Note to Readers 2014: This is a later   Note to Readers: This is an HTML version of a paper which was presented to the American Society for Cybernetics, Conference on Autonomy, Intervention and Dependence, in November, 1984. It was written on the earliest 128K Apple Macintosh, using MacWrite and MacPaint, and is a fine example of very early Apple Macintosh style, i.e. far too many fonts, styles and sizes. When putting this version together from an ancient floppy disk, I decided to preserve the original style as nearly as possible.

Gary AlexanderJanuary 1998

Becoming Friends: Approaching world harmony through social learning, or The transactional dynamics of convergent and divergent communicationTable of contents

Section 1 - Introduction and Overview Section 2 - Divergent and Convergent Communication Section 3 - Human Nature: Myths and Possibilities Section 4 - Exchange from a communication perspective Section 5 - 'Becoming Friends': Toward Social Harmony

Section 1 - Introduction and Overview   1.1 An invitation from the authorsIn preparing this paper, the authors have strayed quite far from the fields in which we were originally trained. We were on the more mathematical side of the physical or engineering sciences: Gary Alexander in nonlinear circuit theory and Mike Hussey in the theory of structures. This has left us with a love for the clarity and consistency which is the strength of mathematical thinking, and is the reason this paper has been prepared for an audience of cyberneticians although its content might be more appropriate for a meeting called something like 'The World Harmony Congress'.We believe that a new and more harmonious vision of the possibilities for humanity and its relationship to the rest of the planet has been emerging, especially over the past 20 years. Various facets of this vision include:

a concern with the effects of human activities on the natural environment more flexible views on family relationships, and especially on the roles of men and

women experiments with forms of community which are more autonomous and self-sufficient new approaches to personal health, both physical and emotional and of course, the search for alternatives to war in general and nuclear weapons in

particular.People who are involved in one of these facets are likely to be involved in others as well, often because they see a deep intuitive or aesthetic connection, more than an intellectual one. Nonetheless, it is rare to find a discussion which links them all, or which can even find a common vocabulary in which to discuss more than one of them.We believe we are in the process of developing just such a linking and unifying approach, based upon cybernetic concepts. We believe that a coherent intellectual treatment is essential if these new approaches are to avoid inadvertently slipping into the old traps. This intellectual approach is meant to complement, not replace an intuitive or experiential approach.The difficulty we face when trying to make sense of this vision as a whole is that we cannot avoid considering areas of knowledge on which other people have spent their whole lives. This inevitably means we must stick our necks out. Moreover, we have found it almost impossible to know where to begin or to end.Although we have been developing our ideas for quite a few years, this paper is our first attempt to set them out in a way which displays most of the pattern we see. Having struggled hard with this paper, we find that we have a long way to go before the rigour we are sure is there in our minds can be expressed in words. There are some key areas, especially the problems with language, which we have left out. Nonetheless, we hope that you will get a sense of the overall pattern. And especially, we hope to find that you are also working along similar lines and will be interested in joining us in our search. 1.2 An overview of the paperI believe the most important contribution of this paper is in its overall message rather than in its details. Thus I will start by outlining that message in this overview. The rest of the paper will go through the outline again, sketching in some of the details. A fully argued and supported treatment would require far more than this one paper.I believe that the accumulated crises facing humanity (military, economic, ecological, managerial, 3rd World debt, energy, etc.) appear as an incoherent mess and as inevitable 'facts of life' because we view them in a fragmented fashion. Every problem area has its own vocabulary and set of ad hoc theories. If, on the other hand, we look for the underlying patterns of communication in these problems, the same communication patterns appear in many different contexts, providing a great deal of coherence.Within recent generations, most of the world's people have become linked through a complex web of interactions. A peasant in India may suffer as a result of price changes on the Chicago commodities market, and changes in the U.S. prime interest rate may affect literally billions of

people. The problem is thus one of synchronising behaviours, and this is done through communication.I shall consider two patterns of communication, which I call convergent and divergent. I believe that the conflict around which most social problems center can be understood in terms of divergent communication. The essential feature of divergent communication is that the partial view each communicant holds leaves out much of what the opposing communicants think is relevant.Before elaborating further, or drawing any conclusion,s I would like to present some preliminary examples of what I mean by convergent and divergent communication.

´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª Example A. Playing "catch": a cooperative gameIn a park, two people throw a ball back and forth between them. They play it as an interesting game of skill. Each player attempts to throw the ball so that the other player can catch it, but with difficulty. To do this, each player must have a pretty good idea of the other's skill. In practice, skill levels tend to vary from minute to minute, so each player must keep quite aware of how the other is doing and feeling.Either player can easily throw the ball so that the other will miss. If either tries to do so deliberately, it spoils the fun. Often, if one player fails to catch the ball, the thrower will apologise, "Sorry, bad throw." Both act to make sure the other knows their intentions remain friendly.They may talk to each other occasionally to steer the game. "Throw me some high ones.", "Make me run a little more."The players are regular partners who know each other's abilities well. They find that the game is an excellent way of improving their throwing and catching, (as well as being enjoyable) because each has the benefit of a sympathetic second perspective on themselves.´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª 

This example exhibits some of the main features of convergent communication:1. Each communicant seeks to maintain an awareness not only of the immediate content of the interaction (i.e. throwing and catching the ball), but of the state of the relationship between them. Each acts to maintain agreement on the content and to maintain sympathy in the relationship. Thus, any potential conflict is easily headed off. The interaction is self-correcting.2. To do this, each communicant seeks to maintain an accurate awareness of how the other views the situation, and tries to keep this consistent with his own view of the situation.

Can you help me with your own examples of interactions between people with the same properties? 

My second example is one in which divergent communication has become institutionalised. ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª  Example B. Communities in conflict in Northern Ireland1. From the perspective of someone in the Catholic community. The English and their local allies, the Northern Irish protestants have been persecuting us for hundreds of years, treating us as second-class citizens in our own land. Today, armed soldiers patrol our streets, search us, restrict our movements, and generally harrass us. We live in a war zone. It is no wonder that our children grow up hating the English and that some of our more hot-headed people go in for violent attacts against them.2. From the perspective of someone in the Protestant community. We are simply trying to live reasonable lives in our own country, the United Kingdom, as we have done for hundreds of years. We don't like the presence of the army on our streets, but if they left we would be at the mercy of the IRA killers and bombers who won't stop making trouble until they have pushed us out. The more hot-headed among us, who harass the Catholics, only do it because they are so angry at what the IRA have done to us.3. From the perspective of someone sympathetic to both communities. It seems to me that each side sees only part of the problem. They see their own actions as basically reactive or defensive, in response to the provocations of the other side, and the actions of the other side as basically agressive. From my perspective, there is a self-maintaining process in which both sides play a part. Both respond to what is in the foreground: the recent hurt they have suffered, and ignore the background: the history that provoked the other side to hurt them. They blame the troubles on the other side, whom they see 'devils', rather than as full human beings.The communities actually seem to me to be very inter-dependent, in terms of provision of food, employment, and all the services which form part of modern life. Neither can really do without the other. The physical and psychological damage of the conflict, plus the cost in terms of human effort which could otherwise be used to good advantage, are making Northern Ireland a much poorer place than it needs to be.´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª 

This example describes a conflict as a self-maintaining pattern of divergent communication. In contrast to Example A, the participants view the situation very differently. Neither fully and sympathetically sees the other's view of themselves. Moreover, neither side makes any attempt to get those views to converge. That is an error in communication. Instead they attempt to coerce the others into doing their bidding. The result is that the actions of each reinforce the other's misunderstanding of them.

