Sociodynamic Effect

[REGINA SEWELL]

In Response to Adam's comments re: Jurgen Habermas's ideal of creating a context where there are no externally imposed barriers to communication.  I love this as an ideal and yet am aware of the reality of the need to conform in group situations.  Many of us tend to conform to the opinions and attitudes of the group, even under very weak group situations.  And there is good reason for this.  Those who don't conform are subject to rejection.  (recall the Asch and Schracter experiments on conformity).  As I understand it, one of the healing potentials of sociometry is to help people understand what patterns, habits, characteristics.. etc they may have that lead others to push them away or avoid them.  Armed with this information, they can either chose to change groups to one that might be more accepting, change, or at least be aware of what the blocks to connection are.

So I'm intrigued by Adam's proposal of doubling as a way to give voice to those who may deviate from the group.  Would this sort of empathy be enough to challenge the drive to conform and/or push conformity on deviants?

regina sewell    


>       I would add to this the power of the double technique in 
> helping those who are less 
> articulate, less able to find the words to express their needs.
> 

----- Original Message -----
From: list-request at grouptalkweb.org
Date: Tuesday, November 7, 2006 1:00 pm
Subject: List Digest, Vol 5, Issue 6

> Send List mailing list submissions to
> 	list at grouptalkweb.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://grouptalkweb.org/mailman/listinfo/list_grouptalkweb.org
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	list-request at grouptalkweb.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	list-owner at grouptalkweb.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of List digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Sociodynamic Effect (Adam Blatner)
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 09:01:59 -0600
> From: "Adam Blatner" <adam at blatner.com>
> Subject: Sociodynamic Effect
> To: "T.Treadwell" <ttreadwe at grouptalkweb.org>
> Cc: list at grouptalkweb.org
> Message-ID: <003401c7027d$aedf8440$2f01a8c0 at dell>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=original
> 
> Dear Tom & Grouptalk,
> 
>     Tom's response was helpful to me in thinking about this vast 
> phenomenon. It connects 
> also with the philosophical approach of Jurgen Habermas, in 
> Frankfurt: Among his many 
> rather dense writings he proposed, if not the "answer," or the 
> "truth," at least a better 
> way to approach truth: Generate a context in which all 
> participants have a voice, where 
> there are no status or other barriers that interfere with the 
> sharing of this voice, no 
> fear of retaliation or exclusion for daring to express a contrary 
> or different opinion.
>       I would add to this the power of the double technique in 
> helping those who are less 
> articulate, less able to find the words to express their needs.
> 
>    My concern is that of more specifically envisioning situations 
> in which principles or 
> methods of sociometry may be applied. I am skeptical of the 
> unspoken idea that 
> generalities and abstractions in fact work. I think the hidden 
> belief is that if the 
> details could be worked out, these general ideals would work, but 
> I question that: It is 
> precisely in the articulation of the details and the challenges 
> encountered that raise the 
> question as to whether the generalities are in fact valid or useful.
>    There is a category of generality that is intuitively true, 
> but so general as to be 
> relatively useless. Such generalities are called "platitudes," 
> such as the Beatle's song, 
> "All you need is Love."        --Warmly, Adam Blatner
>