Saturday, December 12, 2009

The Obama Doctrine

I have read and reread President Obama’s lecture to the Nobel Prize committee and distinguished guests upon his award of the Peace Prize.  I find it to be a powerful and important statement, not just of American foreign policy under this President, but of how we as humans might learn to address and resolve conflicts.

I have been working on an essay about the principles of nonviolence Martin Luther King used in his efforts on behalf of civil rights in America so I was especially sensitive to Obama’s references. To have a President, especially one who is increasing the number of troops in Afghanistan, cite King (and Gandhi) as models to follow and to do so in a way that is coherent and carefully considered illuminates the reasons Obama got the award. That he received it saying so many things that so many of his liberal supporters find disagreeable makes it only more remarkable.

I myself didn’t agree with everything he had to say. But my disagreement has mostly to do with his use of the term nonviolence in ways that, while consistent with popular usage, limits the meaning to “a set of tactics appropriate to actions taken by oppressed persons addressing grievances against an authority which is morally sensitive.”  If we limit the term in that way then he is right, it wouldn’t have worked against the Nazis and it won’t work with al Qaeda.

But if we are looking not so much at the tactics as at the philosophy that undergirds it, and think more creatively about how conflicts can be resolved, then we discover some important principles that unite Nonviolence and the Obama Doctrine. Among them:

  • We are all connected in a great web of care and concern. What affects one of us affects all of us.
  • Passivity or patience in the face of oppression is not only an abandonment of our moral responsibility but is also an invitation to greater violence.
  • The road to peace is through a process of relationship building with those with whom we disagree.
  • Justice is not simply about the rule of law but is also about the equitable distribution of rights and resources, but such equity is not possible without the rule of law.
  • We cannot allow the fact that others abandon righteous behavior to allow us to depart from the values we hold.

These are all examples of the kinds of principles which I hope to celebrate and promote through the promulgation of Creative Conflict Resolution and through Just Conflict.  I welcome your comments.

Friday, November 20, 2009

Why I wrote "Just Conflict"

In November of 1986 I flew back to St. Louis from El Salvador. High above the clouds as I peered out the window I had a startling revelation.

I had been in El Salvador as part of an American delegation observing the civil war that was tearing the country apart. The US government was supporting the Salvadoran government whose troops were terrorizing anyone they suspected of being friendly with the rebels. One day earlier I sat in a conference room in San Salvador and heard a woman give an eyewitness account of her pregnant friend being disemboweled by a government soldier while she watched horrified and powerless from the shelter of the surrounding woods.

Looking out the window remembering her vivid account I thought to myself, “How can anyone do something like that.”

That is just the sort of statement we often make to ourselves when confronted with the horrific events of our lives. Then I heard again what I had thought, this time not as a statement, but as a question. “What is going on with someone who chooses to inflict suffering on another deliberately?” I realized that I know the answer to that question. Further, I realized the question itself is frightening. We are not curious about the intra-psychic dynamics of those who behave in such obviously harmful ways. We choose instead to believe that they cannot be understood.

At the time I was the Clinical Director of a program in St. Louis called RAVEN and was doing contract work for the Child Sexual Abuse Treatment Program of the Masters and Johnson Institute. RAVEN was then a men’s counseling collective which engaged in several programs for social change, among them doing intervention with men who batter and men who commit sexual assault.

The program at Masters and Johnson was targeted at families in which a parent (the father) had sexually abused a child and the non-offending parent (the mother) had hopes of reunifying the family. The question we were exploring was, “What will each part of the family system have to do such that we can be confident that there will not be a re-offense and that we have established such a momentum for healing that we are confident about the children’s long term wellbeing.” My job was to do therapy individually and in a group with the fathers. I was thus doing extensive clinical work with men who batter their wives and sexually abuse their own children.

As I looked out the window at the cloud cover over Mexico it became clear to me that the government soldiers were not all that different from the men I work with every day. Furthermore it became clear to me that the belief that we can’t know why these people do these things comes not from our inability to understand them but from our unwillingness to face our own horror when we do.

As I work with men who batter and with men who sexually abuse, I commonly come face to face with colleagues who try to convince me that what I am doing can’t possibly be effective. I have heard advocates for battered women assert that we shouldn’t do intervention with the men because they won’t change and we are only building unfounded hopes in their partners when we try. I have witnessed administrators of State programs for treatment of sex offenders dismiss therapists from the list of approved providers because those providers were too confident that the men they work with can heal. In effect I was told, “If you think you can help these men heal you are being naïve and they are fooling you.”

Each of us wants to know that we are good. And we also know there are people who do bad things. It is more comfortable for us when we can believe that we are not like them. If we come to know them too well, we lose the ability to see them as essentially different from ourselves. If we can comfortably assert that they cannot change, then we don’t have to understand them so deeply that we begin to identify with them. Nevertheless, they are not so different from us.

So, as I gazed out the window of the plane, I was aware that I knew why these guys did what they did and I could see that neither I nor anyone else is as different from them as we would like. Seeing that we all do things which are harmful to others and especially that we all do things that harm those we care about the most can help us to heal ourselves, our relationships, and those we care about. But we will not address a problem we say we do not have.

In the 23 years since that realization I have worked to know what goes on within us as we make choices which are abusive to others and to discover ways to talk about those interior dynamics such that anyone can understand them. My challenge was to make it simple enough that the men in my care could appreciate and use the perspectives I was offering to alter their behavior when they choose to harm those they say they love the most.

Both the harm and the healing arise out of how we address conflict. This is the clearest context in which to look at abilities and qualities for building healthy relationships. Time and time again it has been brought home to me that everyone and every relationship can benefit from greater self-awareness, a larger ability to care for ourselves, and a willingness to be fully accountable. If we are to create relationships which are just, we must use tools for addressing conflict which move us all into ways of being that construct what everyone needs. That is both the premise and the goal of Just Conflict.

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

“Just Conflict” is now available

A little before six this evening UPS delivered 100 copies of my book.  I went on Amazon and discovered that they have it listed.  There is no image yet and they admit it isn’t in stock, but you can order it.  I am discounting the price if you want to come by for one and I will be taking them to the IFS Conference this weekend.

I will give a copy to anyone who will read the whole thing and write a review.  You can pan it if you want, but I want a commitment to read and write about it.  I will post your review on the web site, Just Conflict, and will invite you to post it to Amazon as well.

Now I get to promote the thing.  I will be sending copies to anyone I think will want to interview me publically or will want to publish a review.  I welcome your suggestions.

Saturday, September 19, 2009

Getting Others to Give Us What We Need

We are hurt when we don’t get what we need. It is healthy to act in ways that move us toward what we need. We use our best cognitive maps to guide us in figuring out what we can do to get what we need. Sometimes we use a poor map and, not only don’t we get what we need, we actually create the opposite of what we need. Here we will examine a very common way this happens.

One of Abraham Maslow’s most enduring contributions was his map for a hierarchy of needs. He pointed out that there are different kinds of needs and that we have to have met certain lower order needs before we can fully establish the higher order ones. We have to have shelter and food before we can fully experience self-esteem and affiliation with others.

When it comes to the lower order needs of things like food, water, clothing, etc. we can get what we need by having others give them to us. If I am hungry and you have a sandwich and I can prevail on you to give me half, then you have met my need. I was able to get you to meet my need. I may come to believe that I get my needs met by getting others to change how they treat me.

But the higher order needs are different. They are not physical objects which we can receive or be denied; they are qualities which are created out of the relationships we create with others.

If, as a child, I had parents who were curious about what was going on with me, I was repeatedly invited to discover my own feelings so I could tell them. I was thus taught how to attend to myself by the fact that they gave me attention. I will then be able to grow to adulthood as someone who can attend to my Self. I enjoy the attention of others, but I don’t need it.

