Carlos J. Medina

12/08/05

Persons are not quite the same as solitary individuals, nor are they a crowd…. Each [person] in some way contains others, and is contained by others, without his or her personal truth ever being wholly isolated or exhausted.

-Angela Tilby, Let There be Light.

Social psychology studies people based on their interaction, behaviorist psychology teaches about behavior of people, sociology focuses on the groups and roles people belong to, and psychotherapy emphasizes the unconscious desires that influence people. The different social sciences seem to yield a different picture of people’s identity. But these apparently discordant approaches may be assembled with the help of modern scientific ideas. I agree with physicist Danah Zohar and psychotherapist Ian Marshall in that one idea from quantum physics may be crucial to understanding collective behavior. Zohar calls this idea "The Principle of Duality," and in quantum physics this principle is called De Broglie’s hypothesis.

I was introduced to De Broglie’s hypothesis earlier this year in my chemistry class. The accepted hypothesis states that matter has a wave/particle duality. In other words matter can be observed as either a wave or a particle! This idea shocked most of us in our science class because waves and particles seem mutually exclusive. Nonetheless Dr. Burns my chemistry instructor explained several atom-bonding phenomena using this idea that opposes common sense. I believed that this idea could have implications outside of the physical sciences, and as I researched a wide variety of academic literature I came across The Quantum Society by Physicist Danah Zohar and Psychotherapist Ian Marhall. The authors suggest that since people are matter, they are also waves, and the quantum laws may be applicable to study human interaction. So then I set myself to examine their claim researching quantum physics and social theories.

I came to the conclusion that Zohar and Marshall’s thesis may be incorrect because the wave aspect of matter is only significant at a really small scale (Brown, Bursten and Lemay 210). But I agree with them in the applications of their thesis. Even though human beings are probably not quantum systems, the principle of duality can be used to integrate sociological, and psychological theories of human interaction. For the purposes of this essay I will use the principle of duality as an analogy to studying human relationships. I agree with Zohar and Marhall’s implication: Just like matter has two different and simultaneous identities, particle and wave, an individual must acquire two completely different identities at the same time while interacting with others. After reading literature in social psychology and psychoanalysis I learned that people must be part of a group’s identity while maintaining their own identity, and not shift back and forth between a group identity and their own individuality. Human interaction must integrate people into a group while allowing them individuality, so that individuals as well as the group as whole benefit the best possible way.

Zohar states that the Principle of Duality is analogous to a dance production (Zohar and Marshall 104). I enjoy watching dance performances, especially ballet and modern dance, and I think Ballet works best to illustrate the principle. In a ballet production, each dancer performs difficult yet beautiful movements. The movements of each dancer are assembled so that even the hands’ motion is important. Each dancer moves with beauty. But at the same time, looking at all the dancers as a whole group, the Ballet Company dances with great synchronicity and beauty. Each dancer performs a specific part that belongs to his or her identity so much that even the movements of his or her fingers is graceful. And yet the company as a whole unravels beauty as well. According to the Principle of Duality each individual dancer is like an individual particle, but the entire group of dancers dancing at the same time is like a wave. Both exist at the same time, but both are different.

The same phenomenon must occur when people interact and form a group. According to the social psychology of Eric Fromm "the more man becomes an ‘individual’... the more he has "to unite himself with the world in the spontaneity of love and productive work, or else to seek a kind of security that destroys his individual self" (Fromm 38). In order to be psychologically healthy we need to be aware of our own individuality and yet at the same time be part of a loving relationship and productive work in society. Fromm agrees with the principle of duality: we must be free individuals and at the same time part of a group. Some people want to live relatively unattached of others and never truly belong to a group, while others may engage in antisocial behavior only to prove to a gang that they want to belong to the group. But either case is too extreme. If we find the appropriate balance between these extremes we will feel better and others will feel better as well.

