Friedman’s success of nerve & failure of empathy: How IFS completes Edwin Friedman’s Theory
I really do not want to take on the task of critiquing Edwin Friedman’s masterpiece, A Failure of Nerve. And honestly, I’ll spend most of this article relating to the brilliance of his work rather than combatting it. I agree with William H. Dorherty’s endorsement, “Reading this book is like discovering an unpublished Beethoven sonata or a missing play of Shakespeare.” Let me tell you about the genius of Friedman’s proposals on leadership and natural systems at large, while I summon the nerve to take a stand on what he is missing in the end
Leadership Is Emotional, Not Cognitive
Friedman’s main argument in the book is that “leadership is essentially an emotional process rather than a cognitive phenomenon.”[1] The contrast Friedman sets up here appears simple enough on the surface but what he really means is the difference between Renaissance era “nerve” (emotional leadership) and post-enlightenment information (cognitive leadership). He claims modern leadership is predicated upon and celebrated as a mastery of data, techniques, methods, and social sciences.[2] (He does leave one exception to this rule – Family Systems Therapy. ) Not only does modern leadership depend on these cognitive systems erroneously, but American society has made cognitive knowledge a pathological addiction where leaders can escape to avoid dealing with the pain and fear of facing themselves.[3] This was a mirror for me and revealed my own addiction to knowledge and fear of emotion.
My Addiction to Knowledge & Fear of Emotion
I flee from internal discomfort. Anytime I am confronted, overwhelmed, excited, or unsure about….anything, I research. I am not fluent in the language of my emotions. Emotions, of any kind, cause a physiological response in my body. This is their medium of communication. Because I have not learned the nuances of that language in my body and valued my body and heart as legitimate sources of wisdom the way I have my cognitive mind, all I feel when an emotion arises within me is extreme discomfort. I commonly refer to this as “itchy sweater syndrome” because it feels like I am wearing an itchy sweater on the inside and can’t take it off. All this to say, I am a knowledge addict, It is my safe house from the undiscovered continents of my internal terrain. This suppression of my physiological responses causes me to operate in chronic anxiety.
Friedman’s thesis is that our contemporary society at large is chronically anxious and has gone into emotional regression.[4] I am displaying the natural energy of the emotional context I am a part of. What’s painful about this is that I am filled with vision for how things could be. I am a creator, a systems thinker, an outlier, a risk-taker, an adventurer, and a visionary. But my vision is constantly funneled through and truncated by research and information, rather than self-directed, internal knowing. Listen to this sobering line:
“Vison is basically an emotional rather than a cerebral phenomenon, depending more on a leader’s capacity to deal with anxiety than his or her professional training or degree.”[5]
Gut check! I wonder how much of my motivation for pursuing a doctorate falls into the category of me not trusting my-Self yet. How do I step into and lead from Self?
Self-Differentiation
According to Friedman, it is the work of “Self-differentiation”. A self-differentiated leader, (or to use Friedman’s key term, a “well-differentiated leader”) is someone with a high level of self-regulation.[6]
This is the work of Family Systems Therapy and Friedman’s leadership development model for dealing with systems – becoming a non-anxious presence to the others around us, and leading with strength and resolve. I can’t help but wonder what Friedman would think about the evolution of Family Systems Therapy into what is today Internal Family Systems Therapy.
Internal Family Systems – The Next Frontier
Internal Family Systems Therapy, created by Dr. Richard Schwartz recognizes that a living system of personalities actually exists within individual people. It takes these truths from external family systems and brings them into the internal system of one person. After putting this book down, I took a long walk and began to dialogue with the parts of me that were feeling anxious. Within minutes, one of those parts began to weep and asked me to lead them and allow them to take on a different role in the system. It had been operating as a protector of a much younger part ever since I was 13 years old. It was only through openness, curiosity, and empathy that I was able to unburden the part and welcome home the younger part it was protecting. Then I promised to lead them all well. The major difference in this approach and Friedman’s approach is in fact empathy.
Love Wins
Friedman warns about the “irrelevance of empathy in the face of un-self-regulating organisms that are by nature always invasive and cannot learn from their experience”.[7] I would say that accurately describes the recurring triggers and anxious cycles I fall into. I have tried self-soothing, separating from the emotions, and regulating my nervous system. And you know what, it works. But it doesn’t heal anything. And while I can appear to be regulated to my family or coworkers, this does not stop the need for regulation from occurring. In short – I am not healed. While I am in awe of his craft and comprehension, I experientially and foundationally disagree with him on this point. Columbus, who Friedman exalts (and for good reason), maybe the hero of nerve, but Christ is the Archetype of Love. From my current worldview, it is love that transforms people, organizations, creation, and my own internal family system. Today I feel better.
[1] Friedman and Steinke, A Failure of Nerve, Revised Edition, 14.
[2] Things like Sociology, Education, Politics, Management, and Psychology.
[3] Friedman and Steinke, 23.
[4] Friedman and Steinke, 59.
[5] Friedman and Steinke, 20.
[6] Friedman and Steinke, 16.
[7] Friedman and Steinke, 166.
About the Author
Christian Swails
Christian is the founder of CoCreation - a Startup Hub for social entrepreneurs in Savannah, Ga. He serves as the Spiritual Director for Wesley Gardens Retreat Center and Wesley Monumental United Methodist Church.8 responses to “Friedman’s success of nerve & failure of empathy: How IFS completes Edwin Friedman’s Theory”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Oh Christian. I do so enjoy your authentic, honest reflection and self awareness. It is a joy to read, although of course I also want to protect your vulnerability as you share so deeply.