On the other hand, if my parents didn’t pay attention to me, I did not learn to attend to myself, and I grew to adulthood as someone who doesn’t know how to attend to my Self. I will need to get attention from others since I don’t know how to create it for myself. I will be needy for attention.

When others attend to me I will sense a great relief as those needs are met. But as soon as the light of the other’s attention is focused somewhere else, I will be plunged into darkness, will be hurt and angry at the other for leaving me bereft, and will go in search of someone who will attend to me.

Suppose then I find someone who gives me attention and affection. We build a stable relationship and enjoy the comfort and security we build for each other. When at some point I do something which disappoints or hurts my beloved and she responds by withdrawing, I will be afraid and angry. I may demand that my beloved return to being my source for attention and affection. She gave it to me before. I can’t create it on my own. I have to get her to give it to me.

The problem here is that the very things I may do to try to create what I need are most likely to get me the opposite. Since my cognitive map for our relationship and my way of getting my needs met is that she is my source for affection and she has met that need in the past and could meet that need now, I will have to demand that she return to meeting my needs.

But affection is not a sandwich. This is not something she carries around in her pocket and can choose to share or not. Affection is a quality which is created in the relationship by the choices we each make. For me to get what I need, I will have to repair the relationship we both want. The more I blame her for not being who I believe I have a right to insist she be, the farther I will move from the relationship I need. It is not that I can’t get what I need. It is that she can’t give it to me. I will have to create it for my Self. And that may take learning some skills as an adult that I didn’t learn as a child.

    Thursday, September 03, 2009

    Self Worth

    We all have intrinsic worth. All of creation is a manifestation of the energy and the intelligence of Spirit, of God. Everything has value. You have value. You know this and you act on your own behalf. You don’t act on your own behalf as well as you would like, but then, who does. I certainly don’t. We struggle with knowing and not knowing our own value.

    We have nothing to do that is more important than taking care of ourselves, but we don’t. So then the question is not, “do I have value?” but “why do I devalue myself?”

    If something of no worth gets damaged it is no big deal. If something we value very much gets damaged it causes us anguish. Thus we can protect ourselves from anguish by making sure the things we value aren’t harmed. If we can’t protect things from harm, then all we can do is to not value them. The devaluation of ourselves comes from our awareness that we can’t protect ourselves from harm. We will protect our feelings by not caring.

    Except that we do care. We each know that we have value. So we construct a barrier between our caring and our awareness. We each have a part named “I don’t care” who simply says, “whatever” whenever hurtful things happen so that we don’t hurt. We can’t allow ourselves to value ourselves because then the hurt would be too great.

    It is hard to talk “I don’t care” out of devaluing ourselves because then we would be flooded with hurt and we are afraid we will be overwhelmed. We are afraid the hurt would never stop. The paradox here is that, while the hurt will never stop, the hurt becomes less overwhelming when we allow ourselves to feel it. It is the flinch, the constriction in the face of the hurt which causes us to tense up, and so the blow does more harm. When we learn to trust that “it is just a feeling” and we can feel our way through it, then we can relax and, like the drunk in the car crash, fare better by being limp.

    Once we know that we are resilient and that this hurt will not harm us, and might even make us stronger, then we can allow ourselves to more and more fully know our own worth, our own value. It is our confidence in our own competence to care for ourselves emotionally that allows us ultimately to know fully how beloved we are.

    Monday, July 20, 2009

    Patterns of Conflict in Significant Relationships

    You have probably had times in your most significant relationships when a familiar conflict recurs and you think to yourself, “Here we go again.” The shoes are in the middle of the floor again. The toilet seat is up again. The car is on empty, the trash is overflowing, and the refrigerator door is open…again.

    Conflicts arise in every relationship and they matter the most in our most significant relationships. Events we would hardly even notice in a relationship with someone who is not important to us become monumental when they arise over and over again in the context of relationships with people who are important to us. While these conflicts can be very aggravating, they are also rich opportunities for creativity and transformation.

    As you spend five minutes every day doing the Bothers Me Log (you have started that haven’t you?), you will begin to notice how the same things arise day after day. The best issues to work on tend to be the little things that happen over and over again. We can also get great satisfaction from addressing the really big events that happen only occasionally, but those tend to be more difficult to address so it helps to start with small things that happen often. That way we get more chances to practice.

    I want to give an example of how this can work, but let me first offer a very helpful turn of phrase and a shift in perspective that is given to us by Robert Kegan and Lisa Laskow Lahey in their book, How the Way we Talk can Change the Way we Work. They invite their readers to develop an awareness of the language of complaint. They invite readers to notice what is bothersome in the ways they function together as a group. They lead the readers through a process of looking at the values they hold and the behaviors they choose and urge them to sit with the tension of the competing commitments and to resist the urge to solve the conflict. Instead they invite us to “let the conflicts solve us.”

    Rather than solving the conflict, instead of trying to get others or the system to change, can we let the conflict solve us? Can we see how the conflict invites us to know ourselves better, to identify what it is we are actually committed to, to see the assumptions we are making that may be constructing the problem we are having, and then to alter ourselves, rather than insisting that those around us change.

    Eddie is a guy who was in one of my groups many years ago. He had been ordered out of his own home as a consequence of his abuse of his daughter, but he was steadfast in his wish to restore his marriage and his family. In order to minimize his own expenses so as to continue to financially support his wife and children, he moved back in with his parents.

    Eddie was earnest and honest and hard working, but not very psychologically minded. He had no sense of what was going on with him when he sexually abused his daughter. He insisted that he had not been abused himself as a child. He was able to recover a memory of feeling abused by the school system when they put him into a program with mentally retarded kids when he was found to be severely dyslexic. He did remember when he was about three and the emergency room nurse asked him if the gash on his head was from falling down the stairs as his father had said. Not realizing that he was supposed to lie, he corrected the report explaining that his dad had thrown him against a radiator. But he was quite certain that he had never been sexually abused. He had seen his dad sexually abuse his mother and his sister, but he had never been sexually abused himself.

    Eddie had a difficult time identifying any of his feelings. This was most evident around his anger. Many people suffer from being too angry, that is they tend to act out anger over even small things that happen. Eddie was one of those people who don’t have enough access to their anger. Some people are so unaware of anger that they are easily taken advantage of. This was a problem for Eddie.

    Thus it was quite a breakthrough when Eddie came to his Monday evening group and announced that he was angry. I was delighted. “So, Eddie, what are you angry about?”

    “It is my dad. He just doesn’t treat me right.”

    “What happened?”

    “It was yesterday morning, Sunday morning, and I was in the kitchen fixing my breakfast, I was frying some eggs, and just as I was about to use the spatula to get the eggs out of the pan, my dad comes in, it is a small kitchen, and as I get the spatula under the eggs, he pushes me to the side to get to the coffee pot and the eggs fly across the room and onto the floor.”

    “Wow, so what happened?”

    “He poured his coffee and went into the breakfast nook to read the paper.”

    “No, I mean what did you do?”

    “I cleaned up the eggs.”

    “Did you say anything to him?”

    “No, that wouldn’t do any good. He isn’t going to change.”

    “Right, well, whether he changes or not, you can’t change him… but didn’t you feel like telling him off or anything?”

    “No, that wouldn’t do any good, he isn’t going to change.”

    In the discussion that followed we affirmed that we were not going to be able to change his dad but that there are things that he needs that he isn’t getting when these things happen. Eddie was easily able to see that his dad always treats him this way and that it hurts his self-esteem. He was able to frame the issue in terms of self-respect. He was not getting the respect that he wanted from his dad. What might he be able to do that would create for himself the respect that he needed. What could he do which would create a greater sense of self-respect?