When we are part of a group, according to American sociologist Robert E. Park, we are also part of another identity that surges from the group itself (Britannica Online). In collective behavior, people "behave alike, not because of an established rule or the force of authority, and not because as individuals they have the same attitudes, but because of a distinctive group process" (Britannica Online). Park’s insight on group behavior resembles the wave-like aspect of matter. According to Park a group is a new unit that emerges from the individuals’ interaction. Similarly in a quantum system, a group of particles, such as electrons, create a new wave out of all the interference between the individual particles. If we don’t share attitudes or behaviors with one of our groups, we may not truly belong to that group. For the sake of the group’s successful development we should either find another group that better resembles our attitudes or adapt our own attitudes to fit the group. During my sophomore year in High School I made the decision to leave my group of friends. Since I had spent a year with them I had difficulty leaving them, but time reassured me that I did the best in parting from them. I left my friends because I did not share with them the attitude regarding stealing. I believed and still do, that stealing is wrong and I could neither accept my friends’ opposite attitude nor change it, so I chose to leave them. Though this process was hard, eventually I found another group of friends who shared more closely my attitudes.

The difficulty I had leaving my friends points out the strength that a group has over the individual identities of its members. The more that group interaction resembles only a wave, the stronger the group identity develops and the weaker the individual identities become. This unbalance occurred in many people of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. These people valued much more their country than they valued themselves. Therefore these people willingly gave their time, money to the motherland; few went as far as giving up their idiosyncrasy and morals for the sake of their country. Sadly these people had no personal identity. They were "Nazi Germans" or "Soviets," but not individuals. History taught us that this type of extreme nationalism might become barbaric. The atrocities of the Holocaust and the Gulag system demonstrate how inhuman we can be if we lose our individuality.

A less destructive but also negative consequence that may arise when group relationship favors the group too much is called Social Loafing. In social psychology social loafing refers to the "tendency for people to apply less effort when they work as members of a group than when they work on their own" (Nevid 510). For instance in a soccer team social loafing happens when players do not play to develop their own potential, but instead rely on the effort of other people, and therefore the team as a whole is less effective. During the game ‘player A’ expects ‘player B’ to get the ball, but ‘player B’ expected ‘player A’ to get the ball. The situation results in that neither of the players gets the ball, and the opposing team does. I think the lesson is that we shouldn’t expect that others will do a certain task if they haven’t told us. In a group like a soccer team we should set responsibilities for each person and hold him or her accountable for these responsibilities.

Just as social loafing and other difficulties arise in a relationship that stresses too much the wave aspect, difficulties may also arise if a relationship stresses too much the particle aspect. When an individual rejects much involvement with any group or any group rejects him or her, the situation overly resembles the particle aspect, individuality, of a relationship. This unbalance results in isolation, and isolation both physical and social may overwhelm a person and create great anxiety (Fromm 36, 45). If a person is alone long enough, he or she is likely to develop psychological disorders (Fromm 34). A way of life in isolation deteriorates our mental health. Human beings are meant to share with others, because human beings are inherently social. I find this idea very true: though at times I may prefer to be alone, sooner or later I end up missing the company of others.

I believe that intimacy may be the appropriate balance that avoids the extremes of too much individuality or too much group identity. In psychodrama, which is the psychoanalysis of human interaction, intimacy is the time when people are truly aware of each other and become able to love and care (Berne 182). We all have a psychological need to be recognized by others (Berne), but an intimate relationship brings together our individuality and the group’s identity. Intimacy in counseling psychology "is a process" that "can take many forms" not limited to sexual intimacy (Griffin). And the word "process" implies that intimacy takes time. But thankfully intimacy may be the solution to finding the right balance for good relationships. My relationships with my family, friends and coworkers may improve if I take the time to develop intimacy with them.

Unfortunately psychotherapist Eric Berne believes that when most people socialize with others they do not achieve intimacy (Berne 16-20). The main reason why most people do not accomplish intimacy is because most people do not communicate well with each other (Griffin). The great importance of communication in achieving an intimate relationship explains why some people may stop being friends and even hate each other because of a miscommunication. I have had instances in my life where I’ve had to apologize to people for saying jocund remarks that were perceived as rude, even though I only intended to say a friendly joke.