Again, I would appreciate your suggestion of more examples of interactions between people with similar properties.  

These two processes, convergent and divergent communication, form the heart of this paper. Section 2 will describe them in more detail. It will show that convergent communication is characterised by a)sympathy between communicants b)an absense of coercion (i.e. freedom) c)truthful communication.Section 2 will also show that, by contrast, divergent communication is characterised by a)antipathy b)coercion c)mendacity. Moreover, there is a common feedback cycle by which it becomes self-maintaining: Divergent communication leads to a failure to complete interactions successfully, which leads to overload. Overload leads to coercion which leads to still more divergent communication. Eventually divergent communication comes to be expected, and thus becomes institutionalised.I believe that divergent communication has been a prominent feature of many (but not all) human societies for thousands of years. It appears in various contexts which reinforce one another. Sections 3 and 4, respectively, look at two reasons why it might be unavoidable: i)that it might be an inherent part of human nature ii)that it is an inevitable consequence of scarcity due to limited resources.Section 3 looks at the myiths and possibilities of human nature. The most common objection I meet when I talk to people about more harmonious human societies is that "People aren't like that!." It is certainly true that our self-maintaining patterns of divergent communication lead us to inflict appalling damage upon ourselves and others. It doesn't follow that these patterns are inevitable, and are somehow 'built-in' to people. This section takes a brief look at childrearing practices, schooling and influences from the wider social environment to show how modern societies grow people who find convergent communication difficult. The section also shows some examples from the anthropological literature of much more harmonious cultures. They generally appear when a culture has developed a fairly relaxed and stress-free adaptation to its environment.After citing the evils of human nature, the second objection I have met to a more harmonious future is that "It's a dog eat dog world." "You have to compete to survive." Put crudely, such objectors say that there isn't enough of everything to satisfy everybody so the nice guys lose out. In section 5, I argue that while many people are faced with scarcity today (1 out of 5 people in the world go to bed hungry), these scarcities are not inevitable. Our major institutions of social coordination, economic and political (of both the Right and Left) are riddled with divergent communication. Its properties of antipathy, coercion and untruth combine to produce a great ineptitude, which leads to a gross mismatch of resources to human needs. What is worse, the endemic conflict absorbs vast amounts of resources and human effort. (The military is only one, obvious example.)To help illustrate these points in a concise and vivid manner, I have concocted a short fictional fantasy about a world which is organised around principles of convergent communication. Even if you don't have time to read all of this paper, you might wish to read that story, in Section 5.Finally, in Section 6, I shall make explicit the links with my starting point in the Introduction: The ways in which new approaches to our relation to the natural environment, to family relationships and sex roles, to forms of community, to physical and emotional health, and to alternatives to war are consistent with a change from divergent towards convergent communication (and also, where they are not consistent with such change.) I will conclude with a careful look at those aspects of the paper which I feel need strengthening, and a request for help in doing so.

Section 2 - Divergent and Convergent Communication In this section I shall be setting out the characteristics of divergent and convergent communication between people. I will build up to this in several stages. 2.1 A stream of transactionsWe are all faced with a continual stream of transactions with our surroundings to which we must direct our attention. Some involve only our physical surroundings, while others involve us in interactions with other people. These transactions arise, require some action on our part, and are completed. Our success, or lack of it, in completing these transactions, is the essence of the quality of life we experience. We have a scheduling problem--the order and amount of attention each interaction requires--which heavily influences that success.

´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª Example C. The runner's worldIt is early morning as I start to run. I become aware of the pounding in my legs, the cool air over my body, and of my breathing beginning to deepen.Soon my thoughts begin to wander to the day ahead of me. How smoothly will the morning ritual of getting children off to school go? I hope they won't miss the bus again. Does that rattle in the car mean anything serious? Oh yes, there is that meeting I must go to. That awkward administrator will be there. Will I be able to get my project approved? I hope the meeting doesn't last too long. Afterwards, I will have the pleasure of seeing the friend with whom I am about to start my new project. I'm sure he and I will be able to accomplish a lot, if only we have enough time.´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª

All our interactions are interrelated to a greater or lesser degree. A new friendship may improve work performance, work pressures may cause us to neglect exercise and our relationships with our family and friends, etc. Through secondary, tertiary, and further relationships, we are connected to most of the world's people. Our food, clothing and other goods are likely to come from all over the world. Our tax money is used to influence economic and political events globally. Monetary and economic problems in one country are likely to affect many others. A web of relationships makes all people interdependent.All of our transactions have deadlines and priorities associated with them, with varying degrees of flexibility. Thus the need to urinate takes precedence over most other transactions, whereas clearing the junk out of the spare room can be postponed indefinitely. We can choose to direct our attention to one interaction rather than another, and to reschedule if necessary, but only within limits. The same principle applies to our more indirect transactions as well. The manager of a firm facing serious cash flow problems cannot direct much attention to reducing the pollution the firm causes. There are feelings of anxiety and urgency which rise as deadlines approach. The intensity of these feelings depends upon the priority of the transaction, which in turn depends upon the consequences of its failure.Some of our transactions will be completed more easily than others. With some people, we expect (and perhaps offer) help to ensure that the transaction is completed to mutual satisfaction and in

good time. With others, we expect conflict and obstruction: The transaction may not be completed to our or the other's satisfaction. One of us may coerce the other. The transaction may require repeated attention before it is completed. The amount of attention required, and any emotional upsets resulting from a transaction are part of the cost of that transaction. In this sense, difficult transactions have a greater cost.This distinction between 'easy' and 'difficult' transactions is often not clear cut (and will be elaborated considerably below). It is more of a spectrum than a clear difference. Nonetheless, it can be used as a rough indicator of the coherence in our lives: To the extent that our transactions are easily achieved and mutually satisfactory, they are coherent. To the extent that they are characterised by conflict and coercion, our lives are fragmented.The possibilities of coherence or fragmentation apply to us at various scales, ranging from internal to our selves to society-wide:

Within an individual there may be more or less coherence: Does our living pattern provide enough exercise, rest and a healthy diet? Do feel torn by conflicts between our roles as friend, parent, wage-earner, lover, etc.?

The background, or context, to those internal transactions are our direct transactions with others and our environment: Are we coping with our jobs successfully? Can we obtain the food and other goods we want? Do we find our neighborhood safe and attractive?

The background, or context to those direct transactions are those which form the social fabric in which we move: To what extent is there coherence or conflict in the production of the goods we consume, between social or political groupings in our community and country, between our nation and others?

The purpose of this paper is to look at the ways in which this fragmentation is developed and maintained at all scales, and at how more coherence can be generated.2.2 The communication problemTo determine what makes a transaction easy or difficult, coherent or conflictual, we must look at the nature of communication between individuals.We all experience life as a private stream of sensory perceptions, thoughts and feelings. That stream constitutes our perspective, or 'View'. Each moment's experience is coloured by its associations with previous, related experiences, which again, are unique to each of us. Within that overall stream are parts which constitute our experience of others.

