As I re-read the last post it occurred to me that it could easily be misunderstood as a rant against the war critics and it was not intended as that. I began the post with the intention of discussing how crippling and emotionally confusing it is for leaders to use Double Bind Communication Patterns. I saw the report by the Iraq Study Group as a good example of a bad habit. However, I missed the mark rather badly with the post so allow me to re fire.
Double Binds and Mental Anguish
(Go to www.garysweeten.com for an in-depth look at this topic.)
After so many years of up-close and personal ministry I can say with no fear of contradiction that good theology brings joy, healing, growth and power. The truth does indeed set us free. On the other hand, bad theology brings sadness, anxiety, a lack of motivation and even depression. Good theology helps people face illness, stay married and rear children effectively. Conversely, bad theology brings destruction and chaos into our family and personal lives.
One of the most destructive types of bad theology is Double Bind Communication. Double Bind injunctions are found in many families and churches and they leave a wide swath of mental, emotional and spiritual destruction. Nowhere is that more true than among highly committed and pious church workers.
The conservative church is especially filled with Double Bind ideas, patterns and expectations.
“If that is true,” you say, “we need to identify and eliminate the Double Bind patterns.” I could not agree more. If Double Binds are so toxic, we need to have a good explanation and description of what they are and how to combat them.
A Double Bind Communication Pattern is any verbal injunction that can only be obeyed when it is disobeyed. And, It is the chronic presence of a no-win communication pattern that induces neurotic thoughts and feelings in the members. Despite what others would consider a superior performance the master of the Double Bind always finds failure so the child can never win for she never, ever fulfills her mother’s demands.
The inner pain, self-condemnation, guilt and shame experienced by a child brought up in such a home us difficult to explain, but let me try. We who have lived under these conditions tend to try harder to please our parent, work better to please the tyrant boss and explain ourselves more fully to fend off the verbal blows that are sure to come as a result of our perceived failures.
But how can healthy people be induced to become neurotically worried about irrational things? Way back in 1927 a very famous Russian researcher, Pavlov, showed us. He made healthy dogs into hyper-emotional, neurotic animals. They became so upset that they could not follow simple commands.
He accomplished his goal in the following ways. He first taught the dogs to differentiate between a circle and an ellipse. Pavlov fed the dogs when they walked through the circle. However, he held back the food when they went through the ellipse. It did not take the animals long to know the difference between the two.
After thoroughly training the dogs to choose the circle and food, Pavlov began to remold the ellipse to be closer and closer to the shape of a perfect circle. As long as the dogs could easily discern the difference they walked through the circle to get the food. However, when the ellipse was bent to a ratio very similar to the circle the dogs could not tell the difference. At that point a strange thing occurred.
When the dogs found it impossible to tell the difference between the circle and the near circle, they had what can only be described as an emotional breakdown. Their behavior was contrary to anything the researchers had seen before. Notes from Pavlov described it this way:
The hitherto quiet dog began to squeal in its stand, kept wiggling about, tore off with its teeth the apparatus…and bit through the tubes…behavior that had never occurred before. On being taken into the laboratory the dog now barked violently. (Pavlov 1927, pp 290-291)
He called it “Experimental Neurosis” or “Learned Helplessness”. We actually see this kind of thing practiced among animal trainers. For example, it is amazing to watch a very small man tell a huge elephant exactly what to do and the huge animal do it without a hesitation. I often wondered, “Why does that big thing not run away? He could do anything he wanted, but for the most part he is docile as a lamb.
Here is how it is done. When the elephant is small, the trainer places a ring around his leg that has very sharp points on the inside. If the animal tries to run away, the spears dig painfully into his leg and he immediately returns the leg to a comfortable position. It does not take long for the big guy to realize that he is helpless to run. After he is thoroughly trained, the Mahout replaces the cutting leg iron with one that will not dig his leg but the animal’s mind has been completely convinced that running means pain. This is “Learned Helplessness”.
If neurotic behavior and hyper-anxious feelings can be produced in dogs and elephants by subjecting them to a highly ambiguous and painful situation can the same thing be done to humans? The dogs had a learned response to the ambiguous, insecure situation. When there is uncertainty about which behavior results in a reward and which will cause a punishment the result will be a state of nervous exhaustion.
Since the days of Pavlov many other scientists have replicated his findings in both animals and humans. Thus, this principle is widely accepted among therapists. It is obvious that humans, like animals, respond with anxiety and fear when faced with important decisions they cannot readily and correctly answer.
The Three Aspects of a No Win-Double Bind
I. Double Binds involve a close relationship between two or more persons. When the relationship is highly intense or when the survival of the relationship is at stake a Double Bind is most powerful. Intense relationships include marriage, parent-child, boss-subordinate, prisoners, hostages, church -member, counselor-client, doctor-patient, etc. Most powerful and intense is one’s relationship with God.
II. Messages are paradoxical between the authority figure and the dependent person. The command can only be obeyed by being disobeyed. When humans, like dogs, are unable to distinguish between obedience and disobedience; reward and punishment; success and failure, neurosis is the result.
III. The person receiving the Double Bind message does not believe he/she can change the nature of the relationship or the message. One cannot:
· Withdraw from the situation
· Meta-communicate or analyze the message’s absurdity
· Make any appropriate response without pain
· Escape bad feelings if they obey or if they don’t obey
From this point of view, the underling is trapped in an impossible situation that cannot be changed, discussed or escaped. Anyone trapped in such a situation over a period of time will likely develop anxiety, depression, fears and physical illnesses. They may try to withdraw from the relationship, church or God as a way of reducing their anxiety. However, that too is deemed wrong so the anxiety and anger will continue to exist.
The Iraq Study Group and Double Binds
The ISG report offered solutions that are impossible to implement yet they seem to be easily accomplished. If the President tries to follow the report he will surely fail and be severely criticized. However, if he refuses to implement the suggestions he will also fail and be severely criticized. Perhaps in fifty years or so historians will conclude Mr. Bush did the right thing but in the immediate future he is damned if he does follow the suggestions and damned if he does not follow them.
I am greatly concerned that the President badly misjudged the volitility of the situation in Iraq and the Middle East when he went to war. However, that does not change the fact that the ISG has placed him in a no win, DB situation and does not relieve them of the responsibility for making his job much tougher now that he is there.
No comments:
Post a Comment