The recent "discussions" about Beer have made me review what PCT
has to say about intrapersonal versus interpersonal conflict.
What is the difference theoretically speaking?
As we have talked about before on CSGnet, intrapersonal conflict
(within the same person) exists when two control systems are
trying to put the same lower level perception in two different
states at the same time. The PCT solution is to use the method of
levels to raise awareness to a level above the control systems.
The solution to an intrapersonal conflict is to view both control
systems at the same time from a higher level and to reset the
reference signal for at least one of them. A patient of mine
likened this to pulling both ends of a rope.
As a concrete example, a worker may be furious at his boss for
some specific reason in a specific situation. Self-image 1 of
the worker may want to be masculine while self-image 2 may want
to be socially adjusted. To control each of these self-images,
different actions would be required. A superordinate "observer"
inhibits(sets reference signal to zero) self-image 2 from being
operant in the situation. The person acts to control self-image 1
which results in "socially adjusted" behavior.
Interpersonal conflict(between two people) seems like a different
situation. There are some new options open for ending the
conflict. One can escape the other control system(ignore, leave).
(It is true that in dissociative disorders, for example, multiple
personality disorder, a person switches to a different self-image
and escapes the stress in this manner.) One can physicaly
eliminate the other control system(fight, war). There is no
higher level control system to reset the reference signal of one
of the conflicting parties(except by law or other binding
agreements).
In the Beer discussions, the conflict ended when one of the
parties pointed out that the friendship between them was being
endangered by continuing the discussions along the lines that it
was going. Both parties stopped the discussions (almost). Trying
to prove that each person's viewpoint was correct was less
important than trying to remain friends. The conflict was ended
(for now) by agreeing to control for a different experience,
namely, being friends which is important to both parties.
When I think about cases of marital conflict which I have been
involved in as a therapist, it seems to me that those couples who
want to stay married are the ones who find alternative ways of
handling differences and dissatisfactions.
It seems that the discussions are now heading in this direction.
Each of the parties are showing new understandings of the other's
viewpoint. If they completely adopted the viewpoint of the other,
then the conflict between each of them would become an
intrapersonal one. Maybe this is the way of solving interpersonal
conflict. Make the other person's viewpoint your own. Then it
gets solved as an intrapersonal conflict. If each party in the
conflict comes up with the same or similar higher level maneuver
then we have conflict resolution.
In short, the way to solve an interpersonal conflict is for each
person to turn it into an intrapersonal conflict and then go from
there. In the March 9, 1992 issue of Time, there was a
description of Cyrus Vance and how he solves interpersonal
conflicts between nations. His strategy is: "Master the facts of
the situation; listen exhaustively to both sides; understand
their positions; make sure they understand the principles that
must dictate a solution; and don't give up."
Perhaps interpersonal conflicts require a third person because it
is so hard to really understand the other person's viewpoint as
if it were your own. The third person helps each person do this
and also provides the higher level principles which any solution
must satisfy.
I don't mean to give the impression that intrapersonal conflicts
are that easy to solve. In the difficult cases, it may require
the help of a second person, a therapist, who helps the person
discover the higher level principles which are behind the
conflict as well as to help the person identify and describe the
nature of the conflict.
ยทยทยท
To: CSGnet people
From: David Goldstein
Subject: conflict
Date: 03/05/92