Although our experience of others is limited to that small sampling we obtain through our perceptions, we can project the existence of another full being, similar to ourselves. In particular, 'I' can recognise that there is a 'You' with your own 'View', to which I have only indirect and very limited access. I have access only to my map of You, but may remember that it is not the territory.

You and I may be present at the same event, but our respective Views, including the meanings of any words spoken, will differ in ways which may not be obvious to either of us, due to the differences in our respective sets of associations.Thus, if we interact, and I desire that interaction to be harmonious, I have the problem of making my View of you consistent with your View (as I project it), to the extent that it is relevant to the context. You have the reciprocal problem. We do this through communication, with speech as a major component. Divergent communication occurs when this process of making our Views consistent fails. Convergent communication occurs when it succeeds.2.3 Divergent communicationThere is no single pattern of behaviour which characterises divergent communication. Rather, it is a cluster of related patterns, all of which share the property that the communicants do not make their Views of the interaction mutually consistent. I will bring out some of its common properties, and especially, the mechanisms by which it becomes self-maintaining, through a series of examples.

´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª Example D. Overload in the family1. The initial problem. The husband begins to find himself under great pressure at work, so he works late and brings work home. He then finds that he hasn't the time he previously spent with his wife and children. He becomes sharp with them when they ask for his attention, and orders them to leave him alone.´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª

The husband has become overloaded. Due to his anxiety over his incompleted work interactions, and his lack of time, he is unable to respond to his family's requests sympathetically. He has rescheduled his activities in a fragmented way, which leaves his interactions with his wife and children incomplete. Due to his feelings of anxiety, he is unable to see their Views, their needs for his attention. Similarly, they are unable to see his View, his need to be left alone. Their communication has broken down. He adopts the only method of dealing with them which occurs to him in such an anxious state, namely, coercion.

´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª 2. It gets worse. The children turn to their mother for the attention they previously received from both her and their father. She too is now in an anxious state, and snarls at them and sends them away. When they next encounter their father, they are much more insistent with their demands. He explodes, and a major row engulfs the family.´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª

The first set of incomplete interactions haven't vanished. They simply shift some of the overload to the wife. Due to her raised anxiety levels, she is unable to see the Views of the rest of the family and absorb the overload. More communication breaks down, and more interactions are left incompleted. The loop is closed when the children next meet their father. His previous coercive approach has left them defensive and more demanding, and so obviously has not succeeded in getting him his free time. This feedback cycle of broken communication and rising anxiety then repeats itself several times in rapid succession, forming the explosive row.

´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª 3. It becomes institutionalised. The family's battles continue and continue. The children stop looking to their father for anything. They become angry and upset at the treatment they are receiving from both parents, and so are rude to their mother and try to get out of anything she asks them to do. The mother is at her wits end with the children. She hopes their current bad behaviour is simply a stage they will grow out of. She scolds and lectures them in the hope that they will reform, but with no success. Mostly, though, she is depressed and anxious at what she takes to be the breakdown of her marriage. She and her husband seem to spend what little time they have together arguing. The husband spends less and less time at home. It certainly isn't a place where he can get his extra work done, and actually, he isn't in much of a state to get it done anywhere. As a result, his work pressures get worse, and his colleagues begin to notice that he isn't performing very well... but that is another story.´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª

Overload has led to anxiety and coercion which has led to more overload and so on. After a while, none of the family members hear or understand the Views of the others, or expect their own Views not to be heard and understood. Their Views of one another have become fragmented. As a result they come to expect to be treated coercively: the only way possible for an anxious person who hasn't heard or understood them. They respond in kind, so that the simplest interactions become sources of conflict.A lot of conflicts take up a lot of time, compounding the overload still more. What is worse, the overload within the family may spread outside through the children's interactions with other children at school, and the parent's interactions at work or in their social life. It may seed the same patterns elsewhere.The family's relationships with one another have moved from friendship towards hostility. This will obviously reduce the quality of their lives, but, for the children especially, there are worse effects. They are in the process of forming their Views of what other people are like and what they themselves are like. What they learn from the process I have been describing is that those people who should be most loving towards them are hostile. They learn that people important to them don't like them, and may decide that they don't like themselves. They learn habitual patterns of communication which are unsuccessful. These Views of others, of themselves, and of communication, will form the context for their interactions with others for the rest of their lives, and will colour their attitudes towards work, social life, politics, etc.Comparing this example with example B (Communities in conflict in Northern Ireland), we find a number of common features. In both, divergent communication has become institutionalised. None of the communicants act to bring their Views of the other into coherence with the other's View of themselves. They expect coercion and antipathy, and thus offer coercion and antipathy rather than attempt to find mutually satisfactory solutions.All parties feel badly misunderstood by the others. Each sees (and responds to) the hostile actions of the others, but not the personal context of defensiveness in which those actions were generated. Each acts on an oversimplified view of the other, treating the other as animated by an innately hostile being (a 'devil'), rather than as a full person. This constitutes a loss of information in the transaction.

Example E. The resource allocation committee 1. The meeting. The Resources Committee is holding its quarterly meeting to allocate money and other resources to the various projects in the organisation which require them. Each Project Chairman has prepared a voluminous bid, detailing his case.The committee members are busy people. They are glad to be on the committee (it has great power), but have little time to give it in their already full schedules. The total volume of papers for each meeting is massive, so very few members have read them all, and most have just glanced through them.The Chairman is anxious that the committee meeting should be finished in a morning rather than a week. He suggests a quick run through of the projects to see which should be supported. If the total resources required then comes to more than those at the committee's disposal, the remaining projects should be allocated a fixed proportion of their bids. The fixed proportion will be chosen so that all the resources are allocated. These ground rules are accepted by the committee, on the grounds that no fairer procedure could be implemented in the time available to them. Following this plan, the meeting ends on time.´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª

Because of their overloaded schedules, the committee members have been unable to take full account of the needs and Views of the Project Chairmen. Instead, they have adopted a simpler, but arbitrary procedure. Much of the Project Chairmen's efforts in preparing their bids has been wasted. Unfortunately, the story does not end there.

´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª 2. The reaction. Many of the Project Chairmen accept the committee's decisions with good grace. Some have prepared their bids in the expectation that they would be cut, and can live with the results. That is why the total of the bids is so much larger than the sum available. Others find that their projects are not viable with partial funds. The unhappiest of all are those who prepared honest bids, cut to the minimum in view of the shortage of funds facing the organisation.Several of the unhappy Project Chairmen send in appeals to the Committee. Some of these are angry, pointing out how unfairly they have been treated. This affects their morale, so their overall work performance is impaired.A sub-committee is set up to deal with the appeals. Other appeals are made to higher ranking committees to try to obtain special allocations of funds in addition to those originally available to the committee. (Of course, at the higher committee, similar problems arise, for the same reasons!) The appeals and re-appeals continue, and in fact, form a permanent part of the committee's workload.´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª

The attempt by the committee to deal with their overload by adopting an arbitrary rule is seen by the Project Chairmen as coercive. As a result they resist, and dealing with their resistance adds to the overload of the committee members. Moreover, because some of the Project Chairmen expect to be dealt with arbitrarily, truthfulness goes by the board. In addition to their overload, the committee members have to work with false information. The overall result is that their ability to act in the best interests of all members of the organisation is greatly reduced.

