sociodynamic effect

[Ivo Banaco]

Dear Adam, Ed and all,

I would like to share my thoughts on the subject.

For me, in this quote, Moreno is not just talking about the telic relations
in the sense that those tele structures tends to be the basis for different
group structures. As I understand the "central structure" is a deep
structure that underlies all human beings independently of tele. The central
structure could be the common traits that we all share, the universal, the
unity.

Sociometry gave and gives us several empirical data mostly about *types* of
group structures. The corollaries that Adam is referring are, I think, very
important, but it's just the first step. What we are, what we tend to do,
how we tend to behave, prefer, to be attracted to, indifferent, what we
repulse, and so on. To be aware of that is to be above that. From horizontal
typology we move to an understanding that besides that we all have
commonalities that we share to every single human being. If we get to that
deep understanding and really feel this we can reach the meaning of Moreno's
"central structure". This is, I think, a fundamental step to unity. To feel
our connection with God (or whatever name we want to call, if nothing else,
we can all agree that we all came from the Big Bang…or we are all living in
the same planet…universe).

The problem is that to realize this we have to feel it, not just
intellectually. The question that links Social Organic Unity and SDE is how
we can move from diversity to unity. So I don't agree with Adam in the sense
that there is, I believe, no contradiction between the two;  I believe that
it's a dynamic move from diversity to unity. But I completely agree with
Adam when he says that it's not easy at all to make that move, to convert
Moreno's vision - that I think we all share - to Adam's "do-able methods".


All the best,

Ivo

On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Adam Blatner <ablatner at verizon.net> wrote:

> Dear Ed and all,
>    I confess my density, my ignorance. I fear I only understand part of
> this noble quote
> of Moreno's:
>         "The discovery that human society has an actual, dynamic, central
> structure
> underlying and determining all its peripheral and formal groupings may one
> day be
> considered as the cornerstone of all social science.  This central
> structure - once it has
> been identified - is  either found or discernible in every form of human
> society, from the
> most primitive to the most civilized: it is in the genesis of every type of
> society.  In
> addition, it exerts a determining influence upon every sphere in which the
> factor of human
> interrelations is an active agent - in economics, biology, social
> pathology, politics,
> government and similar spheres of social action."
>             AB: I agree in general, and of course he's talking about telic
> relations,
> which I think deserves to continue to be explored and better understood.
> I fail so far to appreciate yet how this insight can be converted into
> reliable and
> do-able methods. His sociometric approach so far requires a great deal of
> warming-up and
> readiness of a group. (I'm reminded of some early scientific studies that
> required
> elaborate preparations, though in later years other methods were developed
> that could make
> the process easier.)
>          So I await more specific suggestions and papers.  I'm happy to
> report that I
> hear that our journal may well re-commence, though I don't know when or how
> that will
> happen.
>
>     Ed also notes the following: Sociodynamic Effect (SDE) moves resources
> from the whole
> to the few -  at the expense of the world and many.
>  Again, the rich tend to grow richer, the poor poorer, economically,
> socially, etc.
>      What isn't clear is what should be done about this. A number of
> obvious sociometric
> corollaries exist:
>  1. Brighter and more social people tend to attract more friends. The
> opposite is also
> true.
>     a. People with a wider role repertoire versus people with narrower role
> repertoires.
>       b. People who are perceived to be vehicles for power attract
> "aristo-tele," or
> others wanting to be associated so as to partake of the fame, fortune and
> other benefits
> of that power, celebrity, etc.
>
>   2. Popular people tend to arrange things to serve the benefits of their
> own group.
>              Powerful people tend to be people who have at least been
> moderately popular
> or liked by those who have helped them to come into more power, such as the
> cardinal who
> promotes the priest into a bishopric.  "Team Players,"  loyal people, and
> sycophants may
> be promoted as often (or in some cases even more often) than on the basis
> of merit. Let us
> not forget simony, the sin of paying for an office, giving kickbacks,
> greasing the palms
> of those concerned, etc.
>
>     3. Ed notes that Social Organic Unity is what underlies the SDE  - our
> connection to
> the Godhead that emerges within us, in our work, in groups.
>  AB: Is this so, and if so, it seems to contradict the SDE!  Undoubtedly I
> lack
> understanding of the connection here and am open to instruction.
>
>            Warmly, Adam
>
>
>
> Grouptalk mailing list
> List at grouptalkweb.org
> http://grouptalkweb.org/mailman/listinfo/list_grouptalkweb.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://grouptalkweb.org/pipermail/list_grouptalkweb.org/attachments/20081008/bb0dfd3f/attachment.html