In the movie The Trap, it is said that psychologist Lang was criticized for linking “the struggle for power and control, which he had uncovered in the family” with the struggle for power and control in the world. It was said that this link had helped spread the paranoia of people believing that our society is purposely controlling our lives and that this starts within our closest relationships. Via using Game Theory during examining human interaction, Lang took 20 couples in Britain and asked each individual Game Theory analyzed questions regarding the couples behavior towards each other: why they act in a certain way and what it really means when the individual asks for something or makes a statement.
Analyzing the so-called “coded answer,” he found out that couples used their actions towards each other consciously to manipulate and influence their spouse. He claimed that the partners would act in a form of kindness and love, in order to control and dominate each other.
Certainly it is a bit intense to link action from a relationship to extreme controlling mechanisms of the entire world, but I find his observation very interesting and am not too critical about it. Isn’t it totally normal that people act purposely in a specific way, because they want a certain reaction from one another?
Isn’t it normal that every one plays some secret game, in order to get some sort of reaction, like attention, attraction, admiration or desire?
I agree that it is exaggerated that an individual’s desire is so high, “that the partner could never fulfill it,” but to a certain degree who wants a perfect partner? Would that not be boring? Certainly families should not be “control machines,” but every one plays some sort of selfish game and isn’t that, to some point, even a healthy protection for your own sake?
When it comes to the basics of true love, I would agree that in a healthy relationship one should equally love each other and not play games.
p.s.: But if you don’t have Hugh Hefner as your lover, maybe some secret-games could spice up your love.
And for more info about Hugh’s love, check out the following link…
http://jezebel.com/5134284/women-orgasm-more-with-rich-men-claim-researchers
Possibly Relevant Posts:
- In Defense of Game Theory. Sort of. (2) | Lily Q
- Facebook: A Roundup (4) | Jessica
- Exhibit #1: Pixel love and the impact of video games (5) | nayoung
2 Comments
I agree that Game Theory shouldn’t be applied to a relationship, but in some ways I could also see where he would get that idea. For example, a person in a relationship might not exclusively intend on manipulating the other person, but they could still convenience themselves by knowing how to act around that person. Like, instead of two people being angry at each other for a long time, one finally gives in and they go along with their lives. That person could be giving in because they love the other person, but one can’t forget its also easier to live their life that way (though they might not outright say so).
Of course, game theory was meant to be applied to the cold WAR so, I do with you that it’s not really applicable to a loving relationship.
I agree with Angela that game theory is somewhat applicable to relationships. Although, I wouldn’t go as far as RD Lang, and say that all families have within them a struggle for power and control. But I do feel that people sometimes do employ manipulation and deceit in order to gain control over others. For example, from personal experience, whenever I asked my father for permission to do something that I knew he would disapprove of (i.e. going to a concert, staying out late, etc), he would always answer in a passive aggressive tone, “You’re old enough, do what you want to do.” If I chose to do what I wanted, I would be racked with guilt that I disappointed my Dad, so more often than not, I stayed in or missed out on that concert I wanted to go to so badly. Later in my teen years, I saw through my Dad’s mind games and I started to go anyway. Eventually, my Dad learned that his tricks weren’t working anymore, and he resorted to just saying “no.”