sahp ? where in ASCAP
I would like to elaborate one or two of the
points Paul Gilbert made in the July issue. Our general point is that
the self construct which we know as
self-esteem evolved out of reptilian RHP via (probably anthropoid)
SAHP, but instead of replacing RHP and
SAHP, self-esteem represents an
elaboration of these constructs, which continue to exist in their
own rights in their more primitive parts
of the brain. When we are engaged in agonistic competition, our brains are
calculating RHP and relative RHP. When we are engaged in hedonic competition
our brains are calculating SAHP. At other times we may be influenced by an
appreciation of ourselves that is not based simply on our competitive
ability and then we think in terms of self-esteem.
I think it is important to be clear about what changes and what stays the same when we move from
the RHP to the SAHP system. I think the following things stay the same:
1. A global rating of the self is required
under both systems. In the RHP system it is needed to calculate
relative RHP which is the decision to
attack or submit. In the SAHP system it is probably needed to decide between a
strategy of self-assertion and one of self-effacement on important social occasions.
2. Wide variation in level between individuals
promotes social functioning
in both systems. One might say that variation in RHP is needed so that people don't fight all the time, and
variation in SAHP is needed so that
people don't all speak at the same time.
3. SAHP is still connected to the yielding
subroutine system. Just as a
fall in RHP triggers a further fall in RHP and the other features
of the yielding subroutine, so a fall in
SAHP triggers a further fall in SAHP, and
a generalisation of the fall to the whole self-esteem complex. Thus,
for example, a female novelist, who
prides herself on her writing as well as on her looks and her capacity for
mothering, may be able to cope with a
certain amount of catathesis in the form of bad reviews, with only moderate fall in her pride in writing and no fall in
her pride in her looks or her
mothering; but when faced with
overwhelmingly bad criticism she develops a
yielding subroutine and not only comes to have an exaggeratedly low view
of her writing but also loses confidence
in her looks and her mothering.
What has changed?
1. The signal of absolute RHP which was one of
strength and designed to
intimidate has become a display of attractiveness and competence.
It is not a
signal of SAHP (which would convey the message "see how respected I am") but a display of those qualities
that elicit respect (anathetic signals) from others.
2. Signals of relative RHP have no equivalent
in the SAHP system, because
there is no dydadic eyeball-to eyeball
confrontation, and therefore no
particular rival with whom to compare one's SAHP. Under the RHP system there is an
evaluation of one's own RHP with one's estimate of the RHP of a particular rival, leading to a decision of
favourable or unfavourable relative RHP; the signal of favourable relative RHP is
attack, and because it lowers the
recipient's RHP it is by definition a catathetic
signal; the signal of unfavourable relative RHP is
submission, and because it raises the
recipient's RHP it is by definition an anathetic
signal. What is the equivalent output variable for SAHP? Above I suggested self-assertion versus self-effacement. But with what
is SAHP compared? There must be a complex evaluation
of the whole social situation, including the number of people present and their prestige, and the
weightiness of the occasion. Then, as when question time comes after a lecture,
one decides either to
stand up and speak or remain seated. SAHP also determines the
threshold of
weightiness (of occasion, setting and company) at which
conspicuous participation begins to be
inhibited by social anxiety.
3. Under the SAHP system anathetic
and catathetic signals are given in unison by the audience, and they
contain no comparative component. Catathetic signals
say "You are no good" rather than the "I am better than you"
message of the RHP system. Likewise anathetic signals
say "You are good"
rather than "You are better than me". Whether these hedonic anathetic
and catathetic signals evolved from the agonic ones
of the RHP system, or whether they
evolved from some other social signals such as
those of parenting or courtship, we do not know and probably never will.
The
emancipation of anathetic signals from the
implication of "You are
better than me" allows them to be very widely used between
equals and even from leaders to
followers. In fact, the boosting of followers' morale with anathetic
signals is one of the requirements of good leadership.
4. Under the SAHP system there is no
possibility of reconciliation to assuage loss of SAHP in the way that
reconciliation assuages loss of RHP. Those whom society rejects are very much
"out in the cold", even literally banished to
5. A society using the SAHP system is operating
in the hedonic mode,
because the members are not oriented towards agonistic behaviour.
A society using
the RHP system may be in the agonistic mode (in which fighting is occurring) or in the agonic mode
(in which the members are oriented
towards fighting but no actual fighting is occurring) or in the hedonic mode (in which any status differences
which exist are not at issue, e.g. after
reconciliation).