A double bond is a very disturbing dilemma in communication where an individual (or group) receives two or more conflicting messages, and one message excludes the other. This creates a situation in which a successful response to a single message generates a response that fails against the other (and vice versa), so that the person will automatically fall out of response. A double bond occurs when the person can not deal with an inherent dilemma, and therefore can not solve it or opt out of the situation.
Double bond theory was first described by Gregory Bateson and his colleagues in the 1950s.
A double bond is often used as a form of open, non-coercive control - the use of confusion makes both difficult to respond and also refuses.
A double bond generally includes different levels of abstraction in the order of messages and these messages can be expressed explicitly or implicitly in the context of a situation, or they can be delivered in a tone of voice or body language. Further complications arise when frequent double bonds are part of the ongoing relationship made by the person or group.
Video Double bind
Description
A double bond is often misunderstood as a simple contradictory situation, in which the subject is trapped by two conflicting demands. While it is true that the core of double bonds are two conflicting demands, the difference lies in how they are subjected to the subject, what the subject understands about the situation, and who (or what) forces this claim on the subject. Unlike the unusual winning situation, the subject has difficulty in determining the exact nature of the paradoxical situation in which he is caught. Contradictions may not be expressed in the immediate context and therefore are not seen by external observers, only becoming apparent when previous communication is considered. Typically, a request is imposed on a subject by someone he respects (like a parent, teacher, or doctor) but the request itself is basically impossible to fulfill as some broader context forbids it. For example, this situation arises when a person in an authority position imposes two conflicting conditions but there is an unwritten rule that one should not question authority.
Gregory Bateson and his colleagues define the following double bonds (paraphrased):
Thus, the essence of double bond is two conflicting demands, each at different logic levels , both of which can not be ignored or escaped. This makes the subject split both, so whatever request they try to meet, other requests can not be fulfilled. "I have to do it, but I can not do it" is a typical description of the double bond experience.
In order for the double bond to be effective, the subject must be unable to deal with or resolve the conflict between the requests placed by the main command and the secondary command. In this sense, the double bond distinguishes itself from a simple contradiction to a more unspeakable internal conflict, in which the subject really wants to meet the demands of the main command, but fails each time through the inability to overcome the mismatch of the situation with the demands of the secondary order. Thus, subjects can express extreme anxiety feelings in such situations, as they seek to meet the demands of the main order despite the apparent contradictions in their actions.
This is a problem among US law before the fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution held also applies to state action. A person may be summoned to testify in federal cases and be given immunity of the Fifth Amendment for testimony in that case. However, since immunity does not apply to state prosecution, the person may refuse to testify at the Federal level despite being granted immunity, thus subjecting the person to jail for court contempt, or the person may testify, and information that he or she is forced to surrender to the Federal Court which can then be used to punish the person in a state process.
Maps Double bind
History
The term double bond was first used by anthropologist Gregory Bateson and his colleagues (including Don D. Jackson, Jay Haley and John H. Weakland) in the mid-1950s in their discussion of the complexities of communication in dealing with schizophrenia. Bateson explains that such complexity is normal under normal circumstances, especially in "games, humor, poetry, rituals, and fiction" (see Logic Types below). Their findings suggest that tangles in communication that are often diagnosed as schizophrenia are not necessarily the result of organic brain dysfunction. Instead, they found that destructive double bonding is a frequent pattern of communication among the patient's family, and they suggest that growing in the middle of lasting double bonds can lead to learning patterns of confusion in thinking and communicating.
Complexity in communication
Human communication is complex, and its context is a very important part. Communication consists of spoken words, tone of voice, and body language. It also includes how it relates to what has been said in the past; what is not said, but implied; how this is modified by other nonverbal cues, such as the environment in which it is said, and so on. For example, if someone says "I love you", people take into account who is saying it, their tone of voice and body language, and the context in which it is said. It may be a calm, insincere and/or manipulative declaration of passion or reassurance, implied requests for responses, jokes, public or private contexts can affect their meaning, and so on.
Conflict in communication often happens and often we ask "What do you mean?" or seek clarification in other ways. This is called communication-meta communication: about communication. Sometimes, asking for clarification is not possible. The difficulties of communication in everyday life often occur when the meta-communication system and feedback are lacking or inadequate or there is not enough time for clarification.
