High context/low context culturally. Does same concept apply in relationships?

[teartracks]

Hi everyone,

I've been reading a lot about low context and high context cultures.  The articles I've read explain how context between cultures revolves greatly around individualism or collectivism.  There are a number of links, most relying on the work of Edward Hall who introduced the concept.  It all got me to thinking that a similar parallel might be drawn in families.  That is to say, in a family, it is obvious that each member has a different personality, interprets their surroundings differently, reacts differently, sees and hears what transpires in a context that may be slightly to drastically different from the other members, thereby creating dust devils so to speak within the group.   

Not considering abusive exchanges but adding the real possibility that genetic disorders may be a part of the mix makes me think that often times, we miss incorporating an important part of the cure of family dysfunction by not paying enough attention to how each persons context of any given situation may differ from our own.

n order to communicate successfully you have to consider the cultural differences and the predominating communication process in individualistic and collectivistic cultures. It is best to explain theses differences in terms of low- and high-context communication. Context has to do with how much you have to know before you can communicate effectively.

http://www.via-web.de/273.html

What do you think?

tt

[mudpuppy]

we miss incorporating an important part of the cure of family dysfunction by not paying enough attention to how each persons context of any given situation may differ from our own

I'm not sure there is a cure for the majority of the dysfunctional families I have seen, short of mass lobotomies.

But for an awful lot of people, we are the product of the union of imperfect people who screwed up family interaction on a regular basis, and who created siblings for us who don't know much more about how to interact than they did. And we, although characterized by (perhaps) more introspection, are not much more able.

CB, I respect and admire you greatly but that sentiment above seems like a recipe for ennabling and excusing an awful lot of really bad behavior that may fall short of horrific abuse. 'Love your neighbor as yourself' isn't that hard a concept to grasp and while none of us do it perfectly, those who make little or no effort at it despite comprehending it perfectly well are the cause of about 90% of the problems in families, societies and the world. We all have the same basic human nature but those of us who strive to tame or suppress it should not be lumped in with those who don't. Observe any classroom, party or crowd and it becomes pretty clear pretty quickly just how differently people behave and who causes trouble, who tolerates it but does not participate in it and who tries to prevent or correct it. And short of the mass hysteria of a riot or a rescue situation I don't think there is usually a whole lot of overlap between the three, especially among adults.

mud

[teartracks]

Hi Mud,

I hear your sentiments.  I keep a baseball bat handy for the specific purpose of performing lobotomies!     But if the next generation all have lopsided sculls resulting from lobotomies, I hope you get credit for coming up with the idea right here on this board!

tt

[teartracks]

Hi CB,

I'm glad you found the article interesting and helpful.  I'd love to hear how you put it to work as you attend future intercultural meetings. 

I hope you'll post about the things you glean from the website.

Edit in:  CB, here's a blurb from Edward Hall on his book,  The Dance of Life.  Sounds like it might shed light on the cultures you mentioned. 
 
The Dance of Life deals with the most personal of all experiences: how people are tied together and yet isolated from each other by invisible threads of rhythm and hidden walls of time. Time is treated as a language, as an organizer of activities, a synthesizer and integrator, as well as a special message system revealing how people really feel about each other.

Important chapters are devoted to the Americans and the Japanese as mirror images of each other. Even as such diverse cultures as these, time sets the stage for everything else. Other sections of the book deal with how time influences relations among people in West European countries, as well as among Latin Americans, Anglo-Americans and Native Americans.

tt


 

[CB123]

that sentiment above seems like a recipe for ennabling and excusing an awful lot of really bad behavior that may fall short of horrific abuse.

I know it sounds that way, Mud, but I'm really not enabling or excusing that kind of behavior.

I am just becoming more and more aware that there are people all around us that are good on many levels, but who are very dysfunctional on others.  Me included.  I'll be really honest here: in my own relating to people, I find that I can be so triggered that I have to fight rising hysteria when I am.  I'm serious. 

It makes me aware that that I have a kneejerk response that screams that I am being abused, when I am not.  It doesnt come from what is actually happening to me, but from what has happened to me in the past.  I don't think that I am so unusual either.  And I know what response that I would like to make at times like that, and it would be unwarranted given the REALITY of the situation.  The other person would be right to be offended if I did. 

