sociometry

Mon Dec 31 08:20:36 CST 2007

Some practical problems with your suggestion, Bud.
    You suggested, first, that I contact people in my social network and ask them to come up with lists of favorite composers and music. Few people I know would find that appealing or would react to such a request for a list as really friendly. It would seem clinical, mechanical. I don't like to be asked to come up with lists. It requires an almost painful process of thinking. It doesn't foster rapport. It's closer to a homework assignment given by a non-favorite teacher. 
     Second, my initial question wasn't about music, it was about opinion-giving on the web. This has some relevance as my son is encouraging me to start a blog. I'm wondering who would be interested in listening to my reflections. Hm. But your response took off in what seemed like a number of different directions, each of which implies a different criterion.

      The biggest problem in what you suggest is that of warming-up. Why should I bother taking time in my busy life to play with folks who haven't shown that much interest in playing with me? And I assume others have a similar implicit attitude. Variables that would affect this include degrees of loneliness, free time, the focus of the group or shared interest, task, or goal, the degree to which the group has any sense of its own identity or cohesion, and so forth. 
      For example, with grouptalk, it seems as if there are about 10 people who interact with a little regularity, and 100 casual lurkers, and maybe another 100 occasional lurkers. Even the interacters (there's a word!?!) do so within a context in which there are few direct questions or expectations that they will be interrogated personally. And I suspect this to be a hidden norm. I'm not sure I want to be on this listserve with an agreement that I react personally to every question; and worse, that I respond within a given period of time. I like the freedom of responding or not, as I feel like it.  

      As for your number 3 proposal, then: I'm not sure I'd agree. I'd need a lot of warming up, especially regarding getting a sense of who else would be in the network with me, how I felt about them. I should not be expected to have positive tele at the outset. That's what makes sociometry so dynamic. It might not click with this or that group. It's chancy.
     Then there's the problem of fairly symmetrical interactions at multiple levels of discourse. In other words, some folks you play tennis with, some folks you'd like to date or court romantically or sexually; some folks you want to be on a political action committee, and they're not the same folks in most cases. This general principle applies also on a more subtle level. Some folks enjoy more intellectual analyses together (not many); some folks enjoy more warm-fuzzy give and taking of encouragement; some folks respond only occasionally when they have something to ask for or say---but there's no sense of personal back-and-forth, that reciprocity that is one of the major elements in building tele beyond lukewarm.  So many problems! 

       So this email exchange has been a useful opportunity for me to really think about the complexities of sociometry. It's a profound subject and not easily converted into practical applications. For me, at this time, its value seems to be just that of drawing attention to what generates effective rapport (tele), and introspection: What works with me and why? What dampens my energy or desire to connect, what turns me off, what turns me on, excites me? I find this an intriguing entry point for depth psychology. 

     Warmly, Adam

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: BARNETT WEISS 
  To: Adam Blatner ; list at grouptalkweb.org 
  Sent: Monday, December 31, 2007 12:34 AM
  Subject: Re: sociometry of urgency

  ADAM WROTE: Well okay, here's a start: How would you suggest that sociometry can be helpful in determining what I would prefer to listen to... 
           ... or how does sociometry help me see how my choices are limited? 
   I confess that I haven't a clue how to begin to address these questions.

  BUD'S REPLY:
  While what I am indicating here takes some doing, the rational behind it is the very rational behind doing any form of sociometry either hot or cold. It brings to the surface the culture and structure of the groups in which people participate and gives some concrete evidence of that structure and the choice status of the group as well as tapping into the gifts of the individuals in the group many of whom are barely heard from. The process brings their gifts forward and becomes a benefit for the furthering of all in the group. 

  1) Ask the 5 people you would enjoy spending time with and who you think or perhaps know enjoy music a good deal. Ask them who their favorite composers are in several genre's and why. Let them give you 10 of their most favorite pieces of music. Take the time to listen to these and see what information that gives you in terms of furthering your relationship with those persons and in terms of expanding your musical choices.  You could do the same thing in terms of literature, politics, any subject. THis could be turned into a blog and in fact, we could establish a sociometric blog and begin to advertise it posting these sort of things on the blog. 

  2) Take a poll of all those who participate in whatever list serve you participate in asking them to list the 5 most influential persons in their lives who have published something that is still available, or about whom some extensive writing has been published. These would be tallied and the 5 most listed would have the following done by the people who recommended those particular persons. Research who were the major influences of those chosen. Go back at least 2 generations of influences and publish those results to that list.  This would of course give a really different slant on all those persons as well as on the people who recommended them.

  3) for the purpose of having some private free conferences: People quite knowledgable about the use of sociometric software and tallying processes could volunteer for the purposes of being the engineer for example. They would  be voted upon and paid by the group for their time in completing the following. 

  First, All the names of those on the list should be published. People would be asked Asked to make a picture of themselves available and a brief statement about their view of the particular criteria chosen. THe criteria could be voted upon by listing all criteria desired and tallying them up choosing the highest 5 in order and begin with the first criteria.  People would then submit their votes to the hired technician about the top 5 persons in preference number that they would like to be in a small group of 5 with on a conference call to talk about for example a criteria chosen of say achieving movement on their stated goals in life for one hour long conversation a week for 6 weeks. Publish the sociogram with numbers having assigned a number to each person without publishing anyones number to the entire group other than each person knowing their own number and then being able to see their status afterwards.  
  The various sociometric stars would be contacted and given their groups and asked to contact them to establish the conference calls. 
  This could be done periodically. 