Comparing all three of the examples of divergent communication, we can find several common features:

1. The pattern of divergent communication is self-sustaining, and worse, tends to seed further problems beyond its immediate focus.

2. Actions are taken on the basis of only part of the available information, and are seen as hostile and coercive.

3. Given the context of antipathy and coercion, untruthfulness or mendacity is by some to be an appropriate response. This creates confusion and further divergent communication.

I have characterised divergent communication firstly in terms of a failure to merge views and secondly in terms of mendacity-coercion-antipathy. Do you find this an adequate description? Can you help improve it?

2.4 Convergent communicationThe properties of convergent communication should by now be fairly clear by implication, firstly, from the discussion of making Views consistent, in Section 2.2, and secondly, by contrast with the properties of divergent communication in Section 2.3. I will summarise these properties, and then develop them further through some examples.In convergent communication, each communicant tries to remain aware of the other's View and to make it consistent with his own. This is experienced by each as sympathy from the other, in contrast to the antipathy or hostility of divergent communication.Actions which result from consistent Views are experienced as non-coercive. The relationship is thus characteristed by autonomy or freedom.Given an expectation of sympathy and freedom, the communicants are free to be as truthful and accurate as they can be. This truthfulness enables the communicants to maintain the consistency of their views, and so the communication is self-correcting.

´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª  Example F. Coming home from the PubMy good friend and I walk home after an evening out drinking. My friend makes fun of my unsteadiness, with its implications of lack of drinking capacity. I begin to get angry and start to insult my friend in return. He has the presence of mind to see what is happening, and says, "Hey, I didn't mean to offend you. I wouldn't be teasing you if you weren't such a good friend!" The tension is released, and we both have a good laugh.´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª 

In the foreground of this little incident is the discussion of the effects of drink. In the background, is the state of the relationship between the two people. The friend has remained aware of both foreground and background. He reads the narrator's anger as a message about the relationship, and shifts the focus of attention to it. He then acts to realign their two Views by offering reassurances of his sympathy. The crisis passes.

´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª  Example G. Working with a friendTwo colleagues who are also good friends meet to discuss an urgent report they are producing together. The first reports apologetically that he hasn't completed the calculations he had

promised to have ready, because of a crisis arising out of his son's difficulties at school. The second offers sympathy, checks her diary, and says that with a little replanning of her evening, she should be able to do the calculations instead.She then describes her ideas for the structure of the report. At intervals in her description, her friend says, "If I understand you correctly, you are trying to say... " She sometimes confirms his understanding, and sometimes corrects him. For a while they proceed, feeling quite comfortable that they are in agreement. She then notices that he doesn't seem to be paying attention, and asks what is wrong. He answers that his mind keeps going back to his family problems. They agree to break off and resume the discussion the next day.´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª 

The woman in this example keeps her interaction with the man consistent with its larger context for him, in this case, his current family problems. She helps him maintain the coherence of the various parts of his life.The meeting did not go as either had planned in advance. To make their actions consistent, they alter their expectations as is appropriate. This openness to change is a necessary property of a relationship if it is to remain convergent despite the differing experiences of the communicants in the intervals between their meetings. Convergent communication enables the relationship to adapt to changing circumstances. Another description of it is social learning.Another feature of convergent communication illustrated by both this example and the previous one, is its dynamic nature: The communicants are continually checking to see that they have been understood and are in agreement. Their relationship as friends creates the expectation that their communication can converge. Nonetheless, their Views will necessarily diverge due to their separate experiences and different backgrounds. Thus, if they desire convergence, they must act to maintain it in the present. One point they check is whether they have each other's attention. When this proves to be impossible, they break off the discussion.The algorithm they are using to maintain the convergence of their discussion is summarised in the diagram below. It is roughly parallel to the protocols used in computer communication.

2.5 Summary of Section 2

I have described two characteristic patterns of communication: divergent and convergent. The essence of convergent communication is that it attempts to merge, or make consistent, the communicants Views, by which I mean their relevant perceptions, thoughts and feelings: how the situation appears from their perspective. Divergent communication occurs in the failure or absence of this merging.Both divergent and convergent communication tend to be self-maintaining. Convergent communication is self-maintaining by its very nature. Divergent communication can become established by a pattern of overload leading to coercion, antipathy, and mendacity, leading to resistance and inept actions, leading to further overload. As divergent communication comes to be expected, the participants make little attempt to converge and thus the pattern is institutionalised.As a reminder of the characteristics of the two patterns: mendacity, coercion and antipathy for divergent communication, and truth, sympathy and freedom for convergent communication, I use the diagram below. (I refer to it as the Toblerone diagram, after the chocolate bar of that shape!) Moving towards the left in that diagram is moving towards increasing range of coherence, or harmony, while moving towards the right is moving towards decreasing range of coherence, or fragmentation.

The Toblerone diagramSection 3 - Human Nature: Myths and Possibilities

3.1 Learning about human nature As we are considering the possibilities for more harmonious societies, which we can now interpret as including a much greater prevalence of convergent rather than divergent communication, we must consider whether that possibility is consistent with the nature of human beings. For example, could it be that convergent communication is only possible for a minority of people? I think it is important to distinguish between the set of behavioural patterns which characterise humanity now, and the larger set of possible behaviour patterns which are within the capabilities of our species.It is certainly true that people can and do inflict the most appalling damage upon themselves and others. People who commit crimes of violence or against property certainly do not act in coherence with their victims Views. There are societies in which violence and the fear of it are the principal means of social control. Wars, terrorism, and racial and class hatred afflict most nations.In this section I shall argue that such behaviour is only to be expected, given the institutionalised divergent communication in our societies. We grow fragmented people, whose abilities to communicate convergently have been systematically (although not deliberately) stunted. I will demonstrate this by looking at what a child learns about communication, and about the nature of other people and himself, from common child-rearing practices, educational practices, and less direct influences.I will then look at the possibilities for human nature under conditions where divergent communication is not created.3.2 Growing fragmented peopleA. Parents and children- Parents provide the earliest set of experiences a child has of interacting with other people. They also form the most accessible models of what it is like to be an adult and a parent. There is thus a strong tendency for peoples child-rearing patterns to be passed down from generation to generation.

