Stage-3: Dualistic Tensions

ClosedReminder of the clarification process so far:

Identify Polarizing Tensions

The holistic model provides an overview of the key categories relevant to the situation, but it lacks any life or relation to social order more generally. In order to bring it to life, we need to identify those fundamentals that directly tap into human survival or basic functioning, because those will emerge in every situation in one form or another.

At least three features of any situation are enduring and inescapable and reveal polarization that must be recognized and handled.

1. Us v Them or In-group v Out-group.

Our existence is psychosocial and that means we associate in groups. These groups play a major part in our identity, our sense of safety, and our emotional comfort. Group values provide essential support for our activities of daily living. Every group has boundaries that enable recognition of other groups. The activities of other groups, even their mere presence, can generate a sense of threat to which we initially and often persistently react defensively or even antagonistically.

2. Good v Evil or Right v Wrong.

Our goals and values are morally shaped, like it or not. Ethical beliefs based in doctrines and ultimate values sit at the top of the framework of purpose (PH6-L6&7), and we are enmeshed in the natural moral institutions (PH"4) that control us as social beings (PH'4L6). So all events, choices and activities are viewed through this inherently polarizing lens.

3. Self-determined v Milieu determined.

Every situation may be addressed in terms of the interests and wishes of the particular individual(s) or group(s) involved. At the same time, situations include a milieu and this physical-social environment makes its own demands without concern for those interests and wishes.

These fundamental dimensions of psycho-social functioning shape situations. The appearance of these polarities will vary from situation to situation and will not necessarily get referenced back to their origins. For example, when it comes to change, the us v them polarity shows up as one party seeking progress and the other party seeking the maintain the status quo, with individuals being on either side depending on the type of situation.

Values & Assumptions

Promoting Acceptability

ClosedEssence: Fundamental Polarization

The situation will contain people or groups whose interests and beliefs are diametrically opposed in regard to the essence of the situation. Identification of this deep polarization can put events in perspective so that what seemed unnecessary or puzzling now appears to be a manifestation of powerful forces.

ClosedDesired Benefit: Exposure of Disputes

Disputes and disagreements in a situation are often hidden and what is visible are delays, mistakes, avoidance, aggression, breakdowns. Once tensions leading to polarization are identified, it becomes easier to see the underlying irreconcilable positions that are generating issues.

ClosedMeans: Persistent Tensions

In order to identify polarization, areas of persistent tension need identification and investigation. Commonly those involved will argue the rationality of those tensions but closer scrutiny will reveal that they are based in something more fundamental.

Handling the Group

ClosedParticipation: Accommodate Difference

When identifying polarization, it is necessary to provide for differences of opinion and allegiance by group members. The goal is for the group as a whole to see that their divergent experiences and emotions are being taken seriously.

ClosedCommunication: Speak Respectfully

It is very easy to have a preference to one side of the polarity and therefore to speak in relation to the alternative in a way that is dismissive or demeaning. This will be taken personally by those identified with that pole. As a result, rather than generating clarification, arguments will emerge that foster obfuscation or attack the legitimacy of the underlying model.

ClosedIndividualization: Legitimize Diversity

The positive value of each pole of any duality that is emergent in the situations needs to be identified and promoted. It must be made clear that the various tensions and polarizations are to be expected and that sharply diverse perspectives can be legitimately upheld.

Channeling Your Functioning:

ClosedGain Support: Impartiality

Actively ensuring impartiality in presenting details of the situation, whatever your particular views, can help keep your biases under control. This is fair but more importantly, impartiality lends credibility and fosters trust. It shows respect for the audience by encouraging them to form their own opinions. In particular, it reduces the chance of proposed explanations being rejected.

If the modelling of purpose and a clear formulation of policy in Stage-2 does not lead to progress, more clarification can be provided.

In discussion with the Board members, there appeared to be a fundamental tension polarizing people when determining priorities. Some were highly emotional while others were strictly logical. The emotional selection of a priority was highly personal and focused, neglecting many important matters. In sharp contrast, the logical analyses of priorities took a responsible organizational and social perspective and was comprehensive. In practice, either approach could be applied.

In other words, our Stage-2 psycho-social model of purpose must be modified slightly to show two sorts of priority that are in opposition to each other.

When this tension was applied to the strategic objective, it become evident that the personal-emotional and logical-organizational features could not be teased out separately: both applied simultaneously. If either were absent, then the strategic objective would not function properly.

While the holistic model of purposes had now become more complicated, it was also more realistic, and respect could develop amongst the discussants with differing psychological positions.

Limitations

The introduction of powerful social forces into the model represents a step-change in improving an explanation and clarifying the situation.

However, no attention has yet been given to the model components, that is to say the specific factors and forces that drive the evolution of the situation.

Settling at this Stage

Recognizing the inherent polarizing tensions within a holistic model of the situation may provide sufficient clarity about the situation.

If this is the case, then there will be no felt need to seek further clarification.

Transition

However, if there is dissatisfaction with the degree of clarification, then the situation requires further attention. That means becoming aware of the state of the components and their mutual influences and converting that to a narrative.

The initial Stage-1 causal explanation was subjectively generated without excessive concern for the realities.

The next Stage-2 structural model was objectively developed in an effort to cover a class of real-world situations.

The present Stage-3 polarizing tension is subjectively generated by empathy with those in the situation.

The following Stage-4 would therefore be expected to be objectively developed.

The mode that naturally provides for dynamic interaction amongst situational components is the Dynamic.

ClosedRuling Out Alternative Moves

Originally posted: 30-Oct-2024.