629. George Simon's Book 'In Sheep's Clothing' - Comment 1
This continues entry 628 about the immature theory of mind.
In entries 615 and 618 I already mentioned and commented on George Simon's excellent approach to the problem of disturbed characters. I just got and read his fascinating book 'In Sheep's Clothing'.
Reading it was an excellent reminder of the utter futility of any attempts to reduce being harmed by disturbed characters. Someone with a character disturbance cannot be influenced any more than a moving steam roller. He is determined to get by hook or by crook, whatever he wants. Nothing can stop him from running over anybody standing in his way. The only protection is avoiding disturbed characters.
For me personally, contact with one of them is doomed to lead to an impasse and to unsolvable conflicts. While I am not prone to be a submissive victim accommodating a disturbed character's objectives, his ruthlessness gives him nevertheless enough power to impose sufferings upon me, to which I react with protest and outrage. But a disturbed character is out of the reach of any civilized and moderate influencing him by constructive communication. His mind is surrounded by a wall, any attempts to make him change his behavior bounce off and fail without any effect.
This continues entry 628 about the immature theory of mind.
In entries 615 and 618 I already mentioned and commented on George Simon's excellent approach to the problem of disturbed characters. I just got and read his fascinating book 'In Sheep's Clothing'.
Reading it was an excellent reminder of the utter futility of any attempts to reduce being harmed by disturbed characters. Someone with a character disturbance cannot be influenced any more than a moving steam roller. He is determined to get by hook or by crook, whatever he wants. Nothing can stop him from running over anybody standing in his way. The only protection is avoiding disturbed characters.
For me personally, contact with one of them is doomed to lead to an impasse and to unsolvable conflicts. While I am not prone to be a submissive victim accommodating a disturbed character's objectives, his ruthlessness gives him nevertheless enough power to impose sufferings upon me, to which I react with protest and outrage. But a disturbed character is out of the reach of any civilized and moderate influencing him by constructive communication. His mind is surrounded by a wall, any attempts to make him change his behavior bounce off and fail without any effect.
According to Simon, all exploitative and hurting behavior can be explained by only one of two cognitive dynamics, either the neurotic avoidance of too much painful emotions or the disturbed characters' conscious method to gain selfish advantages.
I see another possibility, which I am missing in the book: It is the incompetence to behave in an appropriate and acceptable way in spite of being motivated and believing to do so.
Therefore I like to add one more type of a disturbed character to Simon's list:
The self-righteous aggressive disturbed character. This type also behaves as a wolf, just as Simon's other types, but he does not put on a sheep skin. Instead he believes to be a sheep. Due to his immature theory of mind and to the subsequent lack of getting or comprehending blatant feedback, he is unaware, that he is perceived as a wolf. (More in entry 628)
He behaves as a wolf due to immaturity and interpersonal incompetence:
1. He is incompetent to know and evaluate the limits of what is rightfully his due. Thus he is unable to accept as a fair deal to give enough back in return for what he receives. Others do not consider as justified, what he feels entitled to get. This can be as bad as an entitlement delusion.
2. He lacks the communicative skills to obtain, whatever he wants, by any form of rational convincing, even when it is justified. When what is not justified is not available, he is too incompetent to apply manipulative tactics. His competence is so limited, that he resorts to use drastic and primitive methods of power, dominance, aggression.
This type is very different from both the unbridled aggressive and the channelled aggressive as described in the book. The self-righteous aggressive usually accepts simple and clearly defined rules and laws, when he understands them in spite of his immature theory of mind.
I see another possibility, which I am missing in the book: It is the incompetence to behave in an appropriate and acceptable way in spite of being motivated and believing to do so.
Therefore I like to add one more type of a disturbed character to Simon's list:
The self-righteous aggressive disturbed character. This type also behaves as a wolf, just as Simon's other types, but he does not put on a sheep skin. Instead he believes to be a sheep. Due to his immature theory of mind and to the subsequent lack of getting or comprehending blatant feedback, he is unaware, that he is perceived as a wolf. (More in entry 628)
He behaves as a wolf due to immaturity and interpersonal incompetence:
1. He is incompetent to know and evaluate the limits of what is rightfully his due. Thus he is unable to accept as a fair deal to give enough back in return for what he receives. Others do not consider as justified, what he feels entitled to get. This can be as bad as an entitlement delusion.
2. He lacks the communicative skills to obtain, whatever he wants, by any form of rational convincing, even when it is justified. When what is not justified is not available, he is too incompetent to apply manipulative tactics. His competence is so limited, that he resorts to use drastic and primitive methods of power, dominance, aggression.
This type is very different from both the unbridled aggressive and the channelled aggressive as described in the book. The self-righteous aggressive usually accepts simple and clearly defined rules and laws, when he understands them in spite of his immature theory of mind.
The self-righteous aggressive is not malicious, he is just not aware of his incompetence nor of how much his behavior is selfish. As far as the self-righteous aggressive comprehends another's needs, he is able to care. For example, he can be a caring master to a dog, if he acquires the knowledge about how to care for a dog. The success with the dog then reinforces his false belief to be a sheep. He is unaware of behaving as a wolf, when he forcefully applies the very same form of care and treatment, which is appropriate only for a dog, also upon a human being.