This is just bare-bones honesty. 

That's where I think TT's concept of context comes in.  The context that I have lived my life in up to now, has a lot to do with my responses.  Add that to the context of my culture's values...add that to the other person(s) context and I don't think that we are always communicating what is really going on.

That's all I'm saying. 

Hope that clarifies--but I know that even so, you and I are probably not on the same point of the scale of absolutes.  Nevertheless, I DEEPLY appreciate your post to Hops to kick butt.  Sometimes you just say it so succinctly, Mud!!!

Love,
CB

[CB123]

Thanks, TT.

I think I'll look at that book.  It sounds really good.

I'll let  you know what I come up with...

CB

[sKePTiKal]

Thanks for this thread, TT....

Context - not just culturally, but situationally - is helpful to me in my current work on approaching boundaries from the side of how they connect us to each other - not just keep us separate.

It makes me aware that that I have a kneejerk response that screams that I am being abused, when I am not.  It doesnt come from what is actually happening to me, but from what has happened to me in the past.  I don't think that I am so unusual either.  And I know what response that I would like to make at times like that, and it would be unwarranted given the REALITY of the situation.  The other person would be right to be offended if I did. 

CB, I've been looking at these triggers again, a lot lately. The probate for my Dad's estate means that I am forced into a relationship with my brother again... and don't ya know... that's bringing up a lot of old crap again? It's as though the 40 years that we've drifted off into our own lives never happened. We're still 10 and 12.

EXCEPT: the context is so different now. Your example sums it all up concisely. I've had to literally walk away from those kneejerk reactions/responses... my brother seems to want to bulldoze my basic human boundaries and my first response is to strike back and cause hurt to make it unmistakably clear that he can't tell me what to do. To go full emotional  nuclear attack, like I used to. But I don't do this anymore.

Walking away, I'm able to be objective enough to look for context - familial context - that helps me understand the reality vs the triggers. And to realize that my brother is also being triggered; his fears and unresolved issues and stunted emotional development (like mine) are controlling his reactions and his responses to situations. The topic of "secrets"... of being a single-minded "unit" and not allowing for individual opinions, emotions, disagreements and compromise... and of course, "the way we do things" - all this stuff is coming up again for me in a new context. My brother hasn't done any therapy. He lives with my mother. He's grieving the loss of my dad - who offset a lot of the damage done, but who caused some of his own - in my brother's self.

So, my brother's view of reality and what is "happening" in situations is different than mine. I am trying to teach him to respect my reality by respecting his and communicating very carefully and clearly. I can't assume we have some innate ability to understand each other. Each individual, I believe, has his/her own "reality" and it's some kind of miracle that there is enough in common among us that we can agree on so many things - this color is "blue", this is a chair, red means stop, etc. If we didn't collectively agree on these types of things, anarchy would be the society of the day and the strongest, meanest, most psychopathic would rule.

Some of the things I see happening socially, politically, economically today seem to point to new definitions of collective "reality" and perhaps a new balance between individual and collective reality. I think humans are trying to invent a new context and value system that balances collective reality with the well-being of individuals. But, that's sorta like trying to invent the wheel - it's silly and not productive to completely reject the traditional, the old, and start all over from scratch. So there's a sorting process: keep this, try this new thing in place that old one...

all looking for context and personal meaning within the whole.

Very, very interesting topic TT.

[mudpuppy]

but I know that even so, you and I are probably not on the same point of the scale of absolutes

Hi CB,

I think maybe it's just that I think there is a considerably larger distance from one end of the scale to the other than you.
I don't equate you perceiving abuse where none exists with the original abuse; they are not moral equivalents any more than the victim of an armed robbery seeing thiefs around every corner is equivalent to the thug who terrorized her in the first place.
Is there a goulash of murky motivations in the middle of the scale? Yes.
But most of us, IMO don't live there very much at all, even though we could if we didn't make an effort not to. Most of us just want to live peacefully on our end of the scale, but those on the far end find it very easy and rewarding to come down and use us, precisely because we are forgiving and inoffensive and thoughtful and easy marks, unlike those on their end of the scale.
The trick is making it so painful they go back from whence they came without taking on their traits.

mud

[teartracks]

Most of us just want to live peacefully on our end of the scale, but those on the far end find it very easy and rewarding to come down and use us, precisely because we are forgiving and inoffensive and thoughtful and easy marks, unlike those on their end of the scale.
The trick is making it so painful they go back from whence they came without taking on their traits.

