Bowen family systems theory grew from an effort to bring psychiatry and behavioral science more in line with the practice of the "hard sciences," especially biological science. Bowen's new approach, originating in the 1950's, involved considering the family the key unit in human functioning; and viewing behavior as a systems phenomenon rather than a matter of simple cause and effect. Systems had to do with seeing the larger picture and the reciprocal relationships among component parts. From this perspective, individual human functioning could be seen in relationship to forces beyond the individual. Bowen articulated how individual action emanated both from qualities of the individual and from the ongoing flow of forces in the social and physical environment. By maintaining a systems focus, Bowen illustrated the limitations of human perception and illuminated the ways in which perception is influenced. Bowen theory permits one to view the human being as part of the larger world that has evolved from other forms of life. It helps expand beyond the limits of human introspection and opens the understanding of humans to the advances of biology, ecology and the other sciences.
Key tenets of Bowen theory are as follows:
--- Variation in human functioning is significantly influenced by three key social/emotional variables. These are differentiation of self, stress, and effective contact with important others, especially the multi-generational family.
--- Differentiation of self is the quality of individuals, families, and groups that is associated with maturity and successful functioning in varying degrees.
--- Differentiation of self has to do with the capacity to separate thinking from emotion and to maintain individual prerogative in the face of social and relationship influences.
--- Levels of differentiation of self are transmitted across generations. Marriage tends to pair individuals at similar levels of differentiation and offspring tend to adopt this level, though with some variation among siblings.
--- Human difficulties emanate from a combination of environmental stressors, lower differentiation of self, and loss of contact with the multi-generational family. These difficulties manifest as physical illness, emotional symptoms, social dysfunction, or a combination of the above. Emotional symptoms take the forms of marital distance, marital conflict, under-functioning in one or both spouses, and under-functioning in one or several children. Families vary in their degree of vulnerability to these difficulties and in the ways that they characteristically manifest such duress.
--- All behavior is influenced by one's relationship network. Relationships between any two individuals tend to draw others in, so as to create a relationship network. Bowen called this phenomenon triangling. The ability to separate relationships from one another contributes to the ability to successfully problem-solve, both for oneself and for the relationships involved. More generally, the ability to define a coherent self involves this ability to separate one relationship from another.
--- As has been demonstrated in the research of Walter Toman, interpersonal style is significantly predicted by the birth order and sex of oneself and one's siblings and that of one's recent ancestors. Furthermore, the complementarity of marital, work, and other later relationships can be understood based on the birth order and sex in sibling constellations.
--- Differentiation of self develops and operates in a social context. Loss of effective contact with significant others, especially from the multi-generational family, is a sign of lower differentiation of self and serves to block efforts toward greater differentiation. Conversely, efforts toward differentiation are facilitated by thoughtful contact with the multi-generational family and other key relationships.
--- In addition to the variables already cited the current functioning level of society, or subsets of society, also affect individual and family functioning. Society tends to oscillate in its functioning level and tends to regress during major shifts in population density and when access to natural resources is diminished.
--- Finally, the theory remains open to unexplained or "supernatural" phenomena such as intuition, coincidence, and premonition, with the expectation that these too will eventually be understood as systems phenomena related to objective, real-world variables.
This is an excerpt of an address I recently gave at my brother's UU church in Barneveldt, NY. It grew out of a discussion with my brother in which I suggested that behavioral science had something useful to say about the current state of society—particularly the intense polarization and uncertainty about what is fact and what is fiction in society today. The initial title of my talk focused on how people influence each other. The form of my talk was a memoir of key lessons I learned through first-hand contact with several of the pioneers in the behavioral sciences.
My early formative experience involved training with Muzafer and Carolyn Sherif who helped bring the scientific method to the field of social psychology. Muzafer's seminal study demonstrated how, in an ambiguous situation, people became increasingly susceptible to the influence of others. Influence tends to be enhanced by the influencing persons’ status and authority as well as by the group they are associated with. A person is most susceptible to influence if the other person is associated with one's reference group, i.e., the group that one identifies with. The Sherifs built their work around concepts. A significant series of studies demonstrated how group differences can be bridged. The relevant concept was called super-ordinate goals. I participated in a summer camp experience based on this concept. I was a counselor in a camp comprised of a mix of Black and white campers and staff in about equal numbers. The camp was structured such that daily decisions and activities involved discussion and participation by everyone. The outcome was a rich experience of learning about and getting along with people from different backgrounds and attitudinal patterns.
The significance of social psychology to me was that it highlighted how much people are influenced by other people—to a greater degree than people tend to realize or admit. Ironically, within the field of psychology, there seems hardly any debate or discussion between the branch of psychology that emphasizes individual action and the branch that emphasizes social influence.
An important next step in my education involved training with Dr. Carl Whitaker at the University of Wisconsin Medical School. By then Carl had converted (or advanced) to the growing interest in working with whole families. To me, this looked like the synthesis of individual and social psychology. I did a co- therapy with Carl—actually an apprentice experience. He met our patient family at the office door but wouldn't let them in because they had left one sibling home. He wanted to work with the whole family. Carl also promoted the idea that in order to develop as an individual one had to re-activate relationships with one's original family.
One day I came in late to Whitaker’s seminar. He got out of his chair and handed me an article saying "I think you will find this interesting." The paper was Murray Bowen’s article about his own family. After my year in Wisconsin was up I attended a conference at which both Whitaker and Bowen presented papers. I spoke with Carl during an intermission and he said "people say Bowen is dry and boring but every time I hear him he knocks my socks off." Soon after that I took a college teaching job. I wrote Dr. Bowen about my interest in researching his theory and specifically about measuring differentiation of self. He wrote back a two page reply—essentially saying it isn’t so easy. Within a year I had joined his training program in Georgetown.
For my purposes here, the part of Bowen's framework that is most central is the way that relationships and emotion impinge on clear thinking. Bowen used the term "subjectivity" a lot but I can’t recall his ever using the term "objectivity." I surmise this is because "objectivity" is a relative term and is never fully achieved. Bowen's theory provided, and still provides, a guideline for navigating the sea of emotionality that nature has given us. The other relevant corollary to his theory about emotion and human functioning involves the way society as a whole fluctuates in its ability to contain and regulate emotion.
From this perspective, one can see that the recent and current state of affairs in society has become increasingly emotionally charged. Thus subjectivity prevails and there is a relative loss of clarity concerning the discernment of facts and reality. Put simply, society becomes more anxious. And anxiety is very contagious.
I will try to summarize and draw some conclusions from this personal journey. We are all, by our very nature, emotional and subjective and influenced by others. Indeed, subjectivity can be a source of creativity and gratification. But we are particularly vulnerable to or in need of outside influence when we are faced with ambiguity and uncertainty. To the extent that we can distinguish between internal and external influences and maintain some sense of our individuality, life can be more manageable for us and for those we live among. My effort here is to document that there has been a good 85 years of behavioral science that can help explain what we are currently experiencing in society, and that understanding might even aid us in figuring how to deal with these times.