    We discussed what he might be able to do differently whenever these events come up and to set up a three part response to these events in his relationship with his dad. They were;

    1. “Dad when you (in this case) push me and my breakfast ends up on the floor and you don’t acknowledge responsibility for what you have done, [event]
    2. I feel as though you don’t have respect for me and are not interested in being accountable for how you affect me, [effect] and
    3. I wish we had a relationship in which we treated each other respectfully.” [need]

    Eddie agreed that it might feel good to say this to his dad, but he had to remind us again that his dad wasn’t going to change. I assured Eddie that we weren’t trying to change his dad but were supporting Eddie in being different in a way that created the respect that he was missing. He agreed to try this different way of being in the coming week whenever his dad treated him in a manner that didn’t feel respectful. He allowed as how that was just about any time he and his dad were in the same room.

    The next week when Eddie checked in at the group session he reported that,

    “It didn’t work.”

    “How do you know it didn’t work?” I asked.

    “My dad isn’t going to change.”

    “No, he isn’t going to change and we aren’t going to change him. What happened?”

    “I was sitting in the living room reading the newspaper and he came in and took it right out of my hands. I said to him, ‘When I am reading the newspaper and you take it from me without saying anything to me it feels like you don’t have any respect for me and I want to have a relationship where we treat each other with respect.’”

    “Excellent! So what happened?”

    “He looked at me like I had two heads and then sat down and read the newspaper.”

    “Okay, but what happened with you?”

    Eddie had to stop and think about this for a minute. He was not yet accustomed to paying attention to his own feelings at this point and he had to do make some space in his awareness.

    “Well, actually, now that I think about it, it felt kind of good. Even though my dad looked at me like I had two heads, he looked at me. He doesn’t normally do that. And another thing, it felt good to hear myself stand up to him.”

    We talked some more about how it felt to him and then he committed to continue to respond to his dad this way.

    Here was a pattern of conflict—Dad treating him disrespectfully—in a significant relationship which Eddie had set with long enough to let it begin to solve him. He had a new way of being in the relationship which could begin to construct what he needed without depending on or insisting that the other change.

    Over the course of the next several months Eddie continued to practice this speech to his dad whenever his dad treated him in a manner that did not feel respectful. Over the months Eddie got better and better at delivering the speech and felt stronger about himself for being able to present his wishes clearly. But he also began to notice a shift in his dad. From time to time his dad would start to do something disrespectful and then stop himself, as if he didn’t want to hear the speech. His dad’s behavior was changing, not because he changed his dad, but because he changed his relationship to his dad and his dad had to adjust to the change.

    Eddie was able to identify a pattern of conflict in a significant relationship and to be able to fashion a plan for how he wanted to be different whenever the pattern emerged. The goal of the plan was to change the way Eddie acted such that he would be responsible for creating what he needed without expecting or depending upon the other to change.

    Discipline #9: A Framework for Creative Conflict Resolution

    We are ready now to look at the central discipline of Creative Conflict Resolution. This is essentially a map of what Eddie was able to do with his dad. It is also the ninth discipline.

    Significant Relationships

    As we have already mentioned, we are awash in conflict. We have far too many conflicts to be able to respond to all of them with the care that assertiveness demands. We will have to limit our field just a bit. So we will want to focus especially on those relationships which are most significant.

    Pattern of Conflict

    Still, within our most significant relationships there are very many conflicts. As we do the Bothers Me Log we will discover to what degree it is the same conflict over and over, though perhaps in somewhat different forms.

    As Eddie was able to discover with his dad, when he isolated a particular pattern of conflict, he was able to design a specific intervention which he could use every time it came up. Sure, there were minor modifications for each event, but the heavy lifting of figuring out what to do to be assertive was already in place. That is, all he had to do was to name the event, know how it affected him, and what he needed; and then act in a manner which moved him toward what he needed.

    Event

    Be able to name the event in such a way that everyone who is a party to it can agree that this is happening.

    Effect

    Be able to be as clear as possible how this event and the pattern of events of which it is a part affect you.

    Need

    Be able to identify the quality which is missing when this pattern of events occurs.

    [You will of course recognize these three items (event, effect, and need) as the steps to being assertive.]

    Action

    And then, and only then, act in a manner which moves you toward what you need without expecting or depending on the other to change.

    Sunday, June 07, 2009

    Organizational Consultation

    Conflict is a natural and normal aspect of any relationship, especially significant relationships. While our most significant relationships are usually our most intimate ones, we can care very deeply about what happens at work and in community organizations. Indeed, we often spend more time at work than at home.

    The perspectives and tools of Creative Conflict Resolution (which are elucidated in the portion of this site dedicated to the book Just Conflict) are just as applicable to corporations and faith communities as they are to small groups like families. While the resources the Center has available for organizations are tailor made for the situation in question, they tend to fall into two types:

    • training in conflict resolution, and
    • facilitation of efforts to address a specific conflict.

    In many interventions a combination of these two roles may be necessary.

    Training in Conflict Resolution

    In the long run it is more effective to teach someone to fish than it is to give them a fish. Conflicts are arising all of the time in all of our relationships and the better a community is at naming, addressing, and resolving whatever conflicts may arise, the more creative will be the collective action of the community. We all resolve conflict on a daily basis, but when a particularly big conflict arises we find ourselves feeling uncertain about our ability to resolve it. Indeed, we may decide that this is a conflict which cannot be resolved.

    It is the fundamental premise of Creative Conflict Resolution that all conflicts can be resolved. It is true that we cannot change others. When we cannot see a way to transform ourselves such that we are generating what we need, we see the situation as hopeless. Consultation with communities in crisis over conflict is about helping the parties discover what they each need and fashioning strategies which will move them toward what they need without depending on others changing. More…

    Facilitation in addressing conflict

    Sometimes a crisis has risen to such a level that the parties cannot afford the luxury of a protracted course in conflict resolution skills. Something must be resolved now. In these circumstances Dr. Robinson is available to work with the polarized parties to help them each see how they can shift their perspective on the problem such that they can again work together to create the best interests of the whole organization.

    This is not mediation in the usual sense of the word. This is not dispute arbitration wherein a legally binding formal agreement is hammered out. This is a process of all the parties coming to see what their common interests are and voluntarily coming to an agreement which meets everyone’s needs.

    What Dr. Robinson brings to the table is a neutral stance toward the conflict itself and a deep understanding of how conflicts can be resolved along with a personal ability to provide a “non-anxious presence” to support all positions being heard respectfully.  More..

    Monday, June 01, 2009

    Site Map for Just Conflict components

    Components

    1. Disciplines

    1. Bothers Me Log - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/discipline-1-bothers-me-journal.html

    2. Anger Workout - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/2-anger-workout.html

    3. Inviting Critical Feedback - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/3-critical-feedback.html

    4. Suspending Self-Soothing - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/4-self-soothing.html

    5. Self Care Routine - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/5-self-care.html

    6. ACE - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/6-ace.html

    7. Statement of Accountability - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/7-statement-of-accountability.html

    8. Apology and Forgiveness - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/apology-and-forgiveness.html

    9. Framework for Creative Conflict Resolution - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/framework.html

    10. Conflict Resolution Meeting - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/conflict-resolution-meeting.html

    2. Distinctions

    Five Crucial

    2.1.1. Feelings from Behavior - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/feelings-from-behavior.html

    2.1.2. Event from Effect - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/event-from-effect.html

    2.1.3. Effect from Cause - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/effect-from-cause.html

    2.1.4. Need from Want - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/need-from-want.html

    2.1.5. What we can do from what we cannot do - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/can-do-from-cannot-do.html

    Others

    2.2.1. Agreements and Understandings - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/agreements-and-understanding.html

    2.2.2. Being and Doing - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/being-and-doing.html

    2.2.3. Being angry and Having anger - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/being-angry-and-having-anger.html