Mud,

You make it sound so easy to make it so painful they go back from whence they came without taking on their traits.   I'm curious, do you have a predictable, predetermined tipping point when it comes to holding your ground or cutting  an offender slack?  A lot of times when someone offends me I let it slide because I figure their head must be in a pretty miserable place for them to behave that way.  Or, I figure my head might be in the wrong place for me to notice something that might be the kneejerk reaction CB speaks of. 

Edit in:  To shed a little light on my question, it is as if I don't know what to be offended by unless it is grossly offensive.  I know that sounds dumb and it probably goes back to my FOO, where, we were required to be feelingless.  I don't want to beat that dead horse for the rest of my life, but now that I'm 'grown up', I want to be as informed and confident about how to handle offenses as you.

tt

[teartracks]

Hi PR,

Glad you find the topic interesting and helpful.  I learn so much from you guys putting your thoughts on the board.

tt

[mudpuppy]

You make it sound so easy to make it so painful they go back from whence they came without taking on their traits.

No. It's usually very difficult. That's why I said it's a 'trick' and not an easy one. It's less difficult pulling a rabbit out of a hat.

I'm curious, do you have a predictable, predetermined tipping point when it comes to holding your ground or cutting  an offender slack?

Nope. I'm a non confrontational person to begin with and I keep short accounts and have a pretty long fuse so it takes quite a lot to cause me to hold my ground. I admit to a certain amusement observing most human misbehavior toward me as long as it remains relatively harmless. They're making an ass out of themselves, not me.
However when my integrity is seriously and baselessly challenged or what someone does is emotionally, physically or financially harming my loved ones whom I am responsible for protecting then I will defend them and myself just as long and with as much force as necessary to end their attacks.

To shed a little light on my question, it is as if I don't know what to be offended by unless it is grossly offensive.

This gives me a chance to clarify something I said to CB. I think we are obligated to try and prevent or correct the murky middle of abuse that occurs to others and even then only so long as our help is not making matters worse or is not unwanted. I was mainly questioning the 'we're all screwed up so who am I to judge' viewpoint not so much advocating the 'turn into a scold and fight every battle that comes along' technique. Picking your major fights well and judiciously is vital if you don't want to spend a lifetime on the battlefield, which isn't much of a way to live.

I want to be as informed and confident about how to handle offenses as you.

I suggest you set your sights a little higher. For me it's easy to talk about theory, a little harder ito put into practice.
I wrongly let a particularly offensive racial comment slide, with only a shake of my head, at my in laws on Thanksgiving just because it was my in laws and the guy says things just to be provocative. My wife, being a blood relation and not holding back too much these days, did not hesitate to let him have it between the eyes.

mud

[teartracks]

Hi Mud,

Well maybe I'm not doing so bad after all.  I'm not much of a confronter.  I used to offer way too much unasked for help though.  That was when I thought my purpose in life was to shield others from the trainwrecks I saw coming in their lives.  I was misguided.  Now that I've quit being the shock absorber, things are working far better for them and me.  I regret (because it was the wrong way) every time I installed myself as the shock absorber in someone else's life.

I like to keep short accounts too.  Right now, there is a person in my family with whom I've desired a true friendship for a long time, but somewhere along the way things got off track.  I can't figure out how.  But I have had to give up that desire. 

It is easy for me to read the low context/high context material and believe that I could eventually learn to work my way through the differences in cultures given time.  Somehow, it's much more difficult  within a family or other domestc group where  our affections are a vital part of the dynamic.

Oh, to live at the bright end of the continuim for the next year, with no having to deal with the murky middle.   Ahhhhh!

Thanks Mud.

tt