Both the covert-aggressive and the self-righteous aggressive consider themselves as justified to pursue what they want with any means, believing to be entitled to get it.
But the covert-aggressive has a mature theory of mind enabling him to be realistic about and aware of what obstacles and resistance to expect during his pursuits. He takes the disagreeing and resisting persons for serious enough to rationally choose the method of aggression, which promises the best success. In the case of the covert aggressive, this includes hiding his true intentions as a part of using manipulative strategies. He is realistic about the powers of his opponents, would they discover his aggression and true goals and react by fighting back.
The self-righteous-aggressive lacks a sufficiently mature theory of mind. He does not take resisting people into account as individual opponents with real or at least subjectively valid reasons for their disagreement. He perceives them as merely amorphous obstacles to be best confronted with outright, indiscriminate and open aggression. The self-righteous aggressive perceives any disagreement with and resistance to his allegedly entitled goals automatically as an indication of others being flawed, wrong, dysfunctional, while nothing makes him doubt his own entitlement. Who resists is believed to be bringing aggression upon themselves as a legitimate consequence.
By applying the same generalized standard methods of aggression to all allegedly flawed obstacles, the self-righteous aggressive character is also not able to improve his immature theory of mind. He notices and reacts to obstacles without understanding, perceiving, evaluating or distinguishing any specific reaction or feedback. This impedes him from learning successful manipulation strategies.
But the covert-aggressive has a mature theory of mind enabling him to be realistic about and aware of what obstacles and resistance to expect during his pursuits. He takes the disagreeing and resisting persons for serious enough to rationally choose the method of aggression, which promises the best success. In the case of the covert aggressive, this includes hiding his true intentions as a part of using manipulative strategies. He is realistic about the powers of his opponents, would they discover his aggression and true goals and react by fighting back.
The self-righteous-aggressive lacks a sufficiently mature theory of mind. He does not take resisting people into account as individual opponents with real or at least subjectively valid reasons for their disagreement. He perceives them as merely amorphous obstacles to be best confronted with outright, indiscriminate and open aggression. The self-righteous aggressive perceives any disagreement with and resistance to his allegedly entitled goals automatically as an indication of others being flawed, wrong, dysfunctional, while nothing makes him doubt his own entitlement. Who resists is believed to be bringing aggression upon themselves as a legitimate consequence.
By applying the same generalized standard methods of aggression to all allegedly flawed obstacles, the self-righteous aggressive character is also not able to improve his immature theory of mind. He notices and reacts to obstacles without understanding, perceiving, evaluating or distinguishing any specific reaction or feedback. This impedes him from learning successful manipulation strategies.
Even the self-righteous aggressive may sometimes apply a few of the
manipulative tactics described in Simon's book, when he is aware of the
probable unpleasant reactions to be avoided.
The essential difference
to the covert aggressive is the self-righteous' lack of any hidden
agenda. Instead he bluntly expresses his claims and demands and what he
intends to do to ascertain to get it. Lacking any comprehension, why others disagree with his entitlement, he does not know nor learn, what to hide and what utterances and behaviors are counterproductive to his goals. By blurring out his true intentions he provokes resistance, to which he then reacts with enhanced aggression and bullying. This is a spiral of fast deterioration.
The covert aggressive misleads others, while the self-righteous aggressive is himself mislead. A wolf, who believes to be a sheep, causes not less devastation than a wolf, who knows to be a wolf, but hides beneath a sheep's skin.
In the case of the covert-aggressive, it is the victim's task to find out, that there is a wolf under the sheep's skin. The wolf knowing to be a wolf has therefore theoretically the choice to change, if the victim refuses to remain in that role.
The self-righteous aggressive openly behaves like a wolf and nevertheless believes his bullying and coercing as the legitimate behavior of the sheep, which he wrongly believes himself to be. Any change is not probable, because someone believing to be already a sheep does not comprehend, why he should change to become one. A wolf cannot decide or attempt to change into a sheep, unless he first becomes aware, that he is a wolf.
In this situation, the victim is powerless. A self-righteous aggressive wolf does not experience his victim as significant enough to influence him. This impedes him from ever discovering the reality of his being a wolf, instead he continues to consider the victim as being so flawed as to warrant being bullied.
The covert aggressive misleads others, while the self-righteous aggressive is himself mislead. A wolf, who believes to be a sheep, causes not less devastation than a wolf, who knows to be a wolf, but hides beneath a sheep's skin.
In the case of the covert-aggressive, it is the victim's task to find out, that there is a wolf under the sheep's skin. The wolf knowing to be a wolf has therefore theoretically the choice to change, if the victim refuses to remain in that role.
The self-righteous aggressive openly behaves like a wolf and nevertheless believes his bullying and coercing as the legitimate behavior of the sheep, which he wrongly believes himself to be. Any change is not probable, because someone believing to be already a sheep does not comprehend, why he should change to become one. A wolf cannot decide or attempt to change into a sheep, unless he first becomes aware, that he is a wolf.
In this situation, the victim is powerless. A self-righteous aggressive wolf does not experience his victim as significant enough to influence him. This impedes him from ever discovering the reality of his being a wolf, instead he continues to consider the victim as being so flawed as to warrant being bullied.