Double braids can be very stressful and become destructive when someone gets stuck in a dilemma and is punished for finding a way out. But attempts to find a way out of a trap can lead to emotional growth.
Example
The classic example of a negative double bond is a mother who tells her child that she loves her, while at the same time turning away with disgust, or imposing physical punishment as discipline: the words are socially acceptable; body language contrary to it. Children do not know how to respond to conflicts between words and body language and, because children depend on mothers for basic needs, they are in a state of confusion. Young children have difficulty articulating oral contradictions and can not ignore them or leave relationships.
Another example is when a person is told to "be spontaneous". Commands are very much at odds with spontaneity, but only become double bonds when one can not ignore a command or comment on contradictions. Often, the contradictions in communication are not seen by observers unfamiliar with previous communications.
Sample phrases
- Mom tells her child: "You have to love me".
- The main command here is the command itself: "You must"; the secondary commandment is the unspoken reality that love is spontaneous, that for the child to love the mother sincerely, it can only be his own.
- Child abuse in children: "You should have run away from me before, it's too late - because now, no one will believe you do not want what I've done", while the same blocking all efforts of the child to escape.
- Child offenders often start a double bonding relationship by "taking care of the child, giving them a little concession, or a gift or privilege to them, so the main command is:" You have to like what you get from me! "
- When the child begins to participate (ie begins to like what he or she receives from the person), the interaction goes to the next level and there is little victimization, with the secondary order being: "I punish you! whatever the child does, for example "because you're bad/misbehaving/messy," or "because you deserve it," or "because you made me do it," etc.).
- If the child shows a rejection (or attempts to escape) from the offender, then the words: "You must escape from me before (...)" serves as a third-level or tertiary command.
- Then the loop begins to feed itself, allowing it to become a worse victim.
- Mother to child: "Leave your own sister!", while her son knows her sister will come near and oppose her to get her into trouble.
- The main command is the command, which will be punished for violating. The secondary command is the knowledge that his sister will be in conflict with her, but her mother will not know the difference and will fail to punish her. He may get the impression that if he argues with his mother, he may be punished. One possibility for a boy to escape from this double bond is to realize that his sister is only hostile to him to make him feel anxious (if that is the reason behind his sister's behavior).
- If he does not care about punishment, his sister may not bother him. He can also leave the situation completely, avoiding his mother and sister. The sister can not confess to being bothered by an absent brother, and the mother can not punish (or scapegoate) the absent sons. Other solutions also exist, which are based on logical applications and creative reasoning.
- The correct answer is: "Please tell the same sis". If the mother wants to 'scapegoize' him, his response will be negative. The order has a negative tone to his son.
Positive double binding
Bateson also explains the positive double bond, both in relation to Zen Buddhism with its spiritual growth path, and the use of therapeutic double bonds by psychiatrists to confront their patients with contradictions in their lives in such a way that will help them heal. One of Bateson's consultants, Milton H. Erickson (5 volumes, edited by Rossi) eloquently demonstrates the productive possibilities of double bonds through his own life, showing the technique in a brighter light.
Science
One of the causes of double bond is loss of feedback system. Gregory Bateson and Lawrence S. Bale describe the dual bonds that appear in science that have caused decades of delay in science because the scientific community has defined something beyond its scope (or as "not science") - see Bateson in his book Introduction to Steps for Mind Ecology (1972, 2000), pp. xv-xxvi; and Bale in his article, Gregory Bateson, Cybernetics, and Social Sciences/Behavior (especially, pp. 1-8) on the classical science paradigm versus system/cybernetic theory. (See also Bateson's description in his Forward book on how the double bond hypothesis falls into place).
Working by Bateson
Schizophrenia
The Double Bind theory was first articulated in association with schizophrenia, but Bateson and his colleagues hypothesize that thinking schizophrenia is not always a congenital mental disorder but a learning confusion in thinking. It would be helpful to remember the context in which these ideas were developed. Bateson and his colleagues worked at the Veterans Administration Hospital (1949-1962) with World War II veterans. As soldiers they can function well in battle, but the effects of life-threatening stress have affected them. At that time, 18 years before Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder was officially recognized, veterans had been burdened with the diagnosis of all schizophrenia. Bateson does not challenge the diagnosis but he maintains that the seemingly unreasonable things that the patient says are sometimes plausible in context, and he gives many examples in Part III of the Steps for Mind Ecology , "Pathology in relationship ". For example, a patient misses an appointment, and when Bateson finds him then the patient says 'the judge disagrees'; Bateson replied, "You need a defense lawyer" see the following (pp. 195-6) Bateson also suspects that people who are accustomed to being trapped in double bonds in childhood will have a bigger problem - that in the case of schizophrenia, double bonding is presented on a continuous basis -mener and accustomed in the context of the family since the baby. By the time the child is old enough to identify the double bond situation, it is internalized, and the child can not deal with it. The solution then is to create an escape from the conflicting logical demands of the double bond, in the world of the delusional system (see in Toward Schizophrenia Theory - Illustration of Clinical Data ).
