at
multiple levels simultaneously.”
What Wilson does not address:
Wilson explains with multilevel natural selection how a selfish/selfless dichotomy could evolve in our species.
What Wilson does not address:
Wilson explains with multilevel natural selection how a selfish/selfless dichotomy could evolve in our species. He does not address how variation has come to exist in how individuals manage this dynamic.
What Wilson does not address:
Wilson explains with multilevel natural selection how a selfish/selfless dichotomy could evolve in our species. He does not address how variation has come to exist in how individuals manage this dynamic. Better differentiated people are more able to regulate both selfish and selfless urges than are poorly differentiated people.
What Wilson does not address:
Wilson explains with multilevel natural selection how
a selfish/selfless dichotomy could evolve in our
species. He does not address how variation has come
to exist in how individuals manage this dynamic.
Better differentiated people are more able to regulate
both selfish and selfless urges than are poorly
differentiated people. My view is that differentiation
of self results from an emergent process.
What Wilson does not address:
Wilson explains with multilevel natural selection how
a selfish/selfless dichotomy could evolve in our
species. He does not address how variation has come
to exist in how individuals manage this dynamic.
Better differentiated people are more able to regulate
both selfish and selfless urges than are poorly
differentiated people. My view is that differentiation
of self results from an emergent process. Natural
selection has presumably acted only on many of the
components that makes differentiation of self
possible.
What Wilson does not address:
Emergence:
Emergence:
. . . is generally defined by saying ‘the whole is greaterthan the sum of the parts’.
Emergence:
. . . is generally defined by saying ‘the whole is greaterthan the sum of the parts’.
The real world is full of the sorts of context dependent,non-linear interactions that tend to generate emergentproperties.
Emergence:
. . . is generally defined by saying ‘the whole is greaterthan the sum of the parts’.
The real world is full of the sorts of context dependent,non-linear interactions that tend to generate emergentproperties.
Emergent evolution is the hypothesis that, in the course ofevolution, some entirely new properties, such as mind andconsciousness, appear at certain critical points, usuallybecause of unpredictable rearrangement of the alreadyexisting entities.
The conundrum arises because the continuum of basic levels of differentiation for our species seems to be a bell-shaped curve. (This is an estimate based on clinical observation.)
My conundrum:
The conundrum arises because the continuum of basic levels of differentiation for our species seems to be a bell-shaped curve. (This is an estimate based on clinical observation.)
My conundrum:
“With increasing experience with a wide range of people,there is evidence that most of the population is below 50 onthe differentiation of self scale.” – Murray Bowen
The conundrum arises because the continuum of basic levels of differentiation for our species seems to be a bell-shaped curve. (This is an estimate based on clinical observation.)
My conundrum:
“With increasing experience with a wide range of people,there is evidence that most of the population is below 50 onthe differentiation of self scale.” – Murray Bowen
5075-100 hypothetical
My conundrum:
50 95
Perhaps gene-culture coevolution can shift the bell-shaped curve towards the right, indicating a majority of the humanpopulation being over 50 on the differentiation of self scale,some even at 95.
Perhaps gene-culture coevolution can shift the bell-shaped curve towards the right, indicating a majority of the humanpopulation being over 50 on the differentiation of self scale,some even at 95.
My conundrum:
50 95
**However, I predict that the bell-shaped curve ofdistribution will likely continue to exist.
This is because, as described earlier, every
multigenerational family produces a range of people in
each generation at many points along the continuum
or scale of differentiation based on the outcome of a
relationship system process. This system process may
be grounded in life forces, natural laws, that natural
selection does not affect.
My conundrum:
Summary: fundamental aspects of human nature
Powerful need foremotional closeness
Allergic to toomuch of it
Powerful need foremotional closeness
Allergic to toomuch of it
Makes a two-person system inherently unstable
Powerful need foremotional closeness
Allergic to toomuch of it
Makes a two-person system inherently unstable
“Solved” with the triangle: two insiders andan outsider. (We-They)
Powerful need foremotional closeness
Allergic to toomuch of it
Makes a two-person system inherently unstable
“Solved” with the triangle: two insiders andan outsider. (We-They)
The higher the basic levels of differentiation,the more adaptive people are to managing
this instinctually-rooted dilemma.
Powerful need foremotional closeness
Allergic to toomuch of it
Makes a two-person system inherently unstable
“Solved” with the triangle: two insiders andan outsider. (We-They)
The higher the basic levels of differentiation,the more adaptive people are in managing
this instinctually-rooted dilemma.
The lower the basic levels of differentiation,the greater the likelihood of polarization,
conflict, and clinical dysfunction.
“The more an individual’s team affiliation
resonated for them, the less empathy they
were likely to express for members of the
rival team.”
Emile Bruneau, Ph.D.Neuroscientist, M.I.T.
“Why hasn’t differentiationgone viral?”
“Why hasn’t differentiationgone viral?”
Togetherness trumpsindividuality.
“Why hasn’t differentiationgone viral?”
Togetherness trumpsindividuality.
I guess we’re allsituational psychopaths
“Why hasn’t differentiationgone viral?”