  3) Publish and republish everywhere you can a sociometric proceedure for working with any list serve as I have pleaded previously that we do with ours. Of course there are always people who post a lot and those who barely post. There would be some time for people to come forward with some warm up process on the net in addition to the already established vertical attainment via open participation. People should also publish their pictures to the list and hopefully some voice recording of a brief statement no longer than 3 minutes telling of what  they are passionate about and at least 2 of their their long term goals as part of that list or any other. 

  IN the way of getting this out to people. every effort could be made by everyone in  ASGPP and other such organizations dealing with the issues of Sociatry to begin establishing this process wherever they are involved. A paper giving good rationale for this could be given to each member and available to all others interested.

  There are many other formats each having its own advantages and disadvantages.  \

  However, there needs to be an over all committment to really using and developing the use of action sociometry which I have not seen as yet really pursued over the years. 

  Blessings, Bud

  Adam Blatner <adam at blatner.com> wrote:
    Hi Bud, 
       Well, I'm certainly open to your pointing out a flaw in my thought---because I'd rather learn something than wallow in the illusion of being "right." The problem below is that your comments have their own inner content or integrity, but I don't see what they say about my observations, other than noting that some sociometric themes may be discerned in both. Please correct me or clarify.

       About your points, comments below

    BW  today, earlier...  Actually Adam, I think there is quite a flaw in your overall thought when it comes to both politics and the choosing between groups known and unknown.  There is the issue of access.
           AB: I didn't think that my proposed points exhausted or fully described all of the dynamics operating in this complex situation. Rather, I was just noting one set of themes and some of their implications.

         The issue of access is a good theme in many ways. Worth thinking about.

      BW  This is largely determined by power and the control of communication venues coming from an accumulation of money and that accumulation has a history which is often difficult to ascertain for most folks and is often purposely hidden such as the incredible criminal aspects of Kennedy's family or the worst of the worst, the Federal Reserve. 
         While the Internet is having some impact on this, the sheer weight of the volume of information on the Internet makes the use of sociometry there even more important. Who is doing something with that? I.E getting the word out to the public about how to use sociometry in determining for themselves what and who to listen to and how their choices are so totally limited and influenced from the get go. 
           AB: this is an intriguing twist on the subject. AS you note, the internet does allow for a kind of quasi-sociometric process in that folks are free to choose to read this or that, or not read anything on the web. 
            Do you have any idea at all about how to address the question--- sociometry and internet and who is doing something with that?  -- and how to get the word out... 
            Well okay, here's a start: How would you suggest that sociometry can be helpful in determining what I would prefer to listen to... 
             ... or how does sociometry help me ses how my choices are limited? 
     I confess that I haven't a clue how to begin to address these questions.

    BW continues: People are easily manipulated based on their fear and often other possible solutions for a certain crisis are eliminated through the response to that fear.  While FDR's words certainly resonate with nearly anyone who has heard of them, i.e. "We have nothing to fear but fear itself,"  the real impact of those words as well as a real understanding of just how that fear is generated are far from transparent as for example one false flag opperation after another throughout history probably including 9/11. Blessings, Bud  

           AB: Okay, there are some recent essays in Newsweek, I think, about fear... but what does this have to do with sociometry in any specific practical way? 

    Adam Blatner <adam at blatner.com> wrote:
        Dear Ed,
        It's good that you bring up the theme of sociometry as part of sociatry.

        It occurred to me that sociometry is a key point in what I've been trying to say. For 
        example, if there are ten subgroups who are working towards a common cause (i.e., 
        sociotele is similar); we are likely to choose those subgroups whose psychetele or rapport 
        is most congenial (based on various criteria, some unconscious, some more related to 
        variables such as style, intensity, tone).
        So your bringing that up leads to the need for folks to pay attention not just to 
        the message they are trying to give, but to the audience and the nonrational dimensions of 
        preference and relationships. Moreno had this problem, as he at times alienated many who 
        were at first inclined to be his ally.
        What I'm getting at is a shift from what I grew up thinking: If one had a persuasive 
        argument, that should count for something. What I'm realizing is, especially as I've 
        observed politics over the last 50 plus years, is that image is almost everything, alas. 
        Image also includes voice tone, charisma, slogans, presentation, reputation, and even the 
        kinds of people with whom one associates.
        Well, we need to recognize that sociometry, then, is not only a sociological field, 
        but also a kind of depth psychology, and one that opens us to questions that most folks 
        would rather not bring into consciousness.
        What do you think of this angle? Warmly, Adam 

  Barnett J. Weiss, MA, LCSW , 7410 Ridge Blvd 2D;Brooklyn, NY 11209 Cell (917)-751-3395 

  Breathing is the foundation of life, and good breathing is the foundation of good health 
  Improve your health by improving your breathing with the Buteyko Method. Call or write
  me for details or appointments. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  No virus found in this incoming message.
  Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
  Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.12/1203 - Release Date: 12/30/2007 11:27 AM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://grouptalkweb.org/pipermail/list_grouptalkweb.org/attachments/20071231/79664756/attachment.html 