[From Fred Nickols (2004.03.08.0917)] --
I need a little help understanding how using "the test" relates to the
examples below.
[From David Goldstein (2004.03.06.1423 EST)]
Let us take the Public area--a goal is known to the person and Others.
Let us suppose that we see a person driving a car and making a right
turn at an intersection. The Others can be pretty sure that the person
wants to make a right turn. The person knows that he/she is making a
right turn and observers know this.
Is the goal above one of making a right turn or is that simply an action (or
perhaps a lower level goal) that contributes to the achievement of some
higher level goal state; for example, arriving at work? Is arriving at work
an end unto itself or does it simply contribute to keeping one's job or
bringing home a paycheck? In any case, it doesn't seem to me that there is
truly a Public goal or reference condition unless it has been identified and
confirmed.
Let us take the Private area--a goal is known to the person but not to
others. It seems that Others are always in the position of not knowing a
goal. I guess we are saying that the outside person doens't even have a
clue. A person is driving but we don't know the person's destination
unless we ask the person or follow the the person's car until the car
stops and the person gets out of the car.
The Private cell in the Johari Window is the one I think applies to most of
what I've seen discussed about using "the test" to identify a goal or
reference condition.
Let us take the Blind area--a goal is know by Others but not by the
person. I know this happens. But the Other is still making a good guess.
As applied to driving, a person may be weaving when driving under the
influence of alcohol. Others may observe this, but the person may be
unaware that this is happening.
Here, it was my notion was NOT that others know with great certainty someone
else's goal or reference condition but that they could use "the test" to
confirm their belief or suspicion.
Finally, the Hidden area--Neither the person or Others know the goal. A
person may be upset by something happening at work and plow into a car
which is stopped at a traffic light. The person is not in the control
mode. Maybe the person is thinking, remembering or imagining about the
problem situation at work. The person is not aware that this is what
he/she is doing. The Others are not aware of what is going on. It was an
accident, not on purpose.
I'm not sure I understand this example at all. Plowing into another car
seems an accident in this case, not a goal being achieved. I thought the
Hidden cell was rife with opportunity for applying "the test."
Thanks for stimulating my thinking further. My original notion was not that
the Johari Window offered a framework for slotting goals or reference
conditions but that "the test" could be used to disclose or confirm goals or
reference conditions. The labels Public, Private, Blind and Hidden would
play out as follows:
Private: I could apply the test to my own actions to confirm what it is I'm
controlling for and I keep my findings to myself.
Public: I and others could apply the test to my actions and we share our
findings to confirm what it is we previously agreed were my goals or
reference conditions.
Blind: Others have applied the test to my actions and determined my goals
or reference conditions but I have not and they have not shared their
findings with me.
Hidden: I, others, or I and others could apply the test to identify what
I'm controlling for.
It's probably all too complicated and messy to be of any use. But I did get
something out of the discussion. I've long known (or believed or perceived)
that ends and means are relative notions. An action leads to a result or
outcome and that result or outcome is in turn a means to some other end or
result or outcome. This ends-means relationship seems reflected in the PCT
hierarchy, which is a hierarchy of reference conditions. And, come to think
of it, that raises a question about the test. How can we use the "test" to
identify anything with any certainty when whatever it is we identify is
embedded in a hierarchy of ends or goals or reference conditions? It would
seem to me that we'd have to be able to classify the level of the reference
condition identified and then chase it up (or down) the hierarchy to truly
understand it.