The psychologist who invented "flow" now makes the case for"complexity." We need to be as different as we can from each other while at the same time integrating our efforts. It is our contribution to the continuation of evolution, says the University of Chicago's eminent Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Ph.D.
With his last book, Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, the man with the unpronounceable name (say Chick-sent-me-HIGH) added a new, intuitively clear concept to the language. In his new book, The Evolving Self. A Psychology for the Third Millennium (HarperCollins; 1993), he looks beyond happiness to consider what we need to grow as individuals and as a society. Csikszentmihalyi exhorts us to develop complexity in our consciousness, to acquire multiple interests and abilities. Our future, he contends, depends on it.
PT: You said in your book that evolution is taking care of increasing the complexity in our lives. Why should we be concerned with trying to help this along?
MC: Well, because at this point we are one of the major--if not the major--selective mechanisms on the planet. Whether we like it or not, what we do is going to make a huge difference in the quality of the atmosphere, the quality of water, plant life, animal life, human life.
Before, evolution could make all kinds of mistakes, and natural selection could have obliterated all types of life forms on the Earth. Slowly, over thousands of years, millions of years, some forms that were obviously more complex had a slight advantage and survived. And the effect has been that we have had more and more complex forms with time.
But now we are in a position that we are selecting what's going to happen, not the blind forces of the physical environment. So we are doing it, and if we don't know what we are doing, we can make the kind of mistake that would stop evolution-at least in its human form.
This is, in a way, the testing ground for whether our species can really survive. I think it depends on whether we can realize it's simply the end and do something that will make evolution more complex, instead of breaking down into warring hordes.
PT: You suggest that people should try to overcome their individual problems, to transcend" their personal dramas....
MC: I think that's the first step. I think without resolving one's own conflicts and the kind of psychic entropy that we carry in our own psyche, it's hard to be concerned and do effective work for others.
PT: Are there some people who are better at finding complexity (and transcendence) in their lives than other people?
MC: Clearly, that's true. We know that people vary in how self-centered, selfseeking, and selfish they are, and how much they're willing to be concerned about others. Unfortunately, we don't have a measure for it like we do for IQ. If we did, it would be a big help because then people could get recognized for this ability. At this point, it's a very private matter, and you can't recognize people unless they are really extreme in this capacity.
PT: Besides rock climbing, which Aldous Huxley said was the ideal basic training for citizenship, what would be your prescription?
MC: Well, I think we find that the arts are generally enjoyed by students even through high school, whether it's dance, music, painting. When the arts are taught systematically, they do teach you discipline, they do teach you the kinds of habits of mind that you want school to inculcate. But, unfortunately, those are exactly the subjects knocked off school curricula as soon as there is a pinch in the budget.
PT: You say that it's useful to develop a complex family. What are the elements that make up a complex family, and what are the ways you can strive to get it?
MC: Well, the notion of complexity is useful because it can be applied to one's state of conscience at the moment and one's personality over time. It can be applied to families, communities, schools, and institutions. So it's a very useful way of categorizing psychosocial systems.
Complexity is made up of two dialectically linked processes. One is differentiation; the other is integration. At the level of the family, differentiation means that each person feels free to pursue their own individual goals and their own individual skills so that the parents support the child's individuality, and that the children respect the parent's own individual values or interest. This kind of understanding and practice allows each person to be as different as they want or can be from each other. That's one half of complexity.
The other half is integration, which means families where each member is aware of the other person's goals--even if they are not the same, or even contrary--and helps that person to realize their goals.
If the family's only differentiated, there's a lot of stimulation, high expectations, and encouragement of differences, without the love and support. You have kids who may be very ambitious and achieve well in school but are not really happy. They're insecure, and that tends to a result.
If you have an only integrated family, there is lots of love and support but no challenge, no pressure, no expectation of higher achievement or accomplishment. Then you have kids who act fairly happy and ad j usted and content, but thev don't seem to develop much ambition.
If you have neither differentiation nor integration, that's the worst, of course. But if you have both, that's when we're talking about complex family.
PT: You're one of the most prominent psychologists in the country. Do you practice what you preach?
Tags:
art,
continuation,
earth,
evolution,
family,
futurist,
mechanisms,
natural selection,
optimal experience,
physical environment,
third millennium,
University of Chicago