    2.2.4. Believing and Believing In - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/believing-and-believing-in.html

    2.2.5. Change and Transformation - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/change-and-transformation.html

    2.2.6. Conflict from Fight - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/conflict-from-fight.html

    2.2.7. Differentiation and Integration from Dissociation and Fusion - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/differentiation.html

    2.2.8. Expectations and Standards - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/expectations-and-standards.html

    2.2.9. Feelings and Emotions - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/feelings-and-emotions.html

    2.2.10. Hurt and Harm - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/hurt-and-harm.html

    2.2.11. Reacting and Responding - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/reacting-and-responding.html

    2.2.12. Responsibility and Accountability - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/responsibility-and-accountability.html

    2.2.13. Simple and Easy - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/simple-and-easy.html

    2.2.14. Subject and Object - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/subject-and-object.html

    3. Glossary

    1. Abuse - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/abuse.html

    2. Accountability - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/accountability.html

    3. Agreements - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/agreements.html

    4. Anger - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/anger.html

    5. Anxiety - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/anxiety.html

    6. Apology - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/apology.html

    7. Assertiveness - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/assertiveness.html

    8. Blame (fault) - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/blame.html

    9. Center of gravity culturally - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/center-of-gravity.html

    10. Centering - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/centering.html

    11. Cognitive Distortions - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/cognitive-distortions.html

    12. Cognitive maps - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/cognitive-maps.html

    13. Compliance - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/compliance.html

    14. Conflict - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/conflict.html

    15. Control - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/control.html

    16. Culture - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/culture.html

    17. Demands - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/demands.html

    18. Discipline - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/discipline.html

    19. Distinction - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/distinction.html

    20. Dominance - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/dominance.html

    21. Emotions: data and energy - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/emotion.html

    22. Energy: physical and emotional - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/energy.html

    23. Esuba - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/esuba.html

    24. Expectations - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/expectations.html

    25. Family of Origin and Generativity - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/family.html

    26. Feelings: data and energy - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/feelings.html

    27. Fiduciary relationships - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/fiduciary.html

    28. Focus of attention - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/focus.html

    29. Forgiveness - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/forgiveness.html

    30. Gender - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/gender.html

    31. Healthy (and Healing) - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/healthy.html

    32. Hurt - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/hurt.html

    33. Intimacy - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/intimacy.html

    34. Justice - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/justice.html

    35. Lines of Development - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/lines.html

    36. Locus of attention - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/locus.html

    37. Multiplicity of Mind - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/multiplicity-of-mind.html

    38. Mutual relationships - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/mutual.html

    39. Needs (as qualities) - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/needs.html

    40. Normal - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/normal.html

    41. Oppression - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/oppression.html

    42. Passion - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/passion.html

    43. Perspective, point of view, lens - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/perspective.html

    44. Power - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/power.html

    45. Promises - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/promises.html

    46. Proximal Self - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/proximal-self.html

    47. Reciprocal relationships - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/reciprocal.html

    48. Relationships - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/relationships.html

    49. Requests - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/requests.html

    50. Resolution (of a conflict) - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/resolution.html

    51. Responsibilities - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/responsibilities.html

    52. Rights - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/rights.html

    53. Safe and Satisfied - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/safe.html

    54. Shalom - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/shalom.html

    55. Stages of Development - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/stages.html

    56. Standards - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/standards.html

    57. Transformation - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/transformation.html

    58. Trauma - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/trauma.html

    59. Trust - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/trust.html

    60. Violence - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/violence.html

    4. Other Maps

    1. The Problem

    4.1.1. Broken Maps: out of date, different territory, too simple or too complex, cognitive distortions - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/broken-maps.html

    4.1.2. Conflict Aspects: resource, identity, process - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/conflict-aspects.html

    4.1.3. Conflict Intensity - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/conflict-intensity.html

    4.1.4. Conflict Stages: strategy, event, quality - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/conflict-stages.html

    4.1.5. Abuse: kinds of definitions for different contexts – to condemn or to transform, in mutual or fiduciary relationships - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/abuse-definitions.html

    4.1.6. Abuse: what allows for it? Opportunity, Permission, and Motivation - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/abuse-allows.html

    4.1.7. Systems of Oppression: - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/systems-of-oppression.html

    2. Relationship

    4.2.1. Accountability to and with in fiduciary and mutual relationships - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/accountability-to-n-with.html

    4.2.2. Agreements: demands and requests, promises and compliance - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/ maps-1/agreements-durable.html

    4.2.3. Balancing Rights and Responsibilities - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/balancing-r-n-r.html

    4.2.4. Bonded and Bounded - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/bonded-and-bounded.html

    4.2.5. Cycle of Intimacy - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/cycle-of-intimacy.html

    4.2.6. Gender constructed by culture: emotion, dominance, and aggression - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/gender-construct.html

    4.2.7. Kinds of Relationships: mutual, reciprocal, fiduciary - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/kinds-of-relationships.html

    4.2.8. Patterns of Conflict - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/patterns-of-conflict.html

    4.2.9. Power: power over, power with, empowerment - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/power-types.html

    4.2.10. Significant Relationships - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/significant-relationships.html

    4.2.11. Stages of Intimacy: 1+1=3 - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/stages-of-intimacy.html

    4.2.12. Victims, Perpetrators, and Bystanders - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/victims-perps.html

    3. Self-awareness

    4.3.1. “Bad” Feelings: hurt, fear, sadness, anger, and guilt - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/bad-feelings.html

    4.3.2. Anger and Desire - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/anger-and-desire.html

    4.3.3. Anxiety and the Doing cycle: when maps don’t work - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/anxiety-n-doing.html

    4.3.4. Feelings: the interior domains of Sensation, Thought, Emotion and Wish. [intuition and imagination] - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/feelings-domains.html

    4.3.5. Focus, Locus, and Lens - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/focus-locus-and-lens.html

    4.3.6. Maps of Needs: personal, relational, and systemic - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/maps-of-needs.html

    4.3.7. Orders of Self - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/orders-of-self.html

    4.3.8. Stages of Development: sequential, invariant, hierarchical - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/stages-of-development.html

    4.3.9. Tiers for Transformation: personal, interpersonal, intrapersonal, transpersonal - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/tiers.html

    4. Technologies for intervention and transformation

    4.4.1. Discipline components: intention, attention, repetition, guidance - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/discipline-components.html

    4.4.2. Good Emotional Hygiene - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/good-emotional-hygiene.html

    4.4.3. Language of Complaint: concerns, criticism, contempt, and control - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/language-of-complaint.html

    4.4.4. Map of maps: where am I, where am I going, and how do I get there? - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/map-of-the-maps.html

    4.4.5. Onions: Addressing a sticky situation - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/onions.html

    4.4.6. Predicting the unwanted outcome - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/predicting-the-unwanted-outcome.html

    4.4.7. Seven Steps to Addressing a problem - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/seven-steps.html

    4.4.8. Stages and Styles in Conflict Resolution– Second order to Fourth order - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/stages-and-styles-in-conflict-resolution.html

    4.4.9. Technologies for transformation: bridging, challenging, and modeling [resonance, rupture, and repair] - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/technologies-for-trans.html

    5. Vision for who and how we might be

    4.5.1. 3 A’s: Awareness, Acting in our own behalf, Accountability - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/3-as.html

    4.5.2. Assertiveness: Event, Effect, Need - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/assertiveness2.html

    4.5.3. Assertiveness: responsibility and control - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/assertiveness1.html

    4.5.4. Curious without asking questions - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/curious-without.html

    4.5.5. Fighting without Fighting - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/fighting-wo-fighting.html

    4.5.6. Going High and Going Deep - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/going-high-and-going-deep.html

    4.5.7. Radical Accountability - http://www.creativeconflictresolution.org/jc/maps-1/radical-accountability.html

    Intensity of Conflict

    The intensity of a conflict between two parties can be seen as a function of both the level of attraction each of the parties have around a given issue or context, and the level of agreement the parties have about how to look at and make meaning about the issue or event.  The greater the level of attachment to the circumstance and the greater the differences in perspective held by each party, the greater will be the felt intensity of the conflict.