The most common patterns of parent-child behaviour are described succinctly, in a popular fashion, by Gordon[1]:

´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª  from "P.E.T. Parent Effectiveness Training", pp 10-11Almost without exception parents can be categorized roughly into three groups--the "winners," the "losers," and the "oscillators." Parents in the first group strongly defend and persuasively justify their right to exercise authority or power over the child. They believe in restricting, setting limits, demanding certain behaviors, giving commands, and expecting obedience. They use threats of punishment to influence the child to obey, and mete out punishments when he does not. When conflict arises between the needs of the parents and those of the child, these parents consistently resolve the conflict in such a way that the parent wins and the child loses. Generally, these parents rationalise their "winning" by such stereotyped thinking as "Father knows best," "It's for the good of the child," "Children actually want parental authority," or simply the vague notion that "It is the responsibility of parents to use their authority for the good of the child, because parents know best what is right and wrong."The second group of parents, somewhat fewer in number than the "winners," allow their children a great deal of freedom most of the time. They consciously avoid setting limits and proudly admit that they do not condone authoritarian methods. When conflict occurs between the needs of the parent and those of the child, rather consistently it is the child who wins and the parent who loses, because such parents believe it is harmful to frustrate the child's needs.Probably the largest group of parents is made up of those who find it impossible to follow consistently either one of the first two approaches. Consequently, in trying to arrive at a "judicious mixture" of each they oscillate back and forth between being strict and lenient, tough and easy, restrictive and permissive, winning and losing. As one mother told us:"I try to be permissive with my children until they get so bad I can't stand them. Then I feel I have to change and start using my authority until I get so strict I can't stand myself."´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª 

Gordon's three common patterns of parent-child interaction, authoritarian, permissive, and oscillatory, are all examples of divergent communication. Interactions end with the imposition of the will of one party on the other rather than with merged Views leading to mutually agreed actions. As described in the previous section, such patterns tend to become self-perpetuating and to result in regularly recurring conflicts.Gordon proposes, and teaches, an alternative which he calls the "no-lose" method, which is consistent with what I have been describing as convergent communication.From the child's View, all of the divergent patterns contain the implicit message, "My interests and yours are opposed." When faced with coercion and antipathy the child may try to lie his way out of trouble, thus provoking more of the same. The child is forced to develop strategies for dealing with such circumstances, which may range from temper tantrums to withdrawal or depression. These strategies can become embedded as the most familiar ways a child has of relating to others. In particular, a child may come to be easily angered or frightened when faced with a conflict. That makes it difficult to proceed to resolve the conflict by convergent communication.B. At school - Over the past few generations, school systems have been moving away from the particularly harsh authoritarianism of the Victorian period. Thus to each generation of parents (and to the great displeasure of some), their children's school appears quite free and easy. Nonetheless, in the terms we have been considering, most teaching is still closer to divergent that to convergent communication. At the very least, the timetable, choice of subjects, and amount of work required invariably are imposed upon the child.In addition, there is usually a strong competitive element, where those whose academic achievements are greater are rewarded and those with lower achievements are looked down upon. Thus a child's pleasure in his growing abilities becomes contaminated with comparisons to other children. The comparison is held to be more important than the achievement. If winning is desirable, then losing is undesirable, and in a competition, the existence of winners implies the existence of losers. Losing must thus be a common experience for children even for achievements which in their own terms (i.e. from their View) would be a source of pleasure.School thus provides children with a large set of interactions in which their own Views are of little account. The modes of behaviour they develop must be in reaction to such divergent communication. The most appropriate behaviour patterns in such circumstances are those for dealing with people whose interests are opposed to theirs, and who consider that one person's gain is another's loss.

C. Indirect influences - Much of a child's impressions of what other people and their relationships are like comes from indirect experiences, through TV, films, books, magazines and newspapers. This applies particular to their impressions of places and cultures away from their own neighbourhood.Much fiction reinforces the stereotyped views people hold of one another in divergent communication: Villains really are incarnations of uncaused evil. Use enough force with suitable skill and the villain will be overcome. Fictional views of conflicts in which both sides are seen sympathetically are not the mainstay of popular culture!The news media also add their contribution to these stereotyped views. Reports of crimes, terrorist acts, wars, strikes, etc. concentrate on the harmful actions and invariably ignore the individual circumstances which led to the acts being committed.As for politics, in governments with two or more parties, the party or coalition in power invariably imposes its will over the vociferous objections of the opposition parties. A good politician must be a good debater, one who can fluently score points off the opposing parties, and certainly not a convergent communicator! Government in which there are single, elite parties aren't exactly noted for convergent communication either. What conclusions can a child draw from such governments?The prevailing images of international relationships are either of alliance (often uneasy, and invariably with much internal conflict), or of outright enmity. The "language of diplomacy" means the language of half-truth and evasion, not of truth and clarity. Political leaders make public statements about the villainy of other governments in language that could come straight out of pulp fiction. What must a child presume about the nature of people from this?

I could continue indefinitely along similar lines. A more complete discussion should include the influence on children of peer groups, and of birth practices, among others. What do you think are the major influences on children's view of human nature?  

Given the importance of the influences on a growing child I have just described, I do not find it surprising to find so many people who believe that human relations are inherently conflictual. If anything, it is the amount of loving, helping behaviour around that needs explaining!Repeated entrapment in patterns of divergent communication (double binds) can lead to extremes of emotional intensity or physical violence. The frustrations, angers and fears that characterise divergent communication are commonplace phenomena of modern societies. They produce personal symptoms such as depression, neurosis, alcoholism or drug addiction and social symptoms such as crime, vandalism and terrorism.As I see the View of the vandal, the mugger, the terrorist bomber (to list a few more extreme cases), the cumulative effect of being on the losing side of many conflicts or comparisons as children has left them unable to see the View of other people, or at least of their victims. Their Views have become fragmented in that the humanity of many people they deal with is absent from it. They see others in crude, oversimplified terms, or not at all. This is a form of social isolation, so that they too are victims.3.3 The possibilitiesTo judge the possibilities for human nature in terms of the cultures which are dominant in the world today is to take a very limited perspective. Any limitations to those possibilities are more likely to be associated with our brains and bodies than with the conditions in any particular culture or set of cultures. The form of our bodies and brains has been virtually unchanged since long before the first civilisations, and so has certainly not evolved in response to conditions in civilised societies.Reading through anthropological literature on non-industrial cultures is one source of a broader perspective on human nature. The variation between cultures is particularly striking. Many are warlike and exhibit the familiar patterns of divergent communication. However, there are also some lovely examples in which the everyday relationships between people would seem impossible by the standards of most modern societies. (I hope it is clear that I am including these examples

only for what they show about the possibilities for human relationships, and not as models for future societies.)

´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª  the gentle people of Tahiti"The people in general are of the common size of Europeans ... their gait easy and genteel and their countenance free, open and lively, never sullied by a a sullen or suspicious look--their motions are vigorous, active and graceful and their behavior to strangers is such as declare at first sight their humane disposition, which is as candid as their countenances seem to indicate, and their courteous, affable and friendly behaviour to each other shows that they have no tincture of barbarity, cruelty, suspicion or revenge. They are ever of an even unruffled temper, so they ought not to be suspected, and an hour's acquaintance is sufficient to repose an entire confidence in them" [2]"Tahiti in the early 1960's when I began my field work there seemed in regard to gentleness little different than the reports of the late 18th and early 19th century had suggested. ...my own observations during a period of more than two years...indicated in comparison with Western experience and in comparison with reports of many other non-Western societies an extreme lack of angry, hostile, destructive behavior." [3]the Yequana of Venezuela"(There) is a respect for each individual as his own proprietor. ...Deciding what another person should do, no matter what his age, is outside the Yequana vocabulary of behaviors. There is great interest in what everyone does, but no impulse to influence--let alone coerce anyone. A child's will is his motive force. ...The Yequana do not feel that a child's inferior physical strength and dependence upon them imply that they should treat him or her with less respect than an adult. No orders are given a child which run counter to his own inclinations as to how to play, how much to eat, when to sleep and so on. But where his help is required, he is expected to comply instantly. Commands like 'Bring some water!', 'Chop some wood!', 'Hand me that!', or 'Give the baby a banana!' are given on the same assumption of innate sociality, in the firm knowledge that a child wants to be of service and to join in the work of his people. No one watches to see whether the child obeys--there is no doubt of his will to cooperate. As the social animal he is, he does as he is expected without hesitation and to the very best of his ability."[4]"One of the most striking differences between the Yequana and any other children I have seen is that they neither fight nor argue among themselves. There is no competitiveness and leadership is established on the initiative of the followers. In the years I spent with them, I never saw a child argue with another, much less fight. The only angry words I did hear were a very rare burst of impatience from an adult with a child who had done something undesirable." [5]´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª 

The social and physical conditions in which such peaceful cultures live are generally relatively stress-free and bounteous (by their own standards). For example, Levy says [6] "The traditional Tahitian environment is completely nonfrustrating. It minimises externally induced irritation. The village adaptation to its surroundings is successful; people do not have difficult problems in providing a varied and bounteous supply of food and other needs, and the traditional arrangements for land ownership, distribution of goods, and for maintaining the general social organization of the village works well." In the terms of this paper, there is little overload in their lives.