“Why hasn’t differentiationgone viral?”
Another way of saying it:
“Why hasn’t differentiationgone viral?”
Another way of saying it:
Differentiation iscounter-intuitive
Summary of Major Points
Summary of Major Points
Differentiation of self and togetherness forces are distinct, but at their best constitute a working team.
Summary of Major Points
Differentiation of self and togetherness forces are distinct, but at their best constitute a working team. Bowen theory may be tapping into natural laws that govern all forms of life.
Summary of Major Points
Differentiation of self and togetherness forces are distinct, but at their best constitute a working team. Bowen theory may be tapping into natural laws that govern all forms of life. Differentiation of self is on a continuum with individuality and is distinct from the togetherness process.
Summary of Major Points
Differentiation of self and togetherness forces are distinct, but at their best constitute a working team. Bowen theory may be tapping into natural laws that govern all forms of life. Differentiation of self is on a continuum with individuality and is distinct from the togetherness process. Differentiation is not a trait that a parent transmits directly to an offspring, but develops “anew” in each generation in the context of multiple people.
Summary of Major Points
Differentiation of self and togetherness forces are distinct, but at their best constitute a working team. Bowen theory may be tapping into natural laws that govern all forms of life. Differentiation of self is on a continuum with individuality and is distinct from the togetherness process. Differentiation is not a trait that a parent transmits directly to an offspring, but develops “anew” in each generation in the context of multiple people. Both individuality and togetherness have ancient roots.
Summary of Major Points
Differentiation of self and togetherness forces are distinct, but at their best constitute a working team. Bowen theory may be tapping into natural laws that govern all forms of life. Differentiation of self is on a continuum with individuality and is distinct from the togetherness process. Differentiation is not a trait that a parent transmits directly to an offspring, but develops “anew” in each generation in the context of multiple people. Both individuality and togetherness have ancient roots. Human differentiation of self is unique compared to other species with the addition of guiding principles and other new brain functions.
Summary of Major Points
Differentiation of self and togetherness forces are distinct, but at their best constitute a working team. Bowen theory may be tapping into natural laws that govern all forms of life. Differentiation of self is on a continuum with individuality and is distinct from the togetherness process. Differentiation is not a trait that a parent transmits directly to an offspring, but develops “anew” in each generation in the context of multiple people. Both individuality and togetherness have ancient roots. Human differentiation of self is unique compared to other species with the addition of guiding principles and other new brain functions. Differentiation of self is an emergent process that gene- culture coevolution could potentially influence in the future.
Addendum: increasing solid self
“It’s possible to decoupleemotion from thinking!”
David PalmerIslesboro, Maine
One tried and true pathway:
One tried and true pathway:
Serious engagement with Bowen theory.
One tried and true pathway:
Serious engagement with Bowen theory.Objectivity about the emotional process in one’s own life.
One tried and true pathway:
Serious engagement with Bowen theory.Objectivity about the emotional process in one’s own life.Consequent emotional neutrality: beyond blame.
One tried and true pathway:
Serious engagement with Bowen theory.Objectivity about the emotional process in one’s own life.Consequent emotional neutrality: beyond blame.Action for self that does not disrupt relationships.
One tried and true pathway:
Serious engagement with Bowen theory.Objectivity about the emotional process in one’s own life.Consequent emotional neutrality: beyond blame.Action for self that does not disrupt relationships.Repeating this many times in important relationships.
One tried and true pathway:
Serious engagement with Bowen theory.Objectivity about the emotional process in one’s own life.Consequent emotional neutrality: beyond blame.Action for self that does not disrupt relationships.Repeating this many times in important relationships.
Emotions appear to be coupled to most of our viewpoints andopinions.
One tried and true pathway:
Serious engagement with Bowen theory.Objectivity about the emotional process in one’s own life.Consequent emotional neutrality: beyond blame.Action for self that does not disrupt relationships.Repeating this many times in important relationships.
Emotions appear to be coupled to most of our viewpoints andopinions. This makes it difficult to think in new ways and thuschange one’s automatic reactions and behaviors.
One tried and true pathway:
Serious engagement with Bowen theory.Objectivity about the emotional process in one’s own life.Consequent emotional neutrality: beyond blame.Action for self that does not disrupt relationships.Repeating this many times in important relationships.
Emotions appear to be coupled to most of our viewpoints andopinions. This makes it difficult to think in new ways and thuschange one’s automatic reactions and behaviors. Exposure tonatural systems thinking offers an alternative lens for examiningrelationship systems.
One tried and true pathway:
Serious engagement with Bowen theory.Objectivity about the emotional process in one’s own life.Consequent emotional neutrality: beyond blame.Action for self that does not disrupt relationships.Repeating this many times in important relationships.
Emotions appear to be coupled to most of our viewpoints andopinions. This makes it difficult to think in new ways and thuschange one’s automatic reactions and behaviors. Exposure tonatural systems thinking offers an alternative lens for examiningrelationship systems. This provides the possibility for decouplingemotion from thinking/perception, but a person must make newobservations that enable a new understanding of what is unfolding.