    As a snowflake forms as water molecules coalesce around a dust particle, so do conflicts arise as emotion gathers around an event or circumstance or issue. The context of the conflict is the particle around which it forms. The intensity of a conflict is a measure of the emotion attracted by the context. An emotion is both data and energy. When two parties attracted by the same context have the same emotional valance--that is, they have similar feelings toward the context--then the charge between the parties will take on a positive quality. They will enjoy a kind of intimacy.

    If, on the other hand, the parties are attracted to the same context but have very different perspectives on the issues and circumstances, then the charge between them will take on a negative quality. They will experience greater intensity in the conflict. There will be a higher level of discord.

    There are thus two kinds of variables in the formation of a conflict. One is the level of attraction or commitment to a given context for each of the parties. The other is the harmony or discord between the perspectives the parties bring to the context. Let’s look at some examples of what this might look like.

    Joe loves to garden. The smell of the dirt, the fact that something beautiful or delicious comes from a tiny seed is a miracle Joe never tires of. Jane hates what gardening does to her nails.

    Jane loves Pilates. She feels invigorated by the workout and over the long run it gives her more energy and confidence. Joe finds that doing Pilates makes him nauseous.

    Joe and Jane love to cook. They delight in having friends over for dinner and they do an elegant tag team when the guests arrive greeting their friends and attending to dishes that are just about ready.

    Joe and Jane love their boys. They are the light of their lives. But Joe thinks Jane is too hard on them about keeping their rooms clean. They are just kids. Jane thinks Joe is coddling the boys. Her dad was way more strict with her than she is with them and she is proud of her ability to keep things orderly. She wants them to grow up knowing how to take care of their things.

    Joe has an attraction to gardening that isn’t shared by Jane. Jane is into Pilates and Joe isn’t. Unless one of them thinks the other should like what they like, there isn’t going to be much conflict here, but not much harmony either. These are just interests in their lives which they don’t share.

    They both have a high attraction to cooking and parenting. They are able to approach cooking from the same or at least a similar perspective and it creates harmony and delight for them both. But the high level of concern they each have about parenting and the welfare of their boys together with very different perspectives about what is in their sons’ best interest results in a relatively high level of conflict between them.

    Thus, the intensity of a conflict between two parties can be seen as a function of both the level of attraction each of the parties have around a given issue or context, and the level of agreement the parties have about how to look at and make meaning about the issue or event. I have given some thought to how to write this function mathematically, but I don’t remember enough about trigonometry to know quite how to do it. Suffice it to say that the emotional valance in a given relationship around a given issue or context can be seen as positive or negative in varying degrees depending on how much each party cares about the issue and how much harmony there appears to be between the perspectives each party takes toward the issue.

    If we are to build effective strategies to resolve conflict it becomes important that we notice what it is that constructs the sense of discord or harmony in the relationship. For example:

    Around the issue of women choosing to end pregnancies through abortion:

    If a man adopts a posture that such an action is murder and the emotion he brings to the issue is heightened by a strong sense that he is acting on behalf of God and a belief that his mother would have terminated her pregnancy when she was carrying him had she had that option; then he is going to have a very strong emotional valance and a very clearly defined perspective.

    If then in his community a group of people who very strongly value a woman’s right to choose decide they will open an abortion clinic, they will find themselves in an intense conflict with the man. Both parties have a high level of commitment to the issues and very different perspectives on how to address it. In the absence of other ways to address the high level of discord, the man may decide to picket the clinic.

    Dominance

    Dominance is a quality of a relationship which is created when one party takes on the right to make decisions which impact the common interest of the relationship without the agreement of the other party or parties.

    It is quite common for people in a relationship, especially one which has some history, to divide the responsibilities on the basis of ability or interest so that everyone does not have to be troubled with all of the decision-making.  This is efficient and usually people are grateful to those who take special responsibility onto themselves on behalf of others.

    In some instances, however, one person will claim the right to make certain decisions without the consent or agreement of others.  This is an act of dominance.  It creates a circumstance of domination.  This is not the same as dominion which may be a responsibility created as a result of a fiduciary relationship.

    del.icio.us Tags: ,

    Violence

    Violence is a quality of an action in which

    • harm is clearly done to another and
    • the actor knew or had reason to know that the choice
      • would be harmful and
      • contrary to the law or other socially permitted behavior.

    We all from time to time make choices which take on the quality of abuse, that is, which use the power we have over another to meet our needs at their expense.  When that abuse is so severe that it is clearly harmful to another, we had reason know it would do harm, and was in violation of the law or other social norms, then we have committed a violation of appropriate behavior…we have committed violence.

    del.icio.us Tags: ,

    Intimacy

    Intimacy is a quality of a relationship which is greater the more the parties know each other and feel known by each other.  This includes knowing not only what each other is doing, but also what is going on in the internal domains of sensations, thoughts, emotions, and wishes of each other.

    A second understanding of intimacy comes from the relationship each party has to issues or circumstances in their common life.  If they share a similar commitment to the same activity, issue, or context, they will experience a form of intimacy.

    We sometimes use intimacy to mean physical intimacy.  Let us differentiate between sex and intimacy and use sex to refer to the physical aspects of intimacy and use the separate term intimacy to refer to the emotional dimensions of a close relationship.

    It is possible to assess for the level of intimacy in a relationship by asking one person what is going on with the other and then confirming with the other whether that feels true.  If each is unable to state what is going on with the other in such a way that each feels known, then we can assume a relatively low level of intimacy.

    It is possible to assess for the second kind of intimacy by discovering what interests the parties share and assessing if they have common values and understandings of the shared issue.  For example, parents may have a shared commitment in the welfare of a child and work together on behalf of the child, thus generating a kind of intimacy between them.  If, on the other hand they see the needs of the child very differently this may be a source of intense conflict.  [see conflict intensity]

    del.icio.us Tags: ,,

    Saturday, May 30, 2009

    An Explanation of the Orders of Self

    This narrative is intended to supplement a chart of the Orders of Self .

    1. What is this tool for?

    All growth happens from within. This is true whether we are talking about the transformation to butterfly that happens in the chrysalis or the ability to quit drinking on the part of the alcoholic. We don’t change because of what is around us but because of what happens within us. Yes, the larva needs the chrysalis and the alcoholic needs the AA group, the sponsor and the higher power. But all of those can be in place and still transformation does not occur.

    If we are to grow, we must be able to go within our own experience and be Self conscious. This awareness of our own interior involves at least three sets of choices. One is that we get to decide what we will pay attention to, that is, the focus of our attention. Another is that we get to decide the place from which we will look at things. This is the locus of our identity. This is the eye from which I view what is going on with me. The third is the perspective or the lens through which are looking.  It is the paradigm or the cognitive map with which we make meaning about what we are seeing. 

    The first five Disciplines, the Mindfulness Disciplines, are all about helping us focus our attention.  The second five disciplines, the Practical Disciplines, are all about what to do once we know what the problem is.  Most of the terms in the Glossary, the Distinctions, and the Other Maps have to do with perspectives or lens by which we can understand the meaning of what we are seeing.  This map, the Orders of Self, is all about where we are looking from.  It is about the locus of our identity.

    Remember for a moment what your second grade classroom was like.

    You probably haven’t thought about that room for a long time but you may be able to call it to mind and remember some things about it. You are able to focus your attention on something that had been filed away in your memory.

    Now look at the perspective from which you are viewing the room. Do you look at it from the point of view of a second grader? Or do you look from the point of view of who you are now? There isn’t a right or wrong way, just different ways. We get to choose. This is the locus of your identity. Things look different depending on the point of view from which we view them.

