I am a woman born 1949 and my quest is to find a mindmate
to grow old together as a mutually devoted couple
in a relationship based upon the
egalitarian rational commitment paradigm
bonded by intrinsic commitment
as each other's safe haven and secure basis.

The purpose of this blog is to enable the right man
to recognize us as reciprocal mindmates and
to encourage him to contact me:

The entries directly concerning,
who could be my mindmate,
are mainly at the beginning.
If this is your predominant interest,
I suggest to read this blog in the same order
as it was written, following the numbers.

I am German, therefore my English is sometimes faulty.

Maybe you have stumbled upon this blog not as a potential match.
Please wait a short moment before zapping.

Do you know anybody, who could be my mindmate?
Your neighbour, brother, uncle, cousin, colleague, friend?
If so, please tell him to look at this blog.
While you have no reason to do this for me,
a stranger, maybe you can make someone happy, for whom you care.

Do you have your own webpage or blog,
which someone like my mindmate to be found probably reads?
If so, please mention my quest and add a link to this blog.

Saturday, July 3, 2010

3. Motivation

Motivation to Enter a Relationship Based on the ERCP

I am looking for someone, whose motivation to base a relationship upon the ERCP is intrinsic. That means, he benefits from it, because it is in congruence with his personality and his needs.
Were the motivation extrinsic, then he would force himself to adopt ERCP behavior by suppressing his own contrary inclinations and impulses. I would have to fight, to barter, to reward to get the treatment, that I need. An attempt to behave as if in an ERCP is not enough to make a relationship to qualify as being based upon the ERCP, because it would not supply the save haven, if I would have to put efforts into maintaining the other's behavior. That means that I rather make efforts to be a caring partner than to make efforts to reward someone for treating me as equal, while he would prefer to dominate.

The ERCP is not a set of behaviors to decide to apply, it is a set of attitudes and capacities, that lead to specific behavioral tendencies.
Egalitarianism is a value, and so are responsibility, accountability, reliability. Some people have an ideal self, that requires to behave in accordance with that value system. As long as they do so, they feel entitled to feel self-esteem, would they behave differently, they would suffer from cognitive dissonance.
Two persons can theoretically agree on defining, what commitment means, and what behavior should be the consequence. The one with the values is intrinsically motivated to live up to his ideal-self and avoid shame and cognitive dissonance. The other only agrees on behaving the same way by extrinsic motivation. If he wants a relationship badly enough, the wish to win or the fear to loose can be very strong extrinsic motivators to repress own inclinations and instead to behave in accordance with the other's attitude.

But there is a limit to the power of extrinsic motivation. It could be as strong as can be, it does not enable someone to act rationality, when only insufficient rationality is wired into his brain. If someone is overwhelmed and compelled to behave irrationally by instinctivity or gullibility, then he is just disabled to be a partner in rational methods to find agreement and solve conflicts.

Therefore it is not my quest to find someone, who for whatever reasons agrees to base his behavior upon the ERCP, I want to find someone, who is intrinsically inclined to it by his own personality.

Important is also the strength of the motivation. Someone can have a strong intrinsic motivation to be egalitarian and responsible, when needed. But he might not be very motivated to enter such situations at all, if by avoiding a relationship, he can avoid the compulsion to be responsible.

As much as two rational and logic persons can arrive to the same conclusions, if they base the logic upon the same premises, facts and information, to do the latter can be a long and strenuous endeavour.
To solve practical problems by logic is comparatively easy. But two persons, who have lived different lives for around 60 years, need a lot of communication, until they know each other well enough. Needs and tastes are given facts, and to find a fair and just way to fulfill the needs of both, requires a lot of deep introspection and sincere disclosure. Needs not only must be known by both, but also the relative importance, to make shared decisions equally beneficial for both sides.
Every conflict has to solved in a way, of which both are convinced to be just. But on top of this, there should also be developed a more general guideline so that similar conflicts can be avoided in the future.

If people think, that all there is needed for eternal happiness is to meet and feel attracted superficially by what they call chemistry, then they are not motivated to invest the efforts needed to create a deep emotional and intellectual intimacy.
If there is not immediately perfect harmony, then at the first disagreement they take the easiest way out, dump one partner ruthlessly and try again with another.

Many dating-advice sites warn people, that they should avoid to appear lonely, needy, desperate. They advice people to pretend instead to be happy and content alone, not to need a partner, who instead would just be an addition to their life, not a necessity.
I strongly disagree, as this is not logical. The more people need and want something, the higher the price that they are willing to pay. The more a man is needy, lonely, desperate, the more time, effort, temporary strain and discomfort he is motivated to invest in creating a relationship with strong bonds.

Reader of this text, if you are attracted by my search, instead of fighting against being needy, instead of pretending not to be lonely, just admit it as a first step to do something about it.