_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Fam Proc 11:107-112, 1972

BOOKS
RABKIN ON BOOKS
The recent governmental decline in the funding of research may give search a chance. We may see novelty and
originality again, qualities that have not predominated in federally sponsored scientific studies. Characteristically, research
proposals submitted to the National Institutes of Health and allied agencies are so thoroughly worked out that they closely
resemble the papers published at the conclusion of the project, except that the results anticipated in the proposal are
presumably confirmed in the final paper. In the Preface to his new work, The War with Words: Structure and
Transcendance (Mouton, 1971), Harley Shands has charged that most of the agencies to which he had applied for support
were conservative, inflexible, and elitist in the sense of requiring membership in a professional guild. In his introductory
remarks he indulges in a type of bitter nose-thumbing at those agencies which wouldn't fund his work because it wasn't
research but "only" search, or speculative inquiry as he calls it. His feelings, while slightly too sensitive, are easily shared.
In spite of all the calls from government sources for imaginative research, maverick research, creative research, there is
never any hint that these agencies realize that what they are actually referring to is just plain search. Established institutions
seldom willingly support a big risk. A formal research proposal itself precludes this. It would be like asking Columbus for a
detailed map of the area he wished to explore. With the government now reducing its level of research support, the climate
may change in favor of those who are involved in speculative endeavors. The history of scientific discoveries is the history
of how scientists got around the restrictions on their speculative drives.

The Empirical Structural Coincidence

One of the most interesting ways in which men stumble on scientific finds is through a coincidence, a particular type of
configuration leading to an accidental glimpse of certain underlying relationships that differ from prevailing views. As
examples, let us consider events in three areas: genetics, ecology, and family therapy from a systems point of view.
Gregor Mendel published his great work in 1866, which was written in the clearest possible manner, but was ignored
during his lifetime basically because scientists of the time were so busily researching Darwin's work. Evolution as a
concept oriented them to look for areas that would reconfirm Darwin's idea that a series of subtle and slight variations
gradually led to the emergence of new species. Unlike his peers, Mendel was dealing with big differences, and so his ideas
went unnoticed until 1900 when men with non-Darwinian interests went looking back through the literature. How then did
Mendel manage to work so effectively in an unpopular domain? No doubt many processes contributed, but one of them was
the happy coincidence between the empirical material (in this case, pea plants) and the underlying structure being studied
(in this case, genes). If he had chosen another plant, whose phenotypical characteristics were involved with several genes
not as nicely separated as they were on the chromosomes of pea plants, he would never have arrived at correct conclusions.
Another example concerns lakes. Originally botanists regarded the material in a lake as merely an aggregation of several
distinct species: floating plants, bottom plants, etc. The associated animals were considered the biotic factor. Physics and
chemistry were simply overlooked. The botanist was interested in classification, in the inner anatomy of the plant, and in its
sex life, so to speak. If he happened to meet a zoologist while at a lake, he would not be surprised to find that the zoologist
thought of animals as aggregations also: bottom animals, surface animals, etc. Perhaps the botanist would feel slightly hurt
to find his entire field of study being relegated, in the eyes of the zoologist, to the status of "the habitat." At some point in
the development of science, the contradictions in this earlier view were resolved by introducing the concept of a
communitya floating community and a bottom community that included both animals and plants.
In the final theoretical step, the lake itself began to take on unexpected dimensions, being seen as the main object to
study. It became difficult to determine the status of slowly dying pondweeds covered with periphytes, some of which were
also continually dying, since the non-living ooze into which they sank was rapidly reincorporated through dissolved
nutrients back into the living animals and plants. Was this mass living or dead, animal, plant, mineral? It was hard to
distinguish the biological in a contrasting sense from the physicochemical. Allee (1) in 1934 first expressed the view of the
lake as a whole by using the metaphor of a superorganism. Tansley (2), in 1935, rejected the notion of superorganism and
proposed instead that of ecosystem. I think this was possible and occurred in the study of lakes, instead of other places such
as deserts, because the underlying living structure, the ecosystem in the case of the lake, happened to coincide conveniently
with the empirical material. Thus, even in the old days of aggregations, the botanist realized that he was developing a
specialty, limnology, that had to do with lakes, while when he was collecting his plants on a desert, he just knew the
environment was hot and dry. Just as Mendel was fortunate to "use" peas to discover genetics, these men were fortunate to
"use" lakes to discover the new ecology.
For studying families, or thinking about institutions from the point of view of systems, the same sort of empirical,
1

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

structural coincidences occurred. Families and institutions just "happened" to be like large networks or collections of
objects related in some functional sense. For example, in a family therapy session many members might take a position in
the room analogous to positions in the underlying family structure; they might move around and change rapidly enough for
the systems nature of the underlying structure to be brought to awareness. In a parenting-sibling system (3) in which an
older sibling takes on many parental duties with regard to the younger siblings, its operation can be made evident by
sending the parenting sibling out of the room. Following this, a remarkable shifting of positions might occur with someone
who looks mentally deficient at one moment sparkling at the next, while someone else takes the role of "dummy." This
empirical food for thought might not be present in a verbal report such as might be offered in individual psychotherapy.