    There are many points of view from which we can look at what is going on both within and around us. There are many “selves” from which we can approach the circumstances of our lives. Everything that grows does so by progressing through stages of development. One of those things is the “Self.”

    1. How does our understanding of the development through stages inform our understanding and use of Orders of Self?

    Everything that grows does so by progressing through stages of development. When we look at the processes of growth we discover that growth happens simultaneously along many lines. That is, there are many developmental lines and they may each experience growth at different rates. As we observe these many lines we discover that there are some qualities and conditions that are true for all developmental lines. Here we want to look at just a few of them to get a general view before we move to look specifically at the Orders of Self.

      1. Stages must be done in order and one can’t skip a stage, though stress may cause regression to an earlier stage.

    Each stage of development has a particular task that it performs. That task must be completed to a minimum level of competency before the organism can move on to the next level. Each level prepares for the one to follow. An insect grows from egg to larva to pupa to adult. It can’t go from larva to adult. It can’t skip a step. Some development can be fragile enough to be undone by stress. Someone who is severely stressed by life circumstances may regress to an earlier level of ethical development. Many Americans, stressed by 9/11, became vengeful and reactive to all people of Arabic descent saying they were defending liberty. This was a regression to an earlier stage of development ethically.

      1. Each stage transcends but includes the stages below it.

    Each stage or level builds upon the stage below it. Thus each stage incorporates and draws from the tools and resources of the previous stages. To the degree that a stage abandons or repudiates an earlier stage, it weakens the capacities at that stage. This is a form of pathology.

    Let’s look at this with a simple example from the work of Jean Piaget in the field of cognitive development. Suppose that there is a family in which there are two sons; Jack, who is five years old, and Jamie, who is three. The parents know about Jack that he will use his position to take advantage of Jamie so they have a rule that whenever there is something to be divided between the boys, one son makes the division and the other gets first choice.

    Jack understands the rule and is willing to obey it but is not above trying to exploit the situation for his own gain. When it is a cookie to be divided, he has Jamie break it because he understands that cookies never break evenly and he will then be able to select the bigger piece. But when it comes to dividing the last of the juice, he is the one who pours.

    He selects two different styles of glass to pour into. One is tall and thin and the other is short and squat. He carefully fills them to the same line and then puts the last few drops into the tall thin one so that it rises to a slightly higher line than the short squat one. Jamie then chooses the tall thin one and Jack is pleased with himself.

    At five Jack understands something that Jamie doesn’t. He understands volume while Jamie has only just mastered length or distance. Jack can think in three dimensions while Jamie is still working with two. If Jack had not mastered two dimensional thinking he would not be able to understand volume and wouldn’t know that he was actually getting more juice even though it didn’t go as high in the glass.

      1. Hierarchy of adequacy, not of value

    Some people resist thinking in developmental terms because it appears to value some people over others. There is an important distinction to be made between the adequacy of the understanding and the value of the person who holds it.

    Jack has a way of understanding that helps him know that amount is more dependent upon volume than on height. Jamie is going to figure this out in a few months and Jack will find himself holding the tall thin glass. Jack’s way of understanding is more adequate [for the moment] than is Jamie’s. This doesn’t mean that Jack is better than or has more value than Jamie.

    1. What are the sources for Orders of Self?

    I want to say a bit about how I came to discover the Orders of Self. The sources are important both because I want to acknowledge my debt to my teachers but also to give others a context in which to understand what I find so valuable here.

      1. Ken Wilber

    My greatest debt is to Ken Wilber both for the breadth of his map and for the specificity of it in its application to my own work. Anyone who is familiar with his AQAL framework will recognize many of its elements here. Anyone who is not familiar with his work can easily find excellent resources on-line. For those who would prefer to start with one of his many books, I would suggest either A Brief History of Everything, or A Theory of Everything, both from Shambhala.

      1. Robert Kegan

    A couple of years back I took Kegan’s In Over Our Heads: the Mental Demands of Modern Life with me on vacation. While not an easy read, I found it to be restorative in its own way as it gave me a refreshing new perspective on the work that I do with men who batter their adult partners. It was instructive both from its emphasis on the importance of understanding the dynamics of development through stages, but also from the specific stages of consciousness that it describes.

    With regard to the dynamics of development: the most significant piece is the observation that it is by taking what is the subjective experience and making it the object of our observation that we are able to move to ever higher stages of development.

    With regard to the stages themselves: the first four Orders are taken directly from Kegan’s work. It is only at the fifth order and above that I begin to depart from his schema.

      1. Richard C. Schwartz

    Dick Schwartz is the developer/discoverer of Internal Family Systemssm therapy.

    IFS is a framework for understanding the complexity of the human personality that has much in common with the techniques of Voice Dialogue, Focusing, Big Mind, and psychosynthesis. Of particular value theoretically is his distinction between the parts of the personality and the ways they are sometimes in conflict with each other and the Self which is to the parts as the conductor is to the orchestra. It is his influence more than others which has informed my understanding of the fifth and sixth orders.

    1. An introductory look at the Orders

      1. First Order [1°]1:

    Our first apprehension of experience is the physical awareness of our sensory realm. We have the incessant input of our five senses giving us information about the world in which we find ourselves. This can be very pleasant and satisfying and this can be very hurtful and terrifying. We are our experience.

    At 1° we are the construction of the physical experiences of our bodies. “I am cold. I am tired. I am rested. I am scared.” Whatever the experience I am having, that is what I am. As infants our only construction of Self is at 1°. We go from crabby to laughing to shy in moments. We are at the mercy of our experience.

      1. Second Order [2°]:

    We wish to have some control over our experience and we notice, for example, that when we bite on the blanket it feels different from biting on the thumb. We discover bit by bit that we can make choices and that the choices that we make affect the circumstances of our experience. We begin to gain mastery over the experience and we begin to identify ourselves differently.

    At 2° I am not the experience itself, I am the one having the experience. I am the subject that can look at my experience as the object. I can make choices and those choices have an impact on my experience. I may be feeling tired but I know that when I have rested I will no longer feel tired. Feelings and experiences come and go, but who I am endures.

      1. Third Order [3°]:

    This mastery over my physical experience may also have some success in the realm of my relationships with others in that I can choose as friends those who are like me and so we can enjoy the same activities, but I find more and more that others make demands of me that I cannot escape. This may be a problem for me when I want dessert and my parents withhold it until I have eaten my peas, but it becomes more of a problem for me as I want greater and greater autonomy and my freedom to do as I wish is curtailed by the expectations of others.

    At 3° I am the construction of the expectations of others. I have certain relationships in which I find myself and certain roles that I am expected to perform. If I want to play in the big game, the coach tells me I have to come to practice. If I want to be Pat’s boyfriend, I have to call him or her every night. If I want to get a paycheck from my job at Burger Doodle, I have to show up for work when it is my shift. I am my roles and my relationships. My identity comes from the community which tells me who I am.

      1. Fourth Order [4°]:

    Still, this community which is defining me is not of a piece. I am on the schedule at Burger Doodle for 3:00 and practice is at 4:30 and Pat is expecting a call and I have a paper due tomorrow. The demands of my life become complicated and conflicting. I try to be a person of integrity and consistency and to be all things to all people but I cannot meet everyone’s demands of me.

    At 4° I decide that I will be who I decide I will be. I will enter into the relationships that I choose and be who and how I decide I will be. I am not ignoring the expectations of others or denying the impact that my choices have on them, but I am a construction of my own will. I am the author of my destiny.

      1. Fifth Order [5°]:

    Yet, I find that I do not always do what I decided I would do. I intended to get a good night’s sleep for the presentation tomorrow and here it is 2:00 AM and I am watching a bad movie that I have seen before. I mean to quit smoking and get exercise and have more patience with the kids. I find that I am not of one mind about who or how I want to be.