Section 4 - Exchange from a communication perspective 4.1 Introduction In previous sections my emphasis has been on interactions at an individual scale. In this section, I shall be more concerned with larger scale interactions: the problems of exchange, or of organising to produce and distribute goods and provide services.In previous sections I have been contrasting divergent communication, in which overload leads to still more overload, and convergent communication. Although the self-defeating nature of the overload cycle should be quite clear, a superficial view of the the world's economic problems might lead to the conclusion that greatly increased output, and hence presumably greater overload, is what is needed.In the industrialised Western countries widespread unemployment is a major problem. It brings with it hardship for those directly affected, and insecurity for those not affected. Greater output of goods and services is supposed to be the way to overcome this problem. Moreover, without it, the money needed to pay for schools, hospitals, roads and all the other public services will supposedly continue to be in short supply.The economic problems of the Third World are considered to be similar, but much more drastic. There, poverty to the extent of hunger or even starvation is widespread, and it is increased

production which is said to be the obvious solution. More production would mean more jobs which would mean the people would have the money they need to overcome their poverty.To be blunt, I believe the analysis I have described in the last two paragraphs is completely topsy-turvy and fallacious. The only way I can think of to explain in a few pages why I believe this is so is to offer a contrasting example: From the perspective of a society organised to maintain convergent communication, much that goes on in the present appears absurd. Unfortunately, I know of no suitable examples among the world's nations. The socialist regimes of Eastern Europe, Asia or elsewhere are hardly models of coordination by truth/freedom/sympathy relationships, and those few gathering/hunting cultures left which are better approximations of convergent communication are so different otherwise as to be largely irrelevant. My only resort is thus to fiction.The little story I have concocted is quite arbitrary in most of its details. I mean it to be an example, rather than a prescription. It is simply there to provide a vivid image of one possible way in which convergent communication could form the basis for solving the exchange problem. Nonetheless, the principles around which I chose the details are not arbitrary, so I will start by explaining them.4.2 The reciprocity spectrumThe exchange of goods and services between people may take such different forms as gift-giving, barter, buying, or stealing. Associated with these examples are differences in relationship between the parties, and differences in what is expected in return. I will describe these differences in terms of a spectrum from what I shall call generalised reciprocity, through balanced reciprocity, to negative reciprocity. These terms follow Sahlins[1], who uses them to compare the exchange relationships in a large number of primitive cultures.Generalised reciprocity, or generalised exchange is exemplified by a free gift, or a favour. No specific return is expected in exchange for what is given, or as a condition of giving. That is not to say that there is no general, or indirect expectation of a return. For example, parents will give things to their children without expecting anything in return on an item-by-item basis. However, they may expect general cooperation and perhaps care when they are elderly. They may see their giving as part of a larger pattern in which they received from their parents.Balanced reciprocity is exemplified by barter or monetary exchange. A specific and agreed return is expected as a condition of a transaction. Without the return, the transaction doesn't occur.Negative reciprocity is exemplified by theft, fraud or expropriation. That which is given is not agreed to by the giver.

In my story below the method of exchange I have assumed is all the way at the generalised end of the spectrum. It is set at some time in the future and assumes that money has gone out of use. I am not sure whether or not this is too extreme, but will explain my reasons.The story is meant to exemplify the application of convergent communication. Thus the giving of goods or services must presume that both giver and receiver take account of needs, problems, special circumstances, etc. of one another, i.e. they seek to converge their Views. That is what the convergent communication is for. In the story, I use a particular mechanism (a computer network) to help. In our monetary economy, as I shall explain, flows of money pre-empt or distort much of this communication, as seen both by the consumer and the producer.For a consumer to decide that he wants a particular thing or service, he must balance what he expects to get out of it against the cost. In a monetary system, cost is represented principally in terms of quantities of money. Actually the concept of cost is much richer than be conveyed by a single number. For example, the cost of a car includes the quantity of metals, plastics, glass and

rubber in it, the amount of fuel used to mine the metal and transport the finished car to its purchaser, the hours spent by the car workers in particular working conditions, the pollution caused by the factory, etc. By reducing this rich concept to a single number, most of its information content is lost. The consumer loses sight of the real cost of his consumption. He can remain blissfully unaware, for example, that his purchase makes it desirable for a landowner in South America to plant cash crops on the most fertile land, leaving the peasants landless.For a producer to decide that a certain item should be produced, or a certain service offered in a monetary economy, the overriding consideration is maintaining suitable cash flows. The satisfaction of the needs of the consumer may influence the cash flows, but they are secondary to them. If his cash flow is threatened, a producer must do something or go under, regardless of his effects on the consumer, the community, or the environment. If a producer of shoddy goods can get away with selling them, he is OK. If a producer can produce goods which prey on people's insecurities, or which are addictive, he may become rich. If a vital public service doesn't provide suitable cash flows, it may be discontinued. Money provides the wrong signals!2.3 A pleasant fantasy

