Advertisement

Contemporary Family Therapy

, Volume 12, Issue 4, pp 339–363 | Cite as

Coexisting and conflicting self-referential conceptual systems: A model for describing malfunctioning in the contemporary family-implications for therapy

  • Charis Katakis
Article

Abstract

In the proposed model, intra- and interpersonal conflicts are formalized as information-processing problems created by inconsistent self-referential conceptual systems. Three self-referential conceptual systems corresponding to the three forms of family lifetraditional-rural, industrial-nuclear, information-transactional-coexist and intermingle, creating difficulties in the coordination of interactions.

Each of these ecotheories is viewed as a constellation of hierarchically-ordered, dynamic, cognitive-emotional structures which express the particular family system's perceptions of itself in relation to its environment and life in general. The model correlates in an integrative manner phenomena at the level of societal change with evolving patterns of intrapersonal and familial dynamics and provides a framework for guiding preventive and therapeutic interventions. The evolving ecotheory model presented in this work follows the metatheoretical paradigms of cognitive science, self-reference and self-organization. The attempted synthesis has been achieved in the context of the unifying concepts and principles of General Systems Theory.

Keywords

Health Psychology Therapeutic Intervention System Theory General System Social Issue 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ashby, W. R. (1960).Design for a brain. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  2. Arnold, M. G. (1962).Story sequence analysis. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bowen, M. (1985).Family therapy in clinical practice. New York: Aronson.Google Scholar
  4. Geyer, F. (1977). Personality traits and problems of global planners. In E. Laszle & J. Bierman (Eds.),Goals in a global community: Studies on the conceptual foundations. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  5. Hallowell, A. I. (1955).Culture and experience. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  6. Jantsch, E. (1980).The self-organizing universe. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  7. Katakis, C. (1975).Pos andilamvanonde ta pedia tis proffivikis ilikias ton eafto tous se shiesi me tous allous sto paradosiake ke synchrono elliniko perivalan. Sigritkik psycholiki meleti. (How children perceive themselves in relation to others in the traditional and rural environment: Comparative psychological study.) (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Thessaloniki, 1975.)Google Scholar
  8. Katakis, C. (1989a). Stages of long-term psychotherapy: Progressive reconceptualizations as a self-organizing process.Psychotherapy Theory, Research, Practice and Training (in press).Google Scholar
  9. Katakis, C. (1989b). The self-referential conceptual system: An operational definition of subjectivity (submitted for publication).Google Scholar
  10. Katakis, C. (1989c). Viewing individuals and families as purposeful systems: Implications for therapy.Dynamic Psychotherapy (in press).Google Scholar
  11. Katakis, C. (1980). Changing patterns of the marital relationships in Greece.Mediterranean Journal of Social Psychiatry, 1(1).Google Scholar
  12. Katakis, C. (1984).I tris taftotite tis Elinkis ikogenias. (The three identities of the Greek family). Athens: Kedros.Google Scholar
  13. Kelly, G. A. (1965).A theory of personality: A psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  14. Lewin, K. (1951).Field theory in social science. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  15. Luhman, N. (1968).Zweckbegriff und systemrationalitat. Tubingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
  16. Maturana, U. R., & Varela, F. (1975). InAutopoetic systems. Report BCL 9.4. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Biological Computer Laboratory.Google Scholar
  17. Markley, O. W. (1976). Human consciousness in transformation. In E. Jantsch & C. H. Waddington (Eds.),Evolution and consciousness: Human systems in transition. London: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  18. Osgood, C. E. (1964). Semantic differential technique in the comparative study of cultures.American Psychologist, 66, 171–200.Google Scholar
  19. Pollack, F. (1973).The images of the future. (E. Boulding, trans.) Abridged English edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  20. Pribram, K. (1971).Language of the brain. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  21. Triandis, H. C. (1972).The analysis of subjective culture. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  22. Tolman, E. D. (1948). Brain bisection and consciousness. In J. Eccles (Ed.),Brain and conscious experience. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  23. Toffler, A. (1980).The third wave. New York: Pan.Google Scholar
  24. Tsoukalas, K. (1977).Exartissi ke anaparagogi. O kinonikos rolos tou expedeftikou michanismou stin Ellada (Dependence and reproduction: The social role of educational mechanisms in Greece.) (1830–1922). Athens: Themelio.Google Scholar
  25. Prigogine, I. (1976). Order through fluctuation, self-organization in social systems. In E. Jantsch & C. H. Waddington (Eds.),Evolution and consciousness. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  26. Vassilou, G. (1963). Story sequence analysis: A tool in research.International Health Newsletter, I, II. Google Scholar
  27. Vassilou, G., & Vassilou, V. (1970). On aspects of child rearing in Greece. In E. J. Anthony (Ed.),The child in his family. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  28. Wallace, A. F. C. (1956). Revitalization movement.American Anthropologist, 264–281.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charis Katakis
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory for the Study of Human RelationsChalandriGreece

Personalised recommendations