A Person should be married to other in a marriage


By Prof Dr. Sohail Ansari
Love in marriage is only possible when both partners feel married to each other.

It is not a lack of love, but a lack of friendship that makes unhappy marriages’ Friedrich Nietzsche    
‘Keep your eyes wide open before marriage, and half shut afterwards.
                        Benjamin Franklin

 

Double-swing model

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The double-swing model (also known as the Möbius integration philosophy) is a model of intercultural communication, originated by Muneo Yoshikawa, conceptualizing how individuals, cultures, and intercultural notions can meet in constructive ways. The communication is understood as an infinite process where both parties change in the course of the communicative or translational exchange.

Overview[edit]

Yoshikawa highlights four major ways of handling the crossing of a cultural boundary:[1][2][3]
·         The ethnocentric mode – In this mode I take no interest whatsoever in the perspective of the person with whom I am speaking, concentrating entirely on my own point of view.
·         The control mode – Here, I do take an interest in the beliefs of my conversational partner, but I do not take them seriously. The information is only useful in assisting me to manipulate the situation in my advantage.
·         The dialectical mode – In this case, my objective amounts to something like fusion of opinions. My purpose is to make differences disappear, so that both I and the person with whom I am communicating lose any sense of independent identity. Thus true differences get lost beneath a spuriously generated consensus.
·         The dialogical mode – The above three modes all assume that encounters are between individuals who are at some fundamental level isolated from each other. The dialogical mode draws upon the Buddhist philosophy (the logic of soku hi) and the ideas of the Jewish philosopher Martin Buber (the I-Thou relationship) in seeing human beings as complete only in relationship. Whilst the dialogue is between two people who are separate and independent, they are simultaneously and inevitably interdependent. It is from this stance of mutual respect that the difficult process of entering the gap in understanding takes place.

He emphasizes that both communication parties play the role of addresser and addressee. In the double-swing model, communication is seen as an infinite process and the two participants will both change during their meeting. He underlines that the goal of communication is not to eliminate differences, but to use the dynamics that arise through the encounter.[4]
The model is graphically presented as the infinity symbol (∞), also as a Möbius strip, visualizing the twofold movement between the self and the other that allows for both unity and uniqueness. The front side and the back side of the strip appear divided, but both sides are apparently interconnected, and may be viewed as one and the same. This theoretical model indicates that one is neither this side or that side nor beyond both sides, but one is the between. Yoshikawa calls the unity that is created out of the realization of differences "identity in unity". This dialogical unity does not eliminate the tension between basic potential unity and apparent duality.[5]
Yoshikawa coined the term "dynamic in-betweenness", suggesting how the individual is able to move between different cultural traditions, acting appropriately and feeling at home in each, and in doing so simultaneously maintains an integrated, multi-cultural sense of self. Rather than the either/or identity of encapsulated marginals, constructive marginals experience their movement between cultures as both/and.[6]
The model has been related to the notion of pendulation described by Peter A. Levine, the swinging back and forth between our point of view and that of the other that allows the potential for understanding each other.[7]

History[edit]

In 1978, Muneo Yoshikawa published an essay of personal reflections upon his psychological evolution as a Japanese in the United States, highlighting the role of identity inclusiveness and identity security as the very essence of what it means to be an interculturally competent person.[8][9] In 1980, he first proposed the double-swing model,[10][11] developing it later in 1987.[1] The theory became also known as the Möbius integration philosophy and served as a premise for the theory of "integrative philosophy", developed by Muneo Yoshikawa in collaboration with Shozo Hibino.[12][13]

Benjamin Franklin Was a Wise Fellow
 

Many clever comments are attributed to Benjamin Franklin, in my opinion this one is the best: "Keep your eyes wide open before marriage," Ben Franklin quoted, "and half shut afterwards."
How can the yet-to-be-married and already-married turn this comment into practical advice?
The yet-to-be-married need Keep your eyes wide open before marriage, and half shut afterwardsto enter into marriage with their eyes wide open. Marriage is a lifetime commitment. Things that look charming and attractive while dating don't necessarily stay that way after marriage. The girl that was so harried that she always had that "lost look" that seemed so cute, will probably continue to always be overwhelmed; after a few years and a couple of children, the "lost look" will start to appear a lot less cute. The boy that seemed so mature because he was very distant during courtship may continue to be distant after marriage as well; if a wife is then looking for a closer and warmer relationship, she will spend the rest of her married life feeling cheated of that closeness.
Notwithstanding all the outside influences that affect us, most people end up with character traits that take after their own family. Checking into what a family of a prospective marriage partner is like is step number one, and it shouldn't be taken lightly. One woman who sat in my office crying that her husband wasn't a father to her sons told me, "I should have known better. His father was so distant and unavailable for his children, but I didn't realize it was important for a man to have a father as a role model." Similarly, the man who expects his wife to be devoted to him because that is the model he grew up with, will be surprised and struggle with a very needy wife. Usually, all he had to do is look into his mother-in-law's behavior before marriage and he "could have known."
There are exceptions to every rule, of course, and I know many people who have overcome a difficult background by taking an objective view on their own childhood and recognizing that they were wronged. Many people, however, who grow up in a "dysfunctional" home don't recognize the dysfunction, and therefore perpetuate it.
Most important of all is that a person looking for a mate should trust their instinct. In the whirlwind of courting and dating things get overlooked. In the ensuing weeks of the engagement things that were just niggling sensations in the back of the mind can become full-fledged worries. Those worries should be discussed with a competent adviser. Some of them may be "engagement blues," but sometimes the subconscious is trying to point out a real problem, that the young adult is trying to ignore in an effort to make this be the "right one."
Premarital counseling can help resolve a lot of issues. The marriage counselor has seen many of the problems and recognizes many of the cues that an in-love couple doesn't. Using the guidance of a counselor may help to draw some issues out and find a practical strategy of how to deal with it.
So much for the first part of Mr. Franklin's advice. The second part is equally crucial. Once married, one should overlook, be tolerant and forget. Overlooking means that not every small thing has to be pointed out and fought about. The old joke about a married couple fighting over how to squeeze the toothpaste--from the bottom or the middle of the tube--isn't such a big joke. People fight and argue about trivial matters all the time. What a silly waste of time and energy!
Just because your mother/ father/ friend doesn't understand why you tolerate x, y or z in your spouse, it doesn't mean that it's harmful to you or your marriageBe tolerant of all our spouses' foibles unless they are truly harmful. Just because your mother/ father/ friend etc. doesn't understand why your spouse does x, y or z or how you tolerate it doesn't mean that it's harmful to you or your marriage.
Forget things your spouse did which you didn't like, and remember the good--and do it religiously. Something that is a perpetual problem must be dealt with, but that which isn't important enough to deal with a professional is not important enough to be harped on and brought up each time there is an argument.

Ben Franklin was a smart fellow. If you want the blessing of a happy home, keep both eyes open before marriage, and one eye closed after.

Comments