´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª  The NetworkIt is early afternoon as I arrive home from my shift at the Electronics Factory. My children, David, 12 and Julie, 16 are playing their newest cooperative game on the computer, "Climbers". On the screen two little people connected by ropes climb around obstacles trying to reach the top of a mountain. My children have developed the individual dexterity and quick-thinking coordination between them needed to negotiate some of the trickiest and most imaginative mountains the computer can offer them!I ask them if they will be finished soon, as I want to use the computer to check the Network for the day's news and messages. David asks if he can do it for me, and I agree.A little later, after a careful search for new games and new mountains for Climbers, he brings me a printout of the day's changes to my Network file. There are messages from several people in the village who want to come in the minibus with me on my trip to the Market tomorrow and others with lists of things for me to bring back. I realise that we won't all fit in the minibus and that I will have to ask one of them to drive in a small car or van as well.There are two offers from people on the other side of the county in reply to my Help message. They offer to take my usual shifts at the Electronics Factory next week, so that I can go and look after my father when he comes back from the hospital. One of them had worked at the factory a year or so back and was hoping to re-contact some friends there so I decide to accept her offer.I look through the general Help messages that have come in. There don't seem to be any I can usefully contribute to, but I mark one to show Jenny, my wife, when she gets home. There have been a series of arguments between two groups of people at the Leather Works which have become so severe that their families have started to complain, and they are now asking for a Facilitator to help. Jenny is one of the most respected Facilitators in the district, and once worked in the Leather Works, so she is the ideal person to do it. I am surprised that the people at the Leather Works have let the problem get so bad, but think that Jen will enjoy the challenge of sorting them out. She will probably have to find people to cover some of her usual work shifts, but that shouldn't be difficult, as everyone will see the urgency of releasing her.Now here's some very special news. That nice lady programmer in Cambodia for whom I did a favour last year has agreed to give me that beautiful jeweled tiara I wanted for Jenny's birthday. She says she has already kept it for nearly two years and is feeling a bit guilty. I wonder how long Jenny will keep it?Oh, here is that reply to my letter to the Appliances Factory about my new washing machine. They don't sound too happy. They've recently had more orders than they can handle without doing more shifts than they want to. They mention the new Musical Organiser they've just installed, and hint that I might help them find a crew of teenagers to man it. I call my daughter."Julie, would you be interested in getting a group of your friends to work at the Appliances Factory for a few shifts during the next few weeks? They've just got one of those Musical Organisers in from California. It uses that crazy music you like to turn boring work into a group game, so I'm sure it'll be fun, and they'll give us priority in recycling our washing machine."She says she'll think about it, and I turn to my son who has been grabbing at my arm with something to show me. It is a letter from his cousin Chris, who is 20."Oh, you've got a letter from Africa from Chris! Is that a real stamp on it? What a beautiful engraving!""No, its not real. He said the Historical Society made it, and he thought I'd like it. Why did letters used to have stamps?"I started to explain about money, how people didn't trust other people to look after them and so wanted to be paid money for doing work, and how people used to think other people wouldn't work unless they got money for it, when he interrupted me:"Yes, but Uncle John hardly ever does any work."

"That's true. There are a few people like that around, but not enough for it to matter. Most people go through some periods when they don't work, so they understand him. Anyway, most people like Uncle John because of all his stories and songs, but he does have trouble sometimes. He is pretty low on the Priority Lists for most things, but he doesn't seem to mind. Anyway, what else does your cousin say? How are his friends Rachel and Arthur?""He says it's really interesting. He's on an overseas aid programme, learning from the people there about the way they grow many different vegetables all mixed in next to each other in their gardens. Next year some of them are coming to England to learn about our flower gardens. And he says that Rachel is still there and fine, but that Arthur has left. I think they had an argument.""I'm not surprised. I've always thought these modern trios were very unstable. Oh yes, Dave, before I do my gardening, have you decided whether you will be joining the children's learning group at the Electronics Factory next month? I've been asked to get a definite decision from you by tomorrow.""No, I'm going to join a work-study party at the Sizewell Nuclear Power Station for a month."That surprised and worried me. It sounded dangerous, and I couldn't see the connection with his interests, so I asked him about it."Well, its still radioactive even though it hasn't been used for 40 years, so they have to keep up the fences and the storage tanks, and check on the effects of radiation on the surrounding countryside. We'll get to wear these amazing white suits with big sealed helmets like spacemen when we go inside. We'll be camping in tents by the sea, and we'll learn all about the plants and animals and insects around the shore and how to use the radiation instruments. It's being organised by Charlotte Dovier, who's a very good biologist, and if I can get a good Respected Work Card from her, it might help me if I want to work in one of the famous labs when I'm older. Also, I want to see those huge old machines in the power station. Why did people make them so big? And why didn't they care about the radiation problems they were leaving for us?"I settled down for a long speech on one of my pet subjects:"Well, the people who built them were so busy worrying about how they would get enough electricity and also about their own careers that they didn't have enough time to really think through the problems of getting rid of the wastes. They built such big power stations because they believed that huge quantities of electricity were necessary for people to have a good life."In those days, people were incredibly wasteful of energy. Buildings had hardly any insulation by our standards. Energy in factories wasn't used and re-used as it is now. And transport... cars were mostly driven with only one person in them. Everyone was always in a rush, so there was no time to organise themselves sensibly. Also, things weren't made near where they were needed. They used to build cars in Japan and sell them in England, and build similar cars in England and sell them in Japan.""But the main problem was that they were always making so much stuff. The things people bought weren't made to last long. They would make things that were slightly better than the older ones and convince people to throw away the old ones while they were still good. They didn't even try to re-use the parts. Lots of people spent lots of time convincing other people to want more and more things, and they didn't really care whether the things were needed. For example, in those days, many people felt very insecure, so others would make things which they said would make people feel more loved, or more manly, or more feminine."David was looking rather dubious. "That's crazy!" he said. "Having things can't make people feel more loved. And doing all that would just be making more work for themselves. Why did they do it?"I could see this was getting difficult. "There was very little communication between the people who made things and those who used them. What counted most for the people who made things or offered services was whether they got paid, not how well satisfied their customers were. They couldn't get anything themselves unless they had money."David's eyes were getting glazed, so I gave up, and gave him a hug. I had to admit that I had trouble believing it myself, even though social history had long been a passion of mine, and I had heard true stories of those days from my own father.I got up to go out to the garden, and looked around. "Damn that boy," I thought, "he's left all his games out again." ...´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª ´ª 

4.4 Comparing the fantasy with the presentI have been arguing throughout this paper that divergent communication can result from and create overload, and that I see much of the world's problems as resulting from institutionalised divergent communication. I would now like to show that more clearly on a large scale, by showing what is missing from my fantasy world as compared with the present.1. I have assumed that people have learned to defuse conflicts at all scales at early stages, before they become serious. The skills to do this are widely available at a local level. Thus the only remaining roles for our major conflict-handling services, the military and the police are as emergency services (i.e. for natural disasters). Such a greatly reduced role releases vast numbers of people, and quantities of equipment, buildings, land, airwaves, etc. for other uses.2. The direct effect of an exchange system based on generalised reciprocity is to eliminate the need for all the money-organising services: no banks, insurance companies, pension funds, stock

markets and money markets. There are also no payrolls, no cash registers or credit cards, no taxes, no financial accountants. Generalised reciprocity is much simpler than balanced reciprocity because a transaction is not conditional upon a balancing transaction.3. Without the need to balance a transaction, much conflict simply vanishes. Disputes over wages and prices simply cannot happen. The motivation for large categories of crime and fraud is non-existent.4. Perhaps the largest effect of generalised reciprocity is that the pressure to provide goods and services now comes only from consumers. The producers don't need to keep up production in order to be able to consume themselves. Thus there is no need for advertising and no need for change for its own sake. On the contrary, goods which last longer, are more reliable and which can be partially or wholly re-cycled make life easier for the producers and so are favoured. This all leads to much lower levels of production.5. Since similar producing organisations no longer have any need to take customers from one another, the need for commercial secrecy vanishes. On the contrary, it is to the advantage of all to share improved methods. Thus much duplication of effort in research and development is avoided, and standards are raised all around. Similarly, there is no longer any point in searching for far-flung markets. Local production keeps transport costs down and makes it easier to tailor products to local needs.6. Secondary effects of the reduced production are to reduce the demand on the construction, extraction, and energy industries. Moreover, much of the parts, materials, and buildings freed are available for recycling and re-use, further reducing effort in this area. It is quite possible that the need for energy could be reduced to what can be supplied from renewable sources only, and perhaps even that the existing stockpiles of some metals and other materials will make further mining of them unnecessary.The cumulative effect of all the above changes is to produce a much greater match to what people want and need with greatly reduced human effort and resources. But that is only the beginning. The social effects of exchange based on convergent communication are very dramatic too, and have further knock on effects on levels of production.1. As people's consumption is no longer tied to a monetary income, unemployment is no longer a problem. People become free to seek the forms of useful contribution to their community which best suit them.2. With less personal conflict, no fear of unemployment, and more sympathetic relationships with others, people are more secure and happy with themselves. This reduces people's desires for those material possessions which serve principally to compensate for emotional shortcomings in their lives.3. With convergent communication on a community scale, people can coordinate their use of transport and of any tools or appliances which are only occasionally used. Again this reduces the need for production.In summary, in a society organised around convergent communication, the cumulative human effort and material resources required for happy, comfortable lives for everyone are much lower than in our present society. Given the sophistication of our culture's technical abilities, surely any other conclusion would be very surprising!Finally, although all of the preceding discussion applies principally to the industrialised West, the story assumes that similar social changes have eventually occurred throughout the world. Certainly, the effects on the Third World of these changes in the West would be very dramatic. They would become free of the debt traps of international finance, and from the exploitation of their land and resources by Western corporations. That would remove an enormous burden of overload from them and would thereby help to release them from the traps of divergent communication. They would then be much freer to develop more harmonious social and political systems themselves.