    At 5° I discover that I am of many minds. I have many aspects and attitudes and abilities and recognize that they each may see the world and my place in it from a different perspective. Each aspect and perspective has its own validity and each brings something of value to my overall being.

      1. Sixth Order [6°]:

    But these aspects or parts are not always in agreement about what is in my best interest. Indeed, sometimes they are so polarized that they viciously attack each other, each insisting that it be the one that should be followed if my best interests are to be met. I realize that sometimes I am of one mind, and at other times am of another.

    At 6° I am able to step back from these parts and relate to each of them with consideration and compassion and to appreciate what they each bring to my awareness and my competence. I then balance the needs and abilities of all of my parts as I choose how I will act. I draw from all of the experiences and lessons of my life, and, from the rich palette of my competencies, I paint the picture that is my life.

      1. Seventh Order [7°]:

    Yet I know that there are limitations to my palette. I have peculiar abilities and disabilities. I am my sex and my race and my nationality. I had no part in choosing these and I have no right to claim their privileges or any obligation to endure their injustices. I am a product of the rich diversity of the whole created order and am no different in substance from all other aspects of this marvelous and horrible cosmos.

    At 7° I am one of the manifestations of the Ten Thousand Things. I am one with all of Creation in its marvelous complexity and beauty. I have deep compassion for the suffering of other beings just as I have delight in their beauty and joy in their fulfillment.

      1. Eighth Order [8°]:

    Still, for all of the complexity and diversity of creation, there is something about each manifestation that has a quality of sameness with every other manifestation. Each wave is the same wave. Each joy is the same joy and each joy is the compliment of the same sorrow. All awareness is the same quality of consciousness.

    At 8° I am one who knows the unity of all things and I know that I am that unity, that One.

    1. Some observations about the symmetry of the Orders
      1. Odd orders and even orders

    The odd numbered orders are each constructed by the in-breaking of some circumstance that is externally constructed to the proximal self. In 1° it is the immediacy of physical reality, in 3° it is the demands of those around us constructing our roles and relationships, in 5° it is the emerging realization that I am not of one mind and I can’t seem to control my own interior conflicts and I can’t get me to do what I intend 2, and at 7° it is the realization that “who I am” is largely the construct of the circumstances of my being. I was dealt this hand. Now I have to figure out how to play it.

    The even numbered orders are our attempt to gain mastery over the ways in which we appear to be helpless to construct ourselves and our own experience. At 2° I discover how my choices construct my experience; at 4° I discover how my choices construct my relationships and my roles; at 6° I discover how my choices mediate between my sometimes wounded parts and effect a healing that allows me to be fully integrated; and at 8° I discover how my choices in fact create the world in which “I” find myself.

      1. Four domains

    Each of these orders is paired into the four domains of the personal, the interpersonal, the intrapersonal, and the transpersonal.

    1. The challenges that move us from one stage to the next
      1. From odd to even is the challenge of mastery of myself
      2. From even to odd is an intrusion of the awareness of demands or influences beyond my control

    i. Personal: the demands of sensory awareness

    ii. Interpersonal: the demands of the expectations of others

    iii. Intrapersonal: the demands of my own multiplicity

    iv. Transpersonal: the demands of the unique circumstances of my own life

    1. Clarification of the difference between states and stages

    We are all able to have an awareness of Self at all of the orders all of the time. Even a young child can know what her parents expect of her [3°], or have a sense of being very divided about what she wants [5°], and some children even have a sense of their lives having a purpose or a sense of destiny [7°]. That is, they are able to have an awareness of Self as a state of being at a given order. We all have moments of being able to access each of the orders as a state of being. What we are not able to do is to rest in all of the orders as a durable stage of development.[3]

    For one to be able to reach a given order as a stage of development, one must first have resolved the issues of the previous order to a minimum level of adequacy. For example,

    1. At 1°, one will have to be able to tolerate the influx of sensory experience enough to be able to step back from those experiences to see them as something happening to the Self, not an aspect of the Self itself.

    2. At 2°, one must be able to have a sufficient sense of mastery over one’s own physical circumstances such that one can be aware of the expectations of others.

    3. At 3°, one must be clear enough about what other’s expectations are that one can begin to choose which demands will be met and how one wants one’s role to be structured.

    4. At 4°, one must have a sufficiently clear notion of how one wants to be in relationship to others to begin to notice that one is not being that way, that is, that there are parts of oneself that wish to be one way and parts that wish to be another way.

    5. At 5°, one must have a sufficiently clear understanding of the various parts, aspects, attitudes and perspectives of which one is made to be able to begin to develop a mastery of those aspects and get them to a place of harmony and integration.

    6. At 6°, one must…well…I’m not really sure. I am personally able to get to 6° for several minutes at a time on my best days. I suspect that I will have to be able to rest there more easily and that will mean having a clear sense of my own polarized parts, my roles and responsibilities, the expectations of others, my strategies for self care and self soothing, and be able to be fully present to my immediate experience.

    1. Transformative technologies

    Looking at the world through the lens of developmental lines can help to reveal what is happening under surface of the change that we hope to manifest in our lives and in the lives of others. It becomes very valuable to distinguish between simple change and actual transformation. Transformation requires a movement to a higher stage of development. This movement can be very difficult to attain and often involves pain and struggle.

    In order to make the shift to a higher stage of development—in our case to a higher Order of Self—it is necessary to have a process or a technology that supports the transformation. There are many examples of technologies for transformation.

      1. AA and Twelve-step: from 2° to 3°

    Perhaps the best known and most widely used technology for personal transformation is that authored by Bill Wilson in the founding of Alcoholics Anonymous. The 12 Steps of AA has proven to be a very robust way for many people to make the transition from 2° to 3° in a durable manner.

    The movement from 2° to 3° requires a willingness to let go of one’s own will and submit to the will of the others who make demands on our lives. We have to be willing to get up and go to work even when we don’t feel like it. Because of the spiral-like qualities of developmental lines, one level may often feel similar to another level. At both 2° and at 4° I get to decide how I am going to act. The difference is that at 4° I am taking into account the demands of 3°; i.e., how others expectations inform the relationship.

    For some people, these demands prove to be too much. If I can’t please my boss or my wife, I might as well go get drunk. I do know how to make the choices that will change my experience in the moment. And if I like how getting drunk changes my experience, I may choose to escape.

    The problem with this strategy is that it works…in the short run. But it makes things worse in the long run. I can have all sorts of insight into what is going on with me that I choose to drink and have a clear wish to quit drinking but if I get stressed out enough, I will turn to my old friend who helps me out. And then I feel better. And then I feel worse.

    AA takes very seriously the developmental task of moving from 2° to 3°. First of all, I have to admit that I can’t do this on my own. I am powerless, there is a source that can save me, and I will turn my will over to that source. Then I must have a very clear sense of what is expected of me. I have to go to meetings, work the steps, and call my sponsor. There are clear demands on me and I am told who I am to be if I would experience the promises of sobriety.

      1. Al-Anon and Landmark Education: from 3° to 4°

    Similar to AA in many respects is the companion program Al-Anon. It is for those who are close to people in the grip of addiction and it is to help them end behaviors that are enabling for the addict and to do a better job of genuinely caring for themselves. The principal difference between AA and Al-Anon is that addicts are not able to be fully present at 3° and the co-addicts or co-dependants are overly attached to a 3° concept of who they are supposed to be for the other. They tend to be too willing to be who the addict tells them they are supposed to be and not sufficiently free to claim who they need to be for themselves [which would ultimately be of benefit to the addict].

    There are also many for-profit training and education programs that promote technologies for transformation. One with which I am familiar is Landmark Education. It uses a fairly intense group process to confront attendees with ways that they are looking at their own lives and allowing their expectations to limit their own choices. By this process the participants are encouraged to envision themselves and their relationships in ways that are free of prior limitations.