One solution to double bonding is to place the problem in a larger context, the state of Bateson identified as Lesson III, the improvement of Lesson II (which requires only learned responses to reward/consequence situations). In Lesson III, double bonds are contextualized and understood as impossible non-winning scenarios so that the ways around them can be found.
Bateson's double bond theory has never been followed up by research on whether a family system imposing a systematic double bond may be the cause of schizophrenia. This complex theory is only partially tested, and there is a gap in the current psychological and experimental evidence necessary to establish cause and effect. The current understanding of schizophrenia emphasizes strong scientific evidence for genetic predisposition to disorders, with psychosocial stress, including patterns of dysfunctional family interaction, as secondary causal factors in some cases.
Evolution
After years of research on schizophrenia, Bateson continues to explore communication and learning problems, first with dolphins, and then with a more abstract evolutionary process. Bateson emphasizes that any communicative system characterized by different levels of logic may encounter double bond problems. Mainly include communication characteristics from one generation to another (genetics and evolution).
"... evolution always follows the path of viability.As Lewis Carroll has pointed out, the [natural selection] theory explains quite satisfactorily why there are no fly and butter flies right now."
Bateson uses Bread and Butter Fly fiction (from Through Looking Glass, and What Alice Found There ) to illustrate the double bond in terms of natural selection. The mosquito shows that the insect will be destroyed if it finds its food (which will dissolve its own head), and hunger if he does not. Alice points out that this must happen often, the mosquito replied "it always happens".
The pressure that drives evolution is therefore the original double bond. And there's really no way out: "It always happens." No species can escape natural selection, including our own species.
Bateson suggests that all evolution is driven by double bonds, whenever circumstances change: If there are environments that are toxic to any species, the species will die unless turned into another species; in this case, the species is extinct as well.
The most important here is Bateson's exploration of what he later calls the 'linking pattern' - that communication problems that reach more than one level (eg relationships between individuals and families) should also be expected to be found. includes other level pairs in the hierarchy (eg the relationship between genotype and phenotype):
"We are very far, later, from being able to ask specific questions for geneticists, but I believe that the broader implications of what I say modify rather the genetic philosophy.Our approach to schizophrenia by the way of level theory or logical type has revealed first problems of adaptation and learning and their pathology should be considered in terms of hierarchical systems in which stochastic changes occur at boundary points between hierarchical segments. We have considered the three areas, stochastic changes - the rate of genetic mutation, the level of learning, and the rate of change in family organizations We have expressed the possibility of these relationships of levels that will be rejected by orthodox genetics, and we have revealed that at least human society the evolutionary system consists not only in the selective survival of persons who happen to choose the appropriate environment but also natural modi fication of the family environment in a direction that might enhance the phenotypic and genotypic characteristics of each member. "
Girard mimetic double bind Girard mimetic double bind >
Renà ©  © Girard, in his literary theory of mimetic desires, proposes what he calls a "model-barrier", a role model that shows an object of desire but, in possession of that object, becomes a rival obscuring the fulfillment of desire. According to Girard, the "internal mediation" of these mimetic dynamics "operates along the same lines as Gregory Bateson as a 'double bond'." Girard is found in the psychoanalytic theory of Sigmund Freud, the precursor to mimetic desires. "Individuals who 'adjust' have managed to remove two contradictory commands from a double bond - to imitate and not to replicate - for two different domains of application.This is, it divides the reality in such a way as to neutralize the double bond . "While critical of Freud's doctrine of the unconscious mind, Girard sees the ancient Greek tragedy, the Oedipus Rex, and a key element of Oedipus Freud's desire, patricidal and incestuous passion, to serve as a prototype for his own analysis of double bonds mimetic.
