*************
The following message is relayed to you by  [email protected]
************
Hi everybody, Robin here

I want to go back on the time-track of this list a bit.

Not long ago it was that Alessandro posted that rather
interesting incident he had in the days of his military
service. You remember, Alessandro was approached and harassed
by two guys in the new barrack.

The interesting part of it is that a multitude of possible
handling of the situation are conceivable.

Let's do a quick recap of some facts from Alessandro's account:

The context he describes is one we have seen before in accounts
of "the stranger coming into that hillbilly village somewhere
in nowhere-land, being suspiciously gazed upon with a good bit
of hostility by the village-community" or the young kid happen
to move into that other town being "the new kid in the block"
now.

Usually the newcomers have to go through some rituals of
initiation first, before they will be accepted, or granted some
respect.

It is all about establishing and/or creating/re-creating (making
known) what the pecking-order is or will be.

In Alessandro's case the two guys were rather kind and already
announced beforehand what their game is and thus establishing
some rules. They were saying: "Let's see how strong you are."

(They did not say: "Ok, lets beat him up!" or even more grave:
"We're going to kill you now!". In that case Alessandro's solution
would - my qualified guess - most likely have lead to severe damage.
It would be a totally different game-setup, based on other game
targets, different set of rules a.s.o. corollary calling for a
different game strategy)

Never the less, in the situation Alessandro was in, he did the
right thing. It does not appear to be the obvious at a first glance.

But look, what they actually said to him is: "Come on friend, let's
do the initiation ritual and see what your place in the pecking-
order is." Alessandro intuitively agreed immediately with their
pan-determined postulate and showed them where he thought his
rightful place is. In other words he acted out the complementary
script to the two guy's script. (Those two were of course only
the representants of that barrack-community. The community wanted
to know, not necessarily the two guys.)

In doing that, Alessandro made everyone win in that little drama.
They had not been after a fight, they just wanted to know where
to place him in their small societal system. No one was hurt, all
questions asked and all answers were given.

I do not know if Alessandro had any conscious or theoretical knowledge
in regard of complementary postulates, games, a.s.o. at that time.
In his account he says that he "reacted"(sic) (so he did not act).
I guess he followed his intuition (or his heart) and thus resolved
the issue with elegance (Italian style so to say ;-).

A great example of how all knowledge there is, is within ourselves
available - spontaneously - triggered by necessity level only.

(I wonder what the outcome would have been if he would have said:
"Hey listen guys, wait a minute (or a day) with beating me up.
I got to check in my TROM-materials first what this is all
about and figure out with my postulate-failure-cycle-chart, you know ..."
Well, might have been worked as well. Confusion-tactics I think it's
called ;-)

Interestingly enough Pete proposed quite a different approach to the
same issue. Quite workable as well and with a good sense of humor.
(I guess it's more the US-type of problem-solution).

An OT's approach could have been to not get into a situation like
depicted above in the first place. It would not have been any of
the scenarios he perceives himself acting out with a granted probability
greater than zero. I guess this OT would not have had any business in
the military any way.

I've had found myself in a very similar situation than described by
Alessandro at the age of 11 or 12 in this particular lifetime.

It was at school, the lesson already started but the teacher was late
for some reason. So the pupils chatted or made some fuss all around.

I was busy writing something on a sheet of paper when I heard
one of the big and bad guys of that class say to another notorious
trouble-maker something to the effect of: "Hey, lets go over to him
and give him a beat." (His head nodding toward me clearly indicated
that "him" was meant to be me.) The other one with a silly grin agreed
without hesitation.

I pretended to have not overheard their talk and was not in the mood
for a fight. (I would not have had a chance physically against each
of them.) They moved over to my place, grabbed a chair each and sat
down left and right from me - smiling.

Well, it was quite clear for me which way this was planned to pan out.
They were not evil enough to commit an overt of overwhelm before
establishing some kind of motivator. The intention to create such by
means of provocation was clearly written on their faces and in their
body-language.

I did not lose time and addressed the leader of this small pack with:
"Well, I've seen you showed some knowledge with that math problem
posed a couple of days ago. What do you think of this problem I'm
pondering here?"

While saying that I showed him the paper I had put some formulas on.
He looked rather surprised for a moment and then immediately changed
his attitude from provocation-mode to interest. It was not interest in
the math of course. What puzzled him was the fact that he was asked for
assistance. I guess the guy never before in his life had been communicated
to in a respectful manner and being recognized as a being.

The other one - just parroting the behavioral patterns of "the boss"
changed as well. We finally had a nice little chat which easily gapped
the five minutes until the teacher arrived and the lecture could start.

So we see a multitude of sensible solutions are possible.
It is up to you to "undercut" scenarios which you do not regard
as desirable for yourself by means of anticipating how they might
unfold, already at an early stage (similar to what a master chess-
player does).

There was and is again and again a warning - "the writing on the wall"
- for those who care to look.

Making the sin of omission of not looking at the signs, establishes
the responsibility to bear consequences on the part of the "victims".


Have a nice weekend

Robin
_______________________________________________
TROM mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.newciv.org/mailman/listinfo/trom

Reply via email to