      1. Creative Conflict Resolution: from 2° to 3° to 4° to 5° to 6°

    Psychotherapy generally can be understood to be a kind of technology for transformation. There are many roles that are constructed to support transformation including teachers, coaches, and pastors. Each has its own methodology for supporting transformation to a higher order.

    Creative Conflict Resolution is a structured program using psychotherapeutic processes and principles for the purposes of affecting growth through stages of development. In particular it recognizes that the movement to a higher level on any developmental line is essentially a creative process of conflict resolution. There is something about the current perspective that isn’t working. The attention is focused on what isn’t working and on the outcome that one is trying to create and then one discovers a new way of being that is not centered on changing the other but on changing oneself.

      1. Various meditation techniques: from 6° to 7° to 8°

    There are a number of meditation techniques that one can use to affect a greater level of awareness at the seventh and eighth orders. These can build the capacity to witness one’s experience [valuable at any level], build compassion, and allow one’s awareness to rest in higher states of consciousness. I have experienced many of these techniques but I cannot claim any particular expertise in this area.

    I only want to point out that the transformation that they support can be at a level above where many practitioners are starting out. I know of no evidence, for example, that Vipassana Meditation has been shown to be an effective intervention for chemical dependency. This is not to say that such techniques have no value in addressing 2° issues or that children cannot benefit from learning to meditate. Only that a more focused intervention that addresses the specific developmental needs is likely to be more helpful.

    1. Some applications of the theory

    I have found the Orders of Self to be a map that has many uses. I offer here just two applications that have come up recently and that show different aspects of its utility.

      1. Over-protective parenting

    I just came across a reprint of an article from Psychology Today about how parenting styles today are raising a nation of wimps. The assertion is that parents are too present in the lives of their kids in a manner that tries to protect their kids from any unpleasantness such that kids are soft and unprepared for life as adults. Setting aside for a moment the observation that many parents are clearly under-involved in their children’s lives, what can we say about the developmental effects of parents who shield their children from frustration?

    At 1° we are subject to sometimes overwhelming sensory input. We must learn how to moderate and negotiate that input to be able to rise to a stable 2° sense of Self. At 3° we experience the demands of others on how we are to perform. We learn how to negotiate the stress and get the paper done on time and make it to practice and find someone else to take our shift at Burger Doodle. If someone else steps in and handles the stress for us, we learn two things. One, we learn that this is more than I should have to manage, and two, that it is more than I am able to manage. What we don’t learn is how to manage it. Thus, over-protective parenting causes developmental delays and can be crippling.

    When seen from a developmental perspective it becomes clear that the parental task is not to shield children from stress but to expose them to frustration in doses that push them to do just more than they think they can do. We must do for our children what they cannot do for themselves, but we must also not do for them what they can become able to do for themselves.

      1. A case example of therapy of a couple

    A couple that I have had in therapy recently ended therapy feeling very satisfied with the current state of their marriage and the intimacy that they enjoy in it.

    I first met with Frank fifteen months ago when he was referred by another client. He was almost ready to quit the marriage. Bouts of drinking, compulsive spending, and numerous affairs on the part of his wife, Judy, had Frank almost ready to give up. He felt she should be accountable for her behavior so he demanded that she write a letter to friends and family confessing her misdeeds. He had given her three months to get her act together or else he would boot her out. He wanted to be sure that he had done everything he could to restore the marriage.

    Frank was using a 2° solution to a 3° problem. He didn’t like the agreement that they had about the nature of their relationship [Judy’s excesses] and so he was committed to making her be different. He had given her an ultimatum. Judy for her part was also using 2° strategies for changing her experience. Neither seemed able to move to a 4° perspective on the problem.

    Over the course of last year each has taken the Building Healthy Relationships program to learn the techniques of Creative Conflict Resolution. After completing the first phase of the program they each participated in separate groups for several weeks and then we began to work with them together.

    What we quickly[4] discovered was that each was being a really good screen on which they could project their own fears. On Frank’s part, he has as a core issue a fear of being hurt. He is hurt when Judy acts out. On Judy’s part, she has a core issue of being found to be unacceptable. She feels rejected when Frank is angry at her financial or lifestyle choices. So the pattern in their relationship has been that he gets scared and tells her that she is unacceptable. She in turn feels the rejection and acts out in ways that scare him. Each thus is creating a relationship that is very different from what they both want.

    On the other hand Judy can fully appreciate how much her behavior is devastating to Frank and she really wants to change it. Frank is able to see how his criticism of Judy is wounding to her and he wants to be more supportive.

    In sessions together each addressed recent conflicts in their relationship in which they were triggered by the other’s behavior. Frank was able to witness Judy’s internal conflicts [5°] over her decision to spend money on a trip with her daughter and thus he was able to learn how this was not personal [2°] and to let go of seeing it as a violation of their agreement about money [3°] and instead to be able to be supportive of her [4°].

    Judy was able to witness Frank’s internal conflicts [5°] over her decision as a repetition of his relationship with his mother that he had to care for and to see how this was not personal [2°] and to let go of seeing it as a rejection of his relationship with her [3°] and instead to be able to be supportive of him [4°].

    Thus by being able to both access 5° and to witness each other at that Order of Self they were able to move to a stable 4° that allowed them to transcend the mess that they had made at 2° and 3°. They are both appropriately cautious about their ability to sustain this transformation, but they also know they know how to repair the relationship should it get damaged again.

    [A note to IFSsm practitioners: You will note that the movement to 5° is another way of saying that the person is developing an awareness of their parts. This awareness at 5° allows for a more durable presence at 4° and thus more stable relationships with others. I am with Mike Elkin here that we may not actually need the presence of Self in the IFS use of that term (that is, we may not need to be able construct our awareness of Self at the 6°) but may only need a reasonably competent manager (that is a part of one’s self at 4° that can reliably hold the reins).][5]

    1. Last thoughts

    I have found the Orders of Self to be a very useful model for understanding how we move from one sense we may have of ourselves to another as we develop through ever more complex and adequate perspectives on who we are. It provides a framework for seeing where we are coming from and for guiding the processes of transformation in ourselves and in others.

    A map must accurately describe the territory if it is going to be useful. It is especially helpful if it is one that can be easily brought to mind. I find this map to be simple enough to remember yet complex enough to be helpful in negotiating some vitally important terrain. It has application for personal development, conflict resolution, communication practice and theory, and for psychotherapy.

    In the chart of the Orders of Self I have listed some aspects of life and how they appear differently at different orders. For example; in the column on good and bad I have charted how these concepts are likely to appear to someone at each stage of development. These are meant to be suggestive of how the Orders can inform how we look at things and, conversely, help to determine the Order from which someone may be operating.

    I welcome your questions and comments.

    Mark Lee Robinson, D. Min, A.A.P.C.

    Center for Creative Conflict Resolution

    6454 Alamo Ave

    St. Louis, MO 63105

    314-863-2363

    MLRobinson@charter.net


    [1] As a short hand I will use the notation 1° to refer to the First Order of Self, and so on.

    [2] While these aspects appear internal, they are “externally constructed” in that they are the product of life experiences, most of which are from outside the realm of our choices.

    [3] I am using the term state in just the way that Wilber uses it, but Wilber speaks of structures where I use the term orders, and Wilber sometimes uses levels when I use the term stages. Beyond this difference in terminology I am pretty sure that we are talking about the same thing.

    [4] Frankly, it was more quickly than usual. But then, don’t we always write about our successes more than our failures?

    [5] I recently asked Mike about this quote. He clarified that he was only talking about working with phobias when he made this comment. Nevertheless, I stand by the assertion that we only need to have a 4° manager available to do parts work.