• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Framing in Debates, Dating, and Politics

ThatsWhatHeSaid

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
7,263
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Edit: Sorry this is so long!

Framing is a term I ran into when reading about pickup artists. It describes what I think is a really fascinating phenomenon, which is whose worldview dominates the interaction.

Framing in Dating
To illustrate in the dating world, imagine you go up to a good looking guy or girl. They start talking about something (anything, trains) and you try to see what they're talking about. You listen and maybe compliment them a little, and try to navigate THEIR world. Now imagine approaching someone you find annoying. If forced to talk with them, you'll be more likely to settle back and let them discover YOUR world. You might make less of an effort to see things from their point of view. You're less invested.

Example from random pickup site:
She says: "If you behave, I'll let you buy me a drink."
You counter with: "Are you too poor to buy your own?"
You lose the frame by saying: "Then I'll make sure I don't behave."

Example 2:
She says: "Like in the Kama Sutra or in the book Art of Making Love by Jane Lawry, the goal should be to orgasm from the mind."
You counter with: "Do you usually orgasm from the hand?"
You lose with: "I like that you read books."

You can see that the "lose with" is submissive and playing in the person's worldview. The "counter" challenges them and their view and pulls it back in your favor.

Framing in Debates
You see the exact same things in debate, and I see it all the time in law. A conflict arises and one party goes on the offensive, saying "these are the facts and this is correct." The other side can counter by going on the offensive - challenging the frame - or by going on the defensive - conceding the frame. Most of the time, there's some combination. Weak framers will concede points and try to appease, while strong framers will stay rigid. The Obama/McCain debate is a great example. McCain ignores, impresses his interpretation, dismisses, and doesn't concede. Obama, in contrast, makes concessions, compliments, acknowledges, etc. You can kinda tell who the strong and weak framers on this site are, too.

Framing in Politics
A lot of political rhetoric deals with framing. The current middle east conflict is a great example. Each side wants to push their view of the situation as furtherest as possible in hopes of shaping the other's view and understanding. Neither side wants to acknowledge the way the other side sees things, because it involves the risk of losing the frame (and losing one's voice).

Framing in Other Situations
The topic comes up in a lot of other areas when you think about it. Negotiation is all about framing and trying to submit the other person. Disputes with significant others, as well.

It would seem to me that what's going on here is a contest for dominance. So, any time we have conflict, we would expect to see some type of framing activity. I'd like to explore the topic a little more, but especially with respect to dominance and what factors give people strong frames. Also, what factors lead a person to surrender a frame? Here's the big question: What rules can we come up with to predict who will win/protect and lose/abandon a frame?

Protecting Frames
1. Dominant individuals will always win the frame. (Imagine talking to Bill Gates. Imagine talking to a homeless person.)
2. Individuals will protect their frame when it is tied up with their identity. (If you think of yourself as good at political analysis, you will hold your frame.)
3. Individuals will protect their frame in the face of physical threat. (Political conflicts)
4. Individuals will protect their frame when confronted with opinions of someone they don't trust as accurate. (In a debate with someone you think doesn't know wtf they're talking about, you will resist seeing the world their way.)

Abandoning Frames
1. Submissive individuals will always lose frames.
2. Individuals will abandon their frame during surges of empathy. (Talking to someone in grief, you will jump to see the world their way.)
 

ThatsWhatHeSaid

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
7,263
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Another question:

Can we come up with a model to predict what leads to a framing conflict? Is it simply a battle for dominance/power/resources? Extra points for flowcharts.
 

Udog

Seriously Delirious
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
5,290
MBTI Type
INfp
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Very interesting. I'm more familiar with 'reframing' as a technique to view a bad situation in a more positive light. (You losing a job becomes an opportunity to find a job you are happier with anyway.)

What rules can we come up with to predict who will win/protect and lose/abandon a frame?

Someone that wants to reach a win/win solution is more prone to abandon his frame. Skilled and dominate people will do it in such a way where they build a new frame that incorporates elements of both original frames. Unskilled or weaker people will lose their frame in the process.

Someone more interested in win/lose will hold onto their frame unless they are literally forced to give it up (lose).
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I think example 4 under Protecting Frames can be both active and passive - active in the sense that you may continue debating your position, or passive in the sense that you don't push your position but sit back and don't acknowledge/affirm the other persons' position either (I'm thinking more in situations where the other person isn't even worth my time and a debate is pointless). The latter might technically fall under 'Abandoning Frame', since it is more of a submissive behavior externally, but internally it is not - internally the person is not seeing things from the other view, they're just effectively ignoring the other person and staying in their own frame.

I don't have any other comments yet....
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
What? Dating is a contest for dominance?
You're doing it wrong!

