Self-Differentiation Principle Twelve
Who Should We Debate With?
A friend suggested I begin expounding on each principle so here I am. I encourage you to read Bowen and Friedman’s books if you need more insight into triangles, relationship patterns or what self-differentiation is all about.
This is the last deep dive into Self-Differentiation Principles I’m making! Let’s go number Twelve!
Directing energy towards participants who are willing to admit their weaknesses publicly while also committing to making steps towards self-differentiation is the best strategy towards stabilization.
Why do I value stabilization? Because slowing the seesaw down is the only way to get off safely and kindly. When people are not receptive to considering what seesaw they’re on (their inner motivations or inherited points of view) I don’t want to keep trying to engage with them. But I don’t want to cut them off by jumping off, running away to a different playground, and never talking to them again.. unless I think they’re genuinely toxic.
Why is my goal to get off the seesaw? Because that’s where repentance is.
I want us to find the point of the fulcrum where we can recognize the thorn in our opponent’s eye, the plank in our own and then fall to our knees and say “Lord Jesus forgive me. Give me Your love. Change my heart to be more like You.”
That’s the only foolproof way to get more mature. It’s not by winning debates or by educating toxic stuck people who refuse to be held accountable.
Who Should You Not Engage in A Debate With?
I wrote this principle because I wanted to create a filter you can use while you engage in conversations with other people. Before pouring out your energy on someone with the expectation of finding common ground (and therefore at least agreeing about the seesaw) it’s important to ask yourself whether or not that person even wants to get off the seesaw at all. Said another way, are the people in your life open to admitting their errors, their sin, their weaknesses, their culpability or their confusion?
I know you’re going to try and talk to people about this stuff.
You enjoy book discussions and powerful podcasts which help you consider ideas that are new to you. You assume that people are like you, desiring growth and change. But before you invest hours or years of your life in conversation with someone you should find out if they’re willing to change.
I’m not just talking about strangers. I’m willing to bet that at least one if not two or three people in your inner circle (maybe even in your family) aren’t willing to do that. You assume that they are because YOU are. But they’re not. They’re stuck.
They don’t want to be wrong. They don't want healing. They don’t want repentance. They don’t want accountability.
They want to keep the seesaw tilting in almost every conversation they have with you so that they can feel powerful or safe. They have no inclination whatsoever to find neutral ground or reassess where they are because their entire life (their playground) has involved this up and down movement. Without it they wouldn’t know how to exist. They’d have to relearn how to walk. That would be frighteningly awful for them.
Change is painful and they avoid pain. So why should you disengage?
Because the act of you getting off the seesaw will do more to change their reality than any thing you could ever say. “Getting off the seesaw” might mean staying entirely calm and neutral in conversations without giving away any of your own ideas, showing a sort of kind, respectful poker face which refuses to engage in any sort of debate or emotional leading. It might also mean investing much more time doing nonverbal activities. Ultimately they will see your commitment to change and (hopefully!) be affected more strongly by that experience than by anything you say.
But some people really are toxic. You should take the time to define that for yourself.
Individualists Who Are Stuck
Individualist-focused people who enjoy being on the seesaw against you will resist you at every turn. Nothing you say will ever penetrate their emotional walls. They will never willingly choose to be on the same side you’re on. They might laughingly resist you (like in the guise of a playful friend) or stubbornly criticize you (an intellectual “giant” who “just” wants you to clarify your terms) but they will never agree wholeheartedly with your point of view.
Ever. Even if they actually do, they won’t admit it!
If you don’t make your stance known or declare your opinion clearly then they, without realizing it, might agree with you for years. But once you actually explain your opinion fairly well they will feel compelled to go against you if only just to define themselves.