Structuralism
If, as I am suggesting, progress in science occurs by speculation that is frequently aided by a coincidental isomorphism
between the empirical material and something called an underlying structure, it pays to think about what we mean by the
term ecosystem, or structure. Furthermore, what is it that prevents us from looking for structures directly? Piaget's two
recent books, Structuralism (Basic Books, 1970) and Genetic Epistemology (Norton, 1971), as well as Michael Lane's
Introduction to Structuralism (Basic Books, 1970), attempt to give some idea of what an underlying structure is. While
their books are difficult reading because they were not designed for psychotherapists, they are valuable to workers in this
field. A structure (for instance, a family from a systems point of view) is characterized by three things:
1. Wholeness. Gestaltists speak of the whole being more than the sum of its parts and, therefore, of a family as being more
than the individual people. This is not structuralism. A structure is independent of its parts. What is primary for a structure
is the arrangement, not the elements; the relationships may, as Piaget suggests, have an objective, independent existence. In
the case of the structure called a family, this relationship is kept going with people related by blood, by inducting the
therapist into the system, by buying dogs, houses, etc. to promote the integrity of the family structure.
2. Transformations. A structure is a system of transformations, or as the modern artist would put it, a happening. The best
examples come from myths. When the princess kisses the frog, she transforms him into a prince. Marriage, to pick a less
mythical example, is also a powerful transformation. Suddenly, if the magic is performed correctly, you are husband and
wife. (While some people might argue that marriage is on the way out and is as mythic as the princess and the frog story,
and still others might argue it is merely legal, a piece of paper. I, for one, can testify that it changed me, transformed me,
personally at least, as much from a frog to a prince, or a prince to a frog.)
3. Homeostatic Processes. Family homeostasis was one of the earliest observations to be made in systems-oriented family
therapy. On a bleak January day in 1954, Don Jackson gave a lecture at the Palo Alto VA hospital on the topic of family
homeo-stasis. Gregory Bateson was in the audience and felt this topic was closely related to the "double-bind" project on
which he was working with Jay Haley and John Weakland. The resulting collaboration created the Mental Research
Institute and indirectly, with the help of Nathan Ackerman's Family Institute, this journal.
Perhaps now we can consider what prevents scientists from looking for structures. Structuralists believe in the
supernatural, perpetual motion, and something like teleologyall highly taboo subjects for scientists. Ecosystems and
structures are not empirical entities but reside on a plane or in a sphere that the ordinary man cannot reach or touch.
Therefore, one could say that they are supernatural. The concept of transformations takes the place of the notion that work
must be paid for with energy, that change takes work. It defies the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Homeostatic processes
can sustain the notion of purpose in a system without having to rely on the idea of motives. In short, a mother's influence
does not fall off by the inverse of the square root of the distance It defies the law of gravity. Until the systems points of view
regarding purpose, perpetual motion, and magic and the supernatural are widely known, it will be much too
unconventional, and even eccentric, to think directly about structures, and progress may have to wait for coincidences.