Section 5 - 'Becoming Friends': Toward Social Harmony

In this final section I would like to return to the issues I started with in the introduction. I started by saying "we believe are in the process of developing a linking and unifying approach" to

"a new and more harmonious vision of the possibilities for humanity and its relationship to the rest of the planet." I listed several facets of this new vision:

a concern with the effects of human activities on the natural environment more flexible views on family relationships and on the roles of men and women experiments with new forms of community, often more self-sufficient and autonomous new approaches to physical and emotional health the search for alternatives to nuclear weapons and war

The linking and unifying concepts are convergent and divergent communication, and their function is as an intellectual debugging tool. They are meant to help the emerging new vision avoid falling into the same traps of communication which have produced the world's major crises.I will start by clarifying the links:1. A concern with the natural environment. This can be seen as a process of convergent communication between humanity and its environment. The growing concern with enviromental pollution, the posibilities of climatic change due to human activities, the fate of endangered species, etc. can be seen as a growing awareness of the View of the rest of the planet, and a desire to make human activities coherent with it.The attitude that the natural world is simply there for people to exploit can be seen as divergent communication, with no regard for the View of the natural environment or our relationship to it. Moreover, as I described in Section 4, such an attitude is a consequence of divergent communication at the level of human interactions. It is simply a side effect of the general overload. While divergent communication prevails in our forms of political and economic organisation it must also prevail in our relationship with the natural world.2. More flexible views on family relationships and on the role of men and women. The problems in relationships between family members were explicitly described as self-maintaining patterns of divergent communication, with examples of convergent communication both from anthropology and a fictional future!The Women's Movement's struggle to have women treated in terms of their individual abilities, desires, needs, etc. rather than according to some arbitrary rules about their presumed role is also a clear application of convergent communication.3. Experiments with new forms of community, often more self-sufficient and autonomous. In Section 4 I applied the concept of convergent communication to derive a system of exchange in which the Views of producer and consumer could be merged. I identified the separation of Views of producer and consumer through the interposition of money as an important part of the divergence of our current economic system. In this sense, organising a cooperative community in which much of what is produced is consumed by its own members is consistent with convergent communication. Moreover, to the extent that such a community is concerned with the natural environment, it is exhibiting convergent communication with the Earth.4. The search for alternatives to nuclear weapons and war. In a world where human relationships are based upon convergent communication, the need for the military disappears, and with it wars and weapons. This goal of a world in which people in different countries see each other as friends is consistent with those of the Peace Movement, although it goes very much further.5. New approaches to physical and emotional health. The recent growth of interest in physical fitness, and the development of new approaches to emotional healing in the Human Potential movement can be seen as convergent communication between different aspects of a person.I see an underlying link between all the above movements and an overall vision of a harmonious world in which convergent communication predominates. Nonetheless, there is much in them which is far from consistent with such a vision. There is much that is rigid and arbitrary: over-specific goals such as the need to use or avoid particular energy technologies, or a particular form of therapy as the only or best route to happiness. An essential feature of convergent communication is an openness. The end result emerges as a result of the process and cannot be predicted in advance.Moreover, while the goals of these movements may be to undo one form of divergent communication, the means they employ may involve divergent communication. The key point about divergent communication is its self-perpetuating nature. Coercion doesn't lead to harmony.

To consider some vivid examples, during this century there have been violent revolutions in many countries in which the revolutionaries had idealistic visions of the harmony which was to follow. But how many revolutions have produced harmonious societies? The reality is that the legacy of bitterness and resistance left by revolutionary change can take generations to die out, if at all.For me, the point in developing and clarifying the concepts of convergent and divergent communication (for example, as represented by the Toblerone diagram) is to help me distinguish between them in my own interactions with others, and in the social processes I see around me. Convergent communication, with its openness and lack of a predetermined conclusion is simply the process of social learning. I am still only a beginner at convergent communication. My understanding of it, as reflected in its presentation in this paper, is full of gaping holes and totally lacking in rigour. Thus I am learning social learning.I like the phrase "Becoming Friends" as a metaphor for convergent communication because of its strong emotional and intuitive appeal. Using it, I divide the various facets of the vision of the more harmonious future into three nested parts:

Becoming friends with oneself Becoming friends with other peopleBecoming friends with the Earth

Becoming friends with oneself is the key to becoming friends with other people which is the key to becoming friends with the Earth. I suspect that if we find ourselves moving in this direction, we will begin to see ourselves differently. People's sense of identity will include not only themselves as an individual, but themselves as an integral part of 'the People', which in turn will be seen an integral part of biological and physical system which is the Earth. Under such conditions, the emergent properties of the Earth as a whole will be those of a creature in its own right, with humanity taking the role of nervous system. The form and content of society under such conditions will be the outcome of our social learning process. All we can predict from here are its emotional qualities: those of friendship.I doubt if there are more than two stable possibilities for the future of humanity. With divergent communication prevalent to the extent it is today, its self-proliferation will result in a nuclear winter or its equivalent by another route. The only alternative is along the route of convergent communication. That is why it is so important to me to learn social learning. And why I hope you agree and wish to join me.

I hope that the overall message in this paper has come across clearly. I would appreciate your comments on that, and also, on where you found the paper lacking and ways you would suggest to strengthen it.

Thank you for taking the trouble to read this paper. 

References [1] Powers, William T., Behaviour, The Control of Perception, Wildwood House, London, 1973. [2] Gordon, P.E.T., p. 10-11.[3] Morrison, James 1935 The Journal of James Morrison. London: Golden Cockerel Press. p. 170 (report from 1784)[4] Levy, Robert I, "Tahitian gentleness and redundant controls", in Montague, Ashley, Learning Non-Agression, Oxford University Press, 1978, p.224[5] Liedloff, Jean, The Continuum Concept,Futura, London, pp.78-9.[6] ibid. p.95[7] Levy, op. cit. p. 225[8] Sahlins, Marshall, Stone Age Economics, Tavistock, London, 1974, pp. 185-275