People who are trapped in this unhealthy cycle exhibit an inability to agree with even simple generalities, admit intellectual errors, or share their gaps in knowledge. Power is their comfort blanket. For them to feel comfortable you have to be the one with the problem. They can’t admit their own errors or inner emotional turmoil. These people have an aversion to sharing whatever type of emotions that they feel uncomfortable with, any real confusion in their own thought process, or anything that would cause them to sound weak. They don’t have a problem criticizing your plans though.
They will interpret your desire to debate with them as a fun power struggle.
Conformists Who Are Stuck
Conformists who are trapped in this unhealthy cycle exhibit their crowd-motivated hearts by their avoidance of any type of disagreement. They don’t want to admit thinking differently from the status quo. They do not want to have any feelings that are contrary to the group or say anything that would make them stand out. For them to feel safe they can’t admit that they have a different opinion. If they do share an opinion and it is disagreed with or questioned they will retreat into apologies or qualifications.
If you don’t have the courage to explain your position first or signal through body language and tone what your position is these people will hardly ever share theirs. They rely on the group to declare itself first so that they can then agree with it. Hesitating until the majority makes itself clear, these people only feel safe reorganizing and resharing the ideas of the crowd.
People who are trapped in this cycle will often volubly support you and commend you while gratefully agreeing with you. They avoid making their own opinions known if they ever disagree with you. They don’t feel comfortable doing so.
They will interpret your desire to debate with them as a potentially hurtful attack.
The Problem
By outlining all this I’ve done something we shouldn’t do. I’ve put those people in a box and said, “Watch out!” but in real life.. people aren’t all one thing, ever. And you’re probably not going to start giving poker face to the people in your life if you suspect they are stuck or if they avoid pain. You’re a good person. You won’t want to be rude.
You think staying neutral is being rude? Hmmm.
Well, maybe you won’t want to change the way you interact with them. They don’t want to change either. Huh. You guys have that in common?
So what’s a conscientious mature adult supposed to do?
Back off for a little while.
Back off when you see your friend (or husband or child) withdraw as they attempt to gain their dignity. Don’t chase them. Back off if they get super energized and agitated. Back off if they feel the need to agree with everything you say. Back off if you sense that they’re enjoying the fight.
In other words, practice stepping away from the seesaw. Practice reorienting yourself around Beauty, Truth, and Goodness in different ways that don’t involve conversations with them as much.
Don’t get yourself stuck on the seesaw trying to find ways to help the person you think is stuck on the seesaw. Obvious, right?
This is easier said than done but it’s important. You need to be a person who can disengage, step away, reconsider, and engage with God first towards your own self-differentiation.
In other words, stop attempting to assess or adjust where other people are on the seesaw and go find a different place to play.
By doing so you’ll be radically changing how the seesaw functions because –please get this through your head— the seesaw doesn’t work without you on it.
The Filter
What type of people should you trust and try to engage in deep life-changing revelatory conversations with?
People who have gone through painful situations, have healed from those situations and who value that experience. They will be open about this.
People who reveal their emotions, not just their thoughts.
People who take the time to explain how their ideas are distinct and separate from the status quo while staying respectful.
People who engage in wondering about ideas out loud. They value gaps in knowledge. They value not knowing something definitively. They aren’t afraid of sharing their lack of knowledge.
People who admit their weaknesses or errors.
People who exhibit gratitude for the conversation, even if (especially if) they were left without a clear stance or position at the end of it.
People who have found a way to genuinely admire the people at both ends or sides of the debate.
Not all of the people in your inner circle are going to fit through that filter perfectly. That’s ok. Just tread carefully with people who don’t fit at all. I don’t want you to get hurt or embroiled with people who thrive on their seesaw cycle.
Yes, this might mean you have to get a hobby. It also might mean you participate in their hobby consistently, without trying to have a heart-to-heart conversation. I don’t know. Your next step has to be between you and God.
For more info about this stuff I highly recommend Friedman’s Fables or Generation to Generation by Edwin Friedman, and Bowen Family Systems in Christian Ministry edited by Jenny Brown.
May your journey towards Christ Jesus be blessed!