Constructionism and Social Design

The clinical arm of systems theory and structuralism is yet another jaw-breaking, ugly term: constructionism. It appears
in Piaget's two books when he discusses development and, by implication, clinical issues. If we take courting or getting
married as an example, different approaches reveal three different clinical models: empirical, nativist, and constructionist.
The empiricist believes that when Mr. Right comes along, Miss Lonely will get married. Although few clinicians support
this view, certainly various social clubs, dating bars, mixers, and so forth, do. In contrast, the nativist concentrates on inner
space. He favors the right time rather than the right person. When Miss Lonely finally is ready for marriage, when she
overcomes her inner blocks and lets it happen, she will get married. Most clinicians fit in here. Both of these approaches
treat marriage as an already known event. The constructionist or systems therapist, on the other hand, thinks of marriage as
a project, probably taking ten to fifteen years to complete involving as many as four generations with the possibility of
several alternative designs. Marriage, in this view, is not a known event, but a unique, one-of-a-kind construction or
structure. Helping with such projects is, therefore, the task of social design, which I would define as the modification,
stabilization, renovation, construction, and/or dismantling of human social systems.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The social systems to which such help may be applied can vary from a two-person relationship to that of a new town.
The systems therapist's task of social design is closely allied with other design professionals, particularly architectual
planners and legislative reformers. The ultimate concern of social design is for the total ecology or environment. Its
scientific roots lie in comparative ecology, a relatively new field, that has encouraged several family therapists to take an
interest in animal "families." One of the few articles on the subject is by Ito entitled "Groups and Family Bonds in Animals
in Relation to Their Habitat," which appeared in Development and Evolution of Behavior (4). In this article he offers the
provocative idea that only the crow, the wolf, probably some apes, and man have sufficient mental development in relation
to the problems presented by the environment to allow for a family group to develop without sacrificing the larger group, or
vice versa. Environmental problems, however, may be too complex now for man to continue to be in that elite company.
We could probably manage with the problems presented to crows and wolves, even some apes, but can we manage the
problems presented to man? Ito's book Comparative Ecology has not yet been translated from the Japanese, although his
article is in excellent English.
Another source of material for social design comes from the study of single cases such as Herbst's book, Behavioral
Worlds (Barnes and Noble, 1971). By making the assumption that each social organization is unique, he arrives at
constructionism from a methodologist's point of view. In his forthcoming book entitled Socio-Technical Theory and
Design he asks many of the same questions that tantalize those interested in social design.
Here in the United States there are few advocates of structuralism, systems theory, constructionism, comparative
ecology, and social design. In France Piaget reports the opposite problem. Structuralism is so fashionable he must
apologize for its popularity at cocktail parties. Perhaps now that research monies are not so abundant, these intriguing,
controversial disciplines will attract more pioneers. Perhaps speculative inquiry will become as popular as it is in France.
Dr. Shands, take heart.

REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.

Allee, W. C., Concerning The Organization of Marine Coastal Communities, Ecological Monographs, 4,
541-554, 1934.
Tansley, A. G., The Use and Abuse of Vegetational Concepts and Terms, Ecology, 16, 284-307, 1935.
Rabkin, J. and Rabkin, R., "Delinquency And The Laterial Boundary of the Family," in P. Graubard (Ed.)
Children Against Schools, Chicago, Follett, 1969.
Aronson, L. R., Tobach, E., Leurman, D. S. and Rosenblatt, J. S., Development and Evolution of Behavior,
Essays in Memory of T. C. Schneirla, San Francisco, W. H. Freeman and Co., 1970.

Beginning with this note, in addition to book reviews, this section will include general reviews of publishing
houses of interest to readers.
Research Press Company, 2612 North Mattis Avenue, Champaign, Illinois 61820 catalog available.
Robert W. Parkinson writes: "We contracted for Living With Children when Research Press was no more than a husband
and wife enterprise in which my wife typed invoices and I packed books on the kitchen table. In two very short years we
have grown to a staff of twenty people with a 6000 sq. ft. building of our own and a sales volume of approximately $85,000
per month. That is what Living With Children has done for the economy"what has it done for families of children?
"Everyday we receive some very positive form of reinforcement from a parent or from those who work with parents.
Often the letters are written on colorful, flavored stationery telling of the gratifying behavioral changes in a child which the
lovely ladies attribute to a reading of Living With Children. The steady flow of domestic orders attests to the flavor Living
With Children has found among professionals. And, the fact that it is under license to firms in Brazil, Mexico, Munich,
Quebec, and Holland attests to the universality of the message of this primer in behavior modification.
"Research Press first published Living With Children in the fall of 1968. It was not long before we found it to be a most
worthy book to launch our firm. The cash flow generated by sales has been adequate to fund publication of How to Use
Contingency Contracting in the Classroom, Trick or Treatment, and most of the current list. Aside from giving Research
Press meaning and vigor, Living With Children has established itself as an historic volume; a classic introduction to social
learning theory and the behavioral methods derived from it.... No weighty tomes for us. We wish to translate good research
into usable form for people who need it."
The Psychiatric Disorders of Childhood., 2nd ed. Charles R. Shaw, M.D. and Alexander R. Lucas, M.D, New York,
Appleton-Century Crofts (Meredith Corp.), 1970. 480 pp. $12.
Readers of Family Process may be interested in William M. Bolman's observations of this book published in the

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

American Journal of Psychiatry October 1971 (Vol 128, No 4. page 505):

Family therapy is presented as "a special type of group therapy espoused mainly by Ackerman," which should be
avoided in a pathologic family group because of the risk of dangerous repercussions
R. R