Social Distancing!!!

Pandemic has done the damage, I feel. Or is it done by mankind, us, unintentionally?

To avoid infection distance required was physical, and we were told to create social distance. And we have done it. We are advised to consider each one trying to come close to you "a potential killer" to create that distance. Some have practiced to negligible effect, more compliant and afraid of virus have achieved greater distance. 

These days, or months now, life is "set" as the "lingo" goes. It has become so predictable that, if you know me, you can tell with confidence which chair I must be sitting on, if you are asked to tell, by looking at the clock or watch or the phone. Unfortunately no one asks you, and you get away, unscathed.

This virus has gained all the attention and importance from the day, the sole purpose of our (family members') existence, Ma, departed. To such an extent it has hurt us, that we could not pay our respect in public, we could not be together to mourn her nor even get nicely framed picture of her in our homes.

For me departure of Ma, the one to whom i was answerable and hence had to report on daily basis, and "social distancing" forced by pandemic, are a double whammy!! I wonder every day in the morning, those two hours we are fixated in rocking chairs, who do i talk to today? Some of you may know, i love talking, to some people. Ma was one to whom, when she was not at her Aadhar card address, i would talk to practically every morning, without any reason. She is not there now.

There are others to whom i would call up regularly, but they are distanced socially, for easons, i can not fathom. There are still some, who are mine and so much committed to me, i perhaps take them for granted and do not count them as those who are "not distanced". But the times have certainly changed, social and political distancing is changing the definition of society.

I was looking for answers to some social distancing related questions and i find, Social distance is the "measure of nearness or intimacy that an individual or a group feels towards another individual or group in a societal network or the level of trust one group has for another".

I was trying to get to the root of causes responsible for my feelings of being excluded and distanced. And hence looked for dimensions by which social distance is measured. I find there are four dimensions. Affections, Norms, Frequency of Interactions and Culture/ Habits.

Affective social distance measures the sympathy members of the group feel for other members and for other groups. Normative social distance refers to widely accepted and often expressed norms for considering some as insiders and others as outsiders. Interactive social distance measures frequency and intensity of interaction within and between groups. Cultural and habitual social distance is largely based on economic and financial disparity.

Distance i was feeling from those whom i would like to remain close must have been caused by disturbance in one or more of the dimensions, logically. I need to introspect and see which dimension i have mishandled.

I have another option. Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientation (FIRO) has a scale version B for behaviour, which measures how one feels when in a group when it comes to inclusion, control and affection/ openness or to be able to get feedback from people in a group.

I know i would like to be included in some groups. I know i would like to include some people in a group i am in. I know i would like to seek control over a group of my choice. I know i would be controlled by a group of chosen one. I know i like some people and i am liked by some. The disturbance must have taken place in these equations, i am sure.

Let me take FIRO-B and get the report, to feel better in these challenging times. I am fortunate to have Psychologists of some standing in the group i would like to be included in but not control. I have taken the test and am waiting for the report. I will analyse the same as soon as received and try to find ways and means to feel better, even if not included.

Political polarisation and its effect on Social Groups

I have been observing the interactions among members of the social groups, where i am a part of. This is a continuous process and I believe all of us subconsciously do and judge others on parameters we have decided for evaluation. 

I  try to observe, more than any other's interactions with me, my interactions with others. By now, most of you who have been observant, must have noted that this is my OCD. And I consciously think about events taking place around me, with the objectives of maintaining and strengthening harmony in the groups where I am a member of and mend my behaviour to achieve peace. This is purely because I am selfish and prefer to live in peaceful surroundings.

For some time, I have observed and experienced loss of harmony and peace in my immediate surroundings. 

That when members of social groups are face to face, opportunities do present themselves to express differing views, and depending on strength of personalities, arguments may achieve higher decibels. The technological advances have made things worse by facilitating intra-group interactions and communication, by permitting virtual gatherings. The opportunities of arguments resulting out of differing views are in abundance. It has further made such interactions resulting in catastrophic fall outs by hiding non-verbal communication.

I was trying to list out causes for differing views and realised that one of the critical areas for difference of opinion is Political scenario. Members of the social groups have developed strong views on the issue, thanks to propaganda on social media, highly partisan electronic and print media and own interests. Confirmation bias has added fuel to fire, since each one of us looks for information in all media which justifies our stand.

This led me to search for details related with Political Polarization and its effect on Social Groups. A Wiki page on the subject of "Political Polarization" defines Polarization as under:

"According to DiMaggio et al. (1996), "Polarization is both a state and a process. Polarization as a state refers to the extent to which opinions on an issue are opposed in relation to some theoretical maximum. Polarization as a process refers to the increase in such opposition over time." Polarization can be benign, natural, and democratizing, or it can be pernicious, having long term malignant effects on society and congesting essential democratic functions."

Wiki page further explains types of polarization as Elite, Mass, and Pernicious polarization. It states “Elite polarization refers to polarization between the party-in-government and the party-in-opposition” and “Mass polarization, or popular polarization, is stated to be occurring when an electorate's attitudes towards political issues, policies, and celebrated figures are neatly divided along party lines. At the extreme, each camp questions the moral legitimacy of the other, viewing the opposing camp and its policies as an existential threat to their way of life or the nation as a whole”.

The most dangerous variety in my perception is Pernicious Polarization. Wiki page goes on to describe that phenomenon as “In political science, Pernicious polarization occurs when a single political cleavage overrides other divides and commonalities to the point it has boiled into a single divide which becomes entrenched and self-reinforcing. Unlike most types of polarization, pernicious polarization does not need to be ideological. Rather, pernicious polarization operates on a single political cleavage, which can be partisan identity, religious vs secular, globalist vs nationalist, urban vs rural, etc. This political divide creates an explosion of mutual group distrust which hardens between the two political parties (or coalitions) and spreads beyond the political sphere into societal relations. People begin to perceive politics as "us" vs "them."”

And this is what is causing me most discomfort. I have observed, such discussions becoming so acrimonious that at times they result into break down of communication and estrangement of relations. Members of the social group demonstrating love and affection today, may be found to be with broken relationship, because of arguments over such unworthy causes, tomorrow.

I found that those who are arguing are intelligent and can defend their commitment successfully. Are we wise, to take the arguments to breaking point, was the question. What is the difference between “Intelligence” and “Wisdom” was a topic of next search and I came across this explanation:

• “Intelligence leads to arguments. Wisdom leads to settlements.
• Intelligence is heat, it burns. Wisdom is warmth, it comforts.
• Intelligence is pursuit of knowledge; it tires the seeker. Wisdom is pursuit of truth; it inspires the seeker.
• Intelligence is holding on. Wisdom is letting go.
• An intelligent man thinks he knows everything. A wise man knows that there is still something to learn.
• An intelligent man always tries to prove his point. A wise man knows there really is no point.
• An intelligent man speaks when he has to say something. A wise man speaks when he has something to say.
• An intelligent man preaches. A wise man reaches.
• Intelligence is good but wisdom achieves better results."

Let me be Wise.

I received another gem of an advice, which makes most sense for social groups and it says:

“Ships don’t sink because of the water around them; it sinks because of water that gets in them. Don’t let what’s happening around you get inside you and weigh you down.”

Amen!!