I observed an example of faulty communication one night talking to my 17-year-old sister. I started the conversation enthusiastically telling her about a badminton match I watched on T.V.

"I’ve played like that at school," my sister replied caustically.

Berne would refer to this example as a type of "Game." In his book Games People Play, The Psychology of Human Interaction Berne defines "Game" as the "mechanism that substitutes intimacy" (Berne 16). In game playing, individuals do not communicate objectively as adults should, but communicate under the influence of inappropriate ego states (Berne 17). Berne would argue that my sister’s reply came from her "child ego state," and did not allow good communication to take place. Game playing occurs all the time in social interaction, and most of the times people are unaware of it, but thanks to advances in psychology we can learn to communicate better and overcome this social barrier.

However overcoming game playing can be difficult. Psychiatrist Adam Blatner believes that the first step to end "game playing" is to become aware of our games (Blatner). Blatner thinks that spontaneity is linked to awareness (Blatner); so being spontaneous may be the key that liberates us from game playing. When we are spontaneous we do not constrain our actions so much, and this liberation from our self-criticism may allow us to focus better on others. Though I agree with Blatner I think that some people like me are naturally more inhibited than others and for us, spontaneity itself is also a barrier. So Blatner’s insight doesn’t help us very much. He should tell us how to be spontaneous.

Fortunately few years ago I found in a book on Zen Buddhism the idea that spontaneity occurs when we live "in the here and now." To live this way we should not worry how others will react to our actions. While to some degree we should evaluate the consequences of our actions, we shouldn’t over do it. For example, every time I have to give a class presentation and I worry about what people will think of me, I become very nervous. My voice projects even less, my hands shake, and depending on my nervousness I may even panic. These effects of my nervousness are what really may distract people. On the other hand if I focus on the material I have to present, I act in a very spontaneous manner and effectively communicate the material.

High School is one place where these ideas of intimacy and spontaneity should bring positive results at creating an appropriate balance in a group. Though High School is built around education, it is also a place where teenagers shape their identities. During High School and since Middle School, teenagers develop the resolution between the particle and wave aspect, and they might continue with these attitudes for the rest of their lives. One way that some teenagers define this balance is through cliques. Kelly Chiang, a former High School student, explained me that a clique is a "group of friends that are obligated to spend time together." Chiang commented that cliques develop their own personality, and each member contributes to the clique’s identity. A High School clique may be a positive way for teenagers to develop meaningful relationships, or they may be not. Like any other group of people, a clique needs to achieve intimacy based in a good communication between its members. While cliques easily develop a wave aspect, they must allow individuals self-expression as well. Since teenagers go through critical developmental stages during Middle and High School, the educational curriculum shouldn’t be academic only but also social. In classes like English or Social Studies, teachers should bring up social interaction issues such as stereotyping. This more holistic education should help students achieve a better balance in their relationships, and enable them to be better people.

I used the principle of duality in this example and throughout this essay as an analogy to interpret human interaction and social theories. Earlier this semester I talked to Dr. Smith, my philosophy instructor, about the philosophical issues regarding interpretation. Dr. Smith argued that every interpretation is doomed to subjectivism because the interpreter brings a system to serve as the basis of the interpretation. In my case my system was the Principle of Duality. Dr. Smith said that the system that the interpreter brings might not be part of reality at all. While I agree with Dr. Smith, I think that using a system like the Principle of Duality to interpret people brings helpful insights that can help people relate to each other better. Therefore instead of not interpreting people we should keep doing it. I used the Principle of Duality as the basis of my interpretation, but there are many other scientific ideas that could also be used and potentially bring helpful insights.

The way we view others is in itself an interpretation. The more I’ve lived and the more I’ve studied, the more I’ve realized that different aspects of life are not mutually exclusive. They may seem exclusive because we might interpret them that way. The reason why during a chemistry lecture the Principle of Duality captivated me so much was probably because this Principle captures the idea that differences such as particle states and wave states are part of the same thing. And I believe life should be a path for finding the right equilibrium between all the particle states and all the wave states, not just in relationships but in every aspect of our existence.