Far from being confined to a number of pathological cases, as proposed by American theorists, double ties - a contradictory double necessity, or rather a whole contradictory imperative network - is a very common phenomenon. In fact, it is so common that it can be said to form the basis of all human relationships.
Bateson is undoubtedly true in believing that the effects of double bonds on children are very destructive. All the voices of adults around him, beginning with the voice of the father and mother (voices that, in our society at least, speak for a culture with established powers of authority) cry out in various accents, "Imitate us!" "Imitate me!" "I bear the mystery of life, a true being!" The more attentively the child is to these seductive words, and the more sincerely he responds to the advice coming from all sides, the more damaging it will be the eventual conflict. The child has no perspective that will allow him to see things as they really are. He has no basis for sound judgment, there is no means to predict his model's metamorphosis to be a rival. The opposition of this model echoes in his mind like a terrible criticism; he can only regard it as an excommunication action. The future orientation of his wishes - that is, his future model choices - will be greatly influenced by his childhood dichotomy. In fact, these models will determine the shape of his personality. If desire is left to bend itself, its mimetic nature will almost always take it into a double bond. The inculcate mimetic impulse throws itself blindly against the obstacles of opposite desire. This invites his own rejection and this rejection will in turn reinforce mimetic tendencies. Thus, we have a self-perpetuating process, constantly increasing in simplicity and spirit. Whenever the student borrows from his model what he believes to be the "right" object, he tries to have the truth by wanting what the model wants. Whenever he sees himself closest to the highest goal, he comes into violent conflict with the opponent. With a mental and self-defeating mental shortcut he convinces himself that violence itself is the most characteristic attribute of this highest goal! After that, violence will arouse desire...
Neuro-linguistic programming
The neuro-linguistic programming field also utilizes the expression "double bond". Grinder and Bandler (both have personal contacts with Bateson and Erickson) assert that messages can be constructed with multiple messages, where the recipient of the message is given the appearance of choice - even though both options have the same result at a higher level. level of intent. These are called "double bonds" in the NLP terminology, and have applications in sales and therapy. In therapy, the practitioner may attempt to challenge the destructive double bond that limits the client in some way and may also establish a double bond in which both options have therapeutic consequences. In the sales context, the speaker can give the respondent the illusion of choice between two possibilities. For example, a seller might ask: "Do you want to pay cash or with a credit card?", With both results presuming that the person will make a purchase; while the third option (which does not buy) is deliberately excluded from the oral choice.
Note that in the NLP context, the use of the phrase "double bond" does not carry the primary definition of two conflicting messages; it is about creating a sense of wrong choice that ultimately binds to the desired outcome. In "cash or credit cards?" For example, this is not a "Bateson double bond" because there is no contradiction, though it is still a "NLP double bond". Similarly, if a salesperson sells a book on trade crimes, it might be a "Bateson double bond" if the buyer happens to believe that the trade is evil, yet feels compelled or obliged to buy the book.
See also
Note
References
- Watts, Alan (1999). Zen Street . Vintage. ISBNÃ, 0-375-70510-4.
- Bateson, Gregory. (1972, 1999) Steps for Mind Ecology: Collecting Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology . Part III: Shape and Pathology in Relationships . University of Chicago Press, 1999, originally published, San Francisco: Chandler Pub. Co., 1972.
- Gibney, Paul (May 2006) Double Dual Theory: Still Making Crazy After All These Years. at Psychotherapy in Australia . Vol. 12. No. 3. http://www.psychotherapy.com.au/TheDoubleBindTheory.pdf
- Koopmans, Matthijs (1998) Schizophrenia and Family II: Paradox and Absurdity in Human Communication Reconsidered. http://www.goertzel.org/dynapsyc/1998/KoopmansPaper.htm
- Zysk, Wolfgang (2004) ,? KÃÆ'¶rpersprache - Eine neue Sicht ?, Doctoral of Dissertation 2004, University of Duisburg-Essen (Germany).
External links
- https://web.archive.org/web/20080211090234/http://www.mri.org/dondjackson/brp.htm
- http://www.behavenet.com/capsules/treatments/famsys/dblebnd.htm
- https://web.archive.org/web/20080215124155/http://laingsociety.org/cetera/pguillaume.htm
- References in Encyclopedia of NLP
- Double loop binding on him, illustrated with chart (and poetry)
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments