The Triangle: trying out three ideas on triangle that I want to develop further; may add development later in week
Posted by Laurie Lassiter
The Triangle as a Regulatory Mechanism
Murray Bowen was an early theorist of regulatory functions of systems, though he focused only on one system, the human family. New discoveries in biology are revealing how much life is made up of systems with regulatory mechanisms.
One of the best summaries of the new knowledge of regulatory systems in life is James Shapiro’s comment that based on recent discoveries there has been a shift in biology “from a mechanistic to informatic view of living organisms.”
” One of the great scientific ironies of the last century is the fact that molecular biology, which its pioneers expected to provide a firm chemical and physical basis for understanding life, instead uncovered powerful sensory and communication networks essential to all vital processes, such as metabolism, growth, the cell cycle, cellular differentiation, and multicellular morphogenesis. Whenever these processes have been subjected to the most advanced types of biological analysis, the number of regulatory interactions and control molecules inevitably has grown to rival (and frequently outnumber) the molecules dedicated to executing the basic biochemical and biomechanical events.”
James A Shapiro, Evolution: a View from the 21st Century, 4.
Understanding the triangle depends on a view of the family or social group as a system that evolved to exert regulation on its individual members. While similar in some respects to EO Wilson’s superorganism, Bowen’s family as a unit contains species-specific details of the social lives of Homo sapiens. Stumbling upon the triangle through meticulous observation of human interactions in family groups, Bowen discovered a mechanism for the regulation of individuals within the group. Unbeknownst to the individuals that make it up, mechanisms at the level of the group regulate thought, feeling, and behavior. Regulatory functions of the triangle and other regulatory mechanisms that have not yet been clearly identified enable individuals to function as parts of a group on an instinctive level.
The advantage to a group that can function as one unit illuminates the nature and function of the triangle. It is likely that Homo sapiens evolved through repeated crises and threats to survival. The groups that could put the survival of the group ahead of the survival of all of the individuals that made it up would be more likely to survive. The instinct to act as one unit would make it possible for some individuals altruistically to defer their own survival for the survival of the group. Humans survive and reproduce in groups, deeply imbedded in and dependent on those groups in order to survive and reproduce successfully.
How does the triangle regulate individuals? Just as humans are hard-wired to take sides with our own, whether a sports team or a sub faction in our own families, we are hard-wired to be sensitive to others teaming up against us. Because the pressures of the triangle occur on an instinctive level, mostly outside of people’s awareness, people adjust their behavior and even what feelings they allow themselves to have based on an inborn fear of being rejected by the group. In its most basic form it is a fear that two others who are important to me will take sides against me and reject me. The triangle exists as this constant threat that two or more in my group will take sides against me.
[Plan here is to research other examples of regulatory systems in life]The Triangle and Differentiation of Self
Bowen identified two factors that determine the intensity of triangle activity within a family or social group: 1) the degree of stress or crisis that the social group is facing, and 2) the level of differentiation of self of the individuals that make up the group.
Bowen chose the term differentiation from biology, referring to cellular differentiation in which a cell that originates in an amorphous mass of cells assumes its mature, specialized form and function. Common terms that approximate what Bowen meant by differentiation of self include emotional maturity and self-regulation. It is both an advantage and a challenge that the concept of differentiation of self is difficult to pin down, though there is general agreement about some of its characteristics. By not defining the concept precisely, Bowen allowed for future discoveries to contribute to its understanding. Bowen described differentiation in different ways, including “I know it when I see it.”
Understanding the relationship between the triangle and differentiation of self provides a way to think about each concept more clearly. Is it simplifying things too much to say that the lower the level of differentiation of self, the greater the sensitivity to the triangle, all things being equal?
[Want to develop further how triangle and dos fit with each other]The Triangle in Other Species
Bowen viewed the triangle as automatic and instinctive, stating that it occurred largely outside of the awareness of the participants. He believed that the triangle was so basic that it probably existed in other species. Alliances within social groups of other species that function as a two-against-one advantage have been observed in wild dogs, dolphins, chimpanzees, baboons, and other primates. These alliances may have regulatory functions at the level of the group, though so far they have been observed only to offer advantage to individuals within the group who team up with one or more others.
