whatsherface
02-28-02, 05:14 AM
From a user in another forum Behaviour Online (http://www.behavior.net/)
Unconscious plans are subordinate to conscious plans. That is, unconscious plans only become clear and apparent ONCE ONE HAS ESTABLISHED the goals of the conscious plans.
So it may be difficult for anyone to imaginatively see beyond the conscious plan into the unconscious plan of oneself or of another.
In a group setting, this mixture of conscious and unconscious planning in one individual, person M, could reveal itself as a very dependent attitude, an attitude in which the planner tries at the beginning of the group's existence to solicit much support and helpfulness from others. Goal a, part of the conscious plan, is to succeed in a noncompetitive effort to gain much support while adopting a dependent stance in relation to others.
Consciously person M thus appears noncompetitive. And this consicous plan is dominant over the unconscious plan since conscious plans typically are dominant over unconscious plans. But this conscious solicitation of support in an effort to create a noncompetitive surround is also part of an unconscious plan to prepare the environment for tests in which the planner then becomes, after having established a climate of support and safety, competitive with her supporters, such competition being the unconscious goal b.
By contrast, consider another person, N, whose childhood pain was associated with failed attempts to be intimate with siblings or peers. This person, that is, was repeatedly met with slights and was left feeling helpless and defenseless when in need of others' support. Person N is likely to later adopt a "counter-dependent" conscious approach with others in which there is no early expression in a group setting of any need for intimacy or support from others.
Appearing at first to not need others at all, person N would consciously present himself or herself as highly competitive with and fully independent of others. Here the unconscious plan is revealed after having found persons with whom to fight. The unconscious plan is fully revealed only after being reassured in competition matches that one can fight back and not be overwhelmed by helpless neediness for others.
Once assured that one can safely protect oneself and that one's need for self-protection is respected by others, person N can then reveal his or her unconscious plan of being able to turn to others for support and intimacy.
Do M-and-Ns Really Melt--in Your Group?
Now the interesting thing is in considering what happens when M an N meet in a group or meet as new acquaintances.
Actually M and N have completely contradictory unconscious plans and will not be likely to melt easily together.
In a group M and N would compete in their efforts from the very start to take the group in entirely opposite directions. M wants to establish a climate of support so that competition is safe for M. N wants to establish a climate of competition so that seeking support is safe for N.
Comments?
Unconscious plans are subordinate to conscious plans. That is, unconscious plans only become clear and apparent ONCE ONE HAS ESTABLISHED the goals of the conscious plans.
So it may be difficult for anyone to imaginatively see beyond the conscious plan into the unconscious plan of oneself or of another.
In a group setting, this mixture of conscious and unconscious planning in one individual, person M, could reveal itself as a very dependent attitude, an attitude in which the planner tries at the beginning of the group's existence to solicit much support and helpfulness from others. Goal a, part of the conscious plan, is to succeed in a noncompetitive effort to gain much support while adopting a dependent stance in relation to others.
Consciously person M thus appears noncompetitive. And this consicous plan is dominant over the unconscious plan since conscious plans typically are dominant over unconscious plans. But this conscious solicitation of support in an effort to create a noncompetitive surround is also part of an unconscious plan to prepare the environment for tests in which the planner then becomes, after having established a climate of support and safety, competitive with her supporters, such competition being the unconscious goal b.
By contrast, consider another person, N, whose childhood pain was associated with failed attempts to be intimate with siblings or peers. This person, that is, was repeatedly met with slights and was left feeling helpless and defenseless when in need of others' support. Person N is likely to later adopt a "counter-dependent" conscious approach with others in which there is no early expression in a group setting of any need for intimacy or support from others.
Appearing at first to not need others at all, person N would consciously present himself or herself as highly competitive with and fully independent of others. Here the unconscious plan is revealed after having found persons with whom to fight. The unconscious plan is fully revealed only after being reassured in competition matches that one can fight back and not be overwhelmed by helpless neediness for others.
Once assured that one can safely protect oneself and that one's need for self-protection is respected by others, person N can then reveal his or her unconscious plan of being able to turn to others for support and intimacy.
Do M-and-Ns Really Melt--in Your Group?
Now the interesting thing is in considering what happens when M an N meet in a group or meet as new acquaintances.
Actually M and N have completely contradictory unconscious plans and will not be likely to melt easily together.
In a group M and N would compete in their efforts from the very start to take the group in entirely opposite directions. M wants to establish a climate of support so that competition is safe for M. N wants to establish a climate of competition so that seeking support is safe for N.
Comments?