Relationship, communication and mind-states
Published by Mysorean on Monday, September 04, 2006 at 1:52:00 am.
Have been reading a lot around the blogsphere regarding relationships and how we should handle them as well as ourselves in these relationships.
People have various ways of looking at relationships. Some people like categorizing relationships on basis of blood and otherwise meaning: family and friends. Some say relationships are strong or weak; close or far; "childhood friends" or "hi-bye friends"; so on and so forth. Categorizing makes for easy handling of this vast in-depth subject. And in most circumstances, the best way of handling it is through categorizing them relevantly.
A relationship is an equation between two people. The equation gets formed when the two start communicating. It can be through any mode of communication. Even just meeting of eyes is sometimes the beginning of a relationship. But then, no communication no relationship. Sometimes communication might happen, yet there might be no relationship. I don't think such a situation is possible at all. Once I have communicated, I might not be thinking about it, but there is a relationship that has been initiated. I might not be aware of it.
As a person we are playing different roles. No, not the kinds shown by Aamir Khan in the toyota ad! With my wife, I am playing the husband's role. With my younger brother, I am playing the elder brother's role. And many others. Not that I am playing them consciously, it's just that it happens. But there are states of mind that I get into while communicating in each role. These mind-states maybe different for each role. But they might not be unique.
Now, when I am in these mind-states the other person is also in these mind states only. I know I am talking on a very vague level, but let me say that there are 4 mind states (It can be 100 also). M1 to M4. Both the persons A & B are communicating from one of these mind-states. Say A is from M1 and B is in M3. If A & B know the mind-states that each other are communicating from, then fine. Otherwise, is where the problem arises from.
And to understand which Mind-state the other person is operating from, constant communication is necessary. Since every person is changing his mind-states constantly, it is necessary to understand the pattern of change also. Once we understand all these then the relationship will be a smooth one. For this, communication is a core necessity. Remember, no communication no relationship!
And yeah the way to solve the problems in relationships is to identify the mind-states properly and responding appropriately. That should put an end to all problems!
Wow Adi is so brilliant! Some stupid theory I have, I keep raving and ranting about it. I know this is very similar to the parent, child, adult egos of the 'transactional analysis' theory, probably this is my way of understanding that theory. I just wrote it and realised that it is very similar to the original TA theory. It's the same "I'm okay, You' re okay" theory.
Well, though I will be laughed at for trying to copy some well-known theory, let me state that I typed it as it came to my mind. And even though I found that it can be accused of plagiarism, I am going ahead with posting it. That's because if even one person who reads this article, develops an interest in the TA theory then I would have emerged victorious.
People have various ways of looking at relationships. Some people like categorizing relationships on basis of blood and otherwise meaning: family and friends. Some say relationships are strong or weak; close or far; "childhood friends" or "hi-bye friends"; so on and so forth. Categorizing makes for easy handling of this vast in-depth subject. And in most circumstances, the best way of handling it is through categorizing them relevantly.
A relationship is an equation between two people. The equation gets formed when the two start communicating. It can be through any mode of communication. Even just meeting of eyes is sometimes the beginning of a relationship. But then, no communication no relationship. Sometimes communication might happen, yet there might be no relationship. I don't think such a situation is possible at all. Once I have communicated, I might not be thinking about it, but there is a relationship that has been initiated. I might not be aware of it.
As a person we are playing different roles. No, not the kinds shown by Aamir Khan in the toyota ad! With my wife, I am playing the husband's role. With my younger brother, I am playing the elder brother's role. And many others. Not that I am playing them consciously, it's just that it happens. But there are states of mind that I get into while communicating in each role. These mind-states maybe different for each role. But they might not be unique.
Now, when I am in these mind-states the other person is also in these mind states only. I know I am talking on a very vague level, but let me say that there are 4 mind states (It can be 100 also). M1 to M4. Both the persons A & B are communicating from one of these mind-states. Say A is from M1 and B is in M3. If A & B know the mind-states that each other are communicating from, then fine. Otherwise, is where the problem arises from.
And to understand which Mind-state the other person is operating from, constant communication is necessary. Since every person is changing his mind-states constantly, it is necessary to understand the pattern of change also. Once we understand all these then the relationship will be a smooth one. For this, communication is a core necessity. Remember, no communication no relationship!
And yeah the way to solve the problems in relationships is to identify the mind-states properly and responding appropriately. That should put an end to all problems!
Wow Adi is so brilliant! Some stupid theory I have, I keep raving and ranting about it. I know this is very similar to the parent, child, adult egos of the 'transactional analysis' theory, probably this is my way of understanding that theory. I just wrote it and realised that it is very similar to the original TA theory. It's the same "I'm okay, You' re okay" theory.
Well, though I will be laughed at for trying to copy some well-known theory, let me state that I typed it as it came to my mind. And even though I found that it can be accused of plagiarism, I am going ahead with posting it. That's because if even one person who reads this article, develops an interest in the TA theory then I would have emerged victorious.