Though the triangle functions at the level of the individual seeking alliances for advantage within the group, as has been observed in other species, it also functions at the level of the group to regulate the individuals within the group so that they function as components, or parts, of the larger group. Every human being functions instinctively as part of his or her social group and is vulnerable to being regulated by the group even at the expense of his better judgment and at the expense of his own survival.
In looking for examples of how the triangle functions in other species, I believe that we are not necessarily looking for alliances, or three individuals operating together. Bowen defined the triangle as the basic molecule of what he termed the emotional system, using the term emotional as Darwin used it, meaning instinctive. What we are looking for to find the equivalent of the triangle in other species are the regulatory mechanisms of the emotional, or instinctive, systems of social species. Identifying the triangle or its equivalents in other species is necessary in order to more fully understand the triangle in the human. Because it exists on an instinctive level, it should be possible to find examples of it in other species.
The first step in identifying regulatory mechanisms is to identify examples of social species in which individuals function instinctively as elements of their larger social group. As in the human, this is easiest to see when the social group is experiencing crisis. From bacteria to the great apes, individuals instinctively align with their social group when under threat.
[Plan here is to report on research of social species]
Laurie,
1) slight language point on “evolved to exert regulation on its members”.
sounds like regulation is the primary function of the family/group rather than a by-product. Primary, I think, in the evolution of the group would be enhanced capabilities and better adaptability than the individual alone.
2) Paragraph beginning “advantage to a group” is excellent. Resonates with Darwin’s case for group selection.
3) The point on sensitivity to the threat of being rejected by the group is important, it is the other side of being willing to compromise self for the approval of the group.
In the second section, I suggest a distinction between the degree of stress /crisis the group is facing and the level of anxiety. It’s not only the stress, it’s the reactivity to the stress. (Interesting example on news of how Peyton Manning handled himself after losing Super Bowl. Big stress, not terribly reactive, still a hero in eyes of fans)
I do not think it is too much to say “the lower the dos, the greater the sensitivity to the triangle.
Third section.
Regarding triangling in other species, deWaal has done so much with this, and his concept, triadic awareness, is a great description of how pervasive is the sensitivity to triangles though he puts it largely in terms of rank.
My question is: what link do you make between triangling and family projection process? When triangling goes into many-on-one would it then fit the criteria to be called family projection process?
Laurie,
I’ll put the question to you that you put to Stephanie, How is this effort to write about the triangle and group evolution moving forward from the other great pieces you’ve written about it?
Comments on The Triangle as Regulatory Mechanism
Your first statement ” Bowen was an early theorist of regulatory functions of systems” is novel and pithy. Who would you put in as other theorists of regulatory functions of systems, early or late -?
Is this an issue of semantics or otherwise insignificant I wonder. You quote Jim Shapiro , “here as been a shift in biology , ” from a mechanistic to an informatics view of living systems.” he goes on to reference sensory and communication networks, regulatory interactions and control molecules. There are a number of references you make to the triangle as a mechanism for regulation of individuals and using mechanism may be accurate, i am not sure. An alternative is to call it a regulatory interaction pattern or process….? I think of Deborah Gordon whose research on ants highlights variation in patterns of interaction which regulate behavior.
I remember Shapiro’s presentation at a symposium and how well he highlighted the regulatory functioning of the group on its individuals, all the way to genetic engineering which may be is called epigenetics now.
On understanding the triangle as a system that evolved to exert regulation on its individual members. I’m focusing on the meaning of “evolved to” – evolved in order to regulate or was selected because it functioned to regulate individuals by the group? My thought is getting both teleological reasoning that confuses cause with effect, and a sense that there is design in evolution out of the argument – it bugs scientists I was taught it is discredited.
How does the triangle regulate individuals ?- as this constant threat that two or more in my group will take sides against me. Well said.
The Triangle and Differentiation of Self –
Good start. interesting points…..differentiation is open to new knowledge, makes sense to me that low DoS = more sensitivity to the triangle. I think your prior work has really served to highlight how understanding the triangle illuminates differentiation and what it is. I think I remember Bowen saying somewhere that the triangle and differentiation of self are the most scientific concepts of the theory.
The Triangle in other species
I wonder it the triangle itself is very deep in evolution as it organizes relationships. Contact inhibition between cells – one definition which may be oversimplified but I read it in a Penguin dictionary of biology is: contact between two constrains contact with the third. However, I understand your point about keeping open about what the regulatory processes are and that they could be different than the triangle.