What a privilege to be invited into your deep soul that has survived turmoil and pain so courageously. Your understanding of yourself is stunning and I loved to read that you used IFS to reflect on your reactions to the book as you walked.
I have a theory which is similar to IFS but leaves room for the internal system to either be either non dissociative, partially dissociative, or fully dissociative with pathological amnesia. I think you’d like it! It enables people to explore the depths of their soul safely, whilst acknowledging that some parts exist to enable survival and therefore won’t be needed as healing occurs.
I was also writing TODAY a keynote on ‘tolerating emotional pain’ because is not explored or understood enough and our knowledge driven, cognitive obsessed world is causing people to normalise the numbing and avoiding as if it’s healthy! And it isn’t. How do we all create time to feel deeply those feelings that are hard to tolerate. I wonder if your walk helped? I know my drives and walks are vital to my emotional health as I process with Jesus and feel deeply.
Oh thank you so much for your words. Thank you for sharing your journey.
Betsy, it does not appear that my comment will situate itself underneath yours, please read below for my response.
Betsy, thank you for covering my vulnerability. You always do. I would love to hear more about your theory. Can you tell me more about dissociation? What does it mean to be partially dissociative?
This is quite interesting to think about parts no longer being needed. I’d like to hear more.
To answer your question about creating time for deep feelings, I think it depends on whether or not you have the ability to access those places on your own. I have not had that ability. Without the framework, audiobooks, workbooks, and podcasts around IFS I would have no clue how to access this stuff. I have been looking for an IFS therapist for sometime. Even with the cognitive knowledge of how to do this, it’s still very challenging to do on my own. I know this is not the case for everyone. My wife, for example, has no problem taping into the depths. Even still, without the frameworks to navigate the psyche, it can be a scary and deterrent place.
I think some type of experience with a navigational framework helps give the confidence to take the walk.
Christian, it’s a privilege to learn alongside you.
My theory is explored in my book, ‘The Simple Guide to Complex Trauma and Dissociation.’ It’s a very basic overview of dissociation and my theory acknowledges the purpose of it as a coping mechanism whist also enabling there to be a recovery journey into healthy use of dissociation to cope with some stress or shock but not every day life. For children we call some parts ‘buckets’, and so they are only needed to hold some reactions to memories that are too overwhelming. When those memories have been processed slowly, the bucket becomes empty and is not needed, creating less emotional overwhelm for them.
It would be impossible to summarise here expect to say that I think we view the internal subconscious sense of self on terms that are far too simplistic and that can increase shame which disconnects us from others and ourself.
I’ve also written a chapter on dissociation in a book published in USA this week I think, ‘The Handbook of complex Trauma and Dissociation.’ That is a huge book full of wisdom. But I’ll think of how to send you some free resources.
I am sorry that the feelings are that overwhelming. You are courageous to share your honest journey which I am sure enables others to understand the life changing impact of trauma. The world needs to understand it more so that we can change national systems to facilitate trauma recovery rather than continue to cause people to think there is something wrong with them. It should never be about ‘whats wrong with you’ but ‘whats happened to you’. Until that changes we will keep giving drugs and lables to people who have lost hope of healing. But our God is The Healer and He gives resources to His people to share to bring transformation and recovery.
Dear Christian,
You are an excellent writer. Your vulnerability is relatable and feels authentic. In particular, in this post, I appreciate your distinction between regulation and true healing. Sometimes ignoring pain may feel like regulation, but it can be so unhelpful. Nuance is needed in how we understand responses to pain, which I am sure you understand well.
I noticed that you capitalized the word “self” a few times in this post. Is that intentional, and if so, I’d love to hear your rationale and thinking related to that.
Joff, thank you for your comment and for noticing the nuance.
For the Self, you intuited correctly. In IFS language the Self is the “other” thing that emerges when turning towards the parts of the interior with compassion, and willing their good. It’s Something that is unencumbered by ego, trauma, or the like. This is documented to happen over and over again when a practitioner can step back from the physiological feeling and choose to welcome the feeling completely to come.
I interpret this as Christ in me. Many others have as well. It’s an incredibly unitive experience feeling the presence of the unburdened One within me.
Thanks for asking me that. I have never articulated it quite like that before and it was encouraging.
Oh man, your quote from Friedman on vision being more emotional than cerebral and how a leader deal’s with anxiety hit hard. Your reflection question on your motivation for doing this doctorate may have part to do with you not trusting yourself, also hits hard. I wonder the same for myself- do I think somehow I will be more acceptable of a leader only if I do the work of getting a higher degrees? Then I contradict myself by resonating with the quote that how I deal with anxiety is more important than all the training and degrees I get.
Your reflection on Friedman’s example of Columbus as the hero of nerve got me thinking. Columbus’s willingness to ask different questions and go a different direction from the groups orientation was an heroic act, but it ultimately lead to forcing very poor leadership on a whole new people group. Risk-taking leadership may lead to risky leadership. This is why I appreciate you bringing it to a key missing part, Love. If true love was central to the acts of leadership, things like the theft of life and land from native peoples, may not have happened.
Oh nice, that’s an interesting thread. Where does grit and unwavering resolve square with love? I think it certainly can and I think love is THE source of energy that will supply and sustain that grit and resolve long-term. I’m not speaking in platitudes. I truly think Love is the most powerful force in the cosmos. Compelling, inspiring, motivating, and sustaining the impossible for the good of creation.
So would the implications of oppression of First Nations people have happened if the original pursuit had been motivated by Love? I don’t know. It would be interesting to play out what could happen if the initial (re)discovery of Colombus had had a purpose of union and mutual blessing. That was in large part not available to this time period, for that people group. What I mean is dominating, religious Europe did not wield mystical enlightenment at it’s highest levels of power. But then again, who ever has?