Defensive (not necessarily submissive) people will always lose 'frames'.
And conceding a point doesn't have to mean losing.

Do you concede the point? ;)
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,192
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Great topic, thank you so much for bringing it up -- I've never seen it discussed before.

Offhand, what about flex-framers? With the McCain/Obama example, certainly McCain would stick to his frame and never shift; Obama did shift, but usually only after it was clear that McCain would not, and he would either flex just enough to incorporate (or reinterpret) McCain's frame INTO his as much as possible.

Perhaps this is a "Blob" strategy or some other sort -- when the other type has a rigid frame you can't shatter, you shift your enough to absorb some of the strength of theirs but then reinterpret it so it becomes your frame again?
 

ThatsWhatHeSaid

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
7,263
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Offhand, what about flex-framers? With the McCain/Obama example, certainly McCain would stick to his frame and never shift; Obama did shift, but usually only after it was clear that McCain would not, and he would either flex just enough to incorporate (or reinterpret) McCain's frame INTO his as much as possible.

See, I see that as basically losing the posturing game.
 

CzeCze

RETIRED
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
8,975
MBTI Type
GONE
Does winning the frame = winning the debate? Or winning really at all? I don't think so.

I think it's much more complex than simply conceding a point = losing = being submissive.

Not all points are equal. If two people are butting heads, it's the person who concedes that starts to control the flow of the situation and move it from impasse.

Basically by doing something which is here labelled as 'submissive' one becomes the gate keeper to resolution, or they can.

It depends really on the intent and strategy of the people involved and level of conversation is happening.

Good negotiators know what's really going and what is really at stake and what is really being fought over. Getting defensive and digging your heels in...is that winning a debate? In itself, no, I don't think so.

PS Now you're making me paranoid.
 

Thursday

Earth Exalted
Joined
Mar 14, 2008
Messages
3,960
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
8w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Another question:

Can we come up with a model to predict what leads to a framing conflict? Is it simply a battle for dominance/power/resources? Extra points for flowcharts.

Yes & Yes.
When it does, its not as fruitful for either party.
Extrovert or not, we thrive on our communion with others
in order to create a hospitable trade agreement,
a bridge where give and take are in order and non-mercenary needs to be established

Your thoughts.
 

CzeCze

RETIRED
Joined
Sep 11, 2007
Messages
8,975
MBTI Type
GONE
Abandoning Frames
1. Submissive individuals will always lose frames.
2. Individuals will abandon their frame during surges of empathy. (Talking to someone in grief, you will jump to see the world their way.)

3. Individuals will abandon their frame when they are afraid to lose

4. Individuals will abandon their frame when they just don't care

You already stated it in the pick-up scenarios (btw, makes SO much sense now, those pick-up artists with schools are obvious NTs!)

In early stages of relationships, dating, courtship, happens all the time. I've totally done it before. I say something, someone disagrees, and normally I would debate my point and enjoy doing so (because that's what I do). But instead I go, "Meh, I'm just trying to [get a friendly hug at the end of the night] so sure, I can let this go"

So it was both that I was afraid of losing the desired outcome of the bigger picture and that I didn't care about defending my point.

When this happens in relationships and courtship too much it's a bad sign. Especially when done against your better judgement.

So conceding can definitely cost you footing if you do so unwillingly or unnaturally or because you are forced.
 

LostInNerSpace

New member
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
1,027
MBTI Type
INTP
Another question:

Can we come up with a model to predict what leads to a framing conflict? Is it simply a battle for dominance/power/resources? Extra points for flowcharts.

Interesting. There is already a model. NLP. I think NLP was a good start, but I'm not so convinced it's as useful as some people claim.

You're better off reading up on Milton Erickson. NLP is largely based on the work of Milton Erickson and Virginia Satir.
 

ThatsWhatHeSaid

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
7,263
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
3. Individuals will abandon their frame when they are afraid to lose

Interesting! I think this is definitely true, and it jives with the dominance stuff, too, since individuals who feel dominant in a dynamic aren't concerned about rejection.

Cze^2 said:
4. Individuals will abandon their frame when they just don't care

Also interesting, because I think this depends on personality. I think some people - NTs? - would hold onto their frame because it's enjoyable, like how Kiersey says NTs take every opportunity to refine their ideas.

Interesting. There is already a model. NLP. I think NLP was a good start, but I'm not so convinced it's as useful as some people claim. You're better off reading up on Milton Erickson. NLP is largely based on the work of Milton Erickson and Virginia Satir.

I don't know that much about NLP, but I'll keep it in mind next time I'm at the bookstore. Can you, Lost, find this model off the web and post it here? (Please? :))



A few observations since yesterday:

Framing only becomes relevant during a conflict.
The person afraid to lose the frame will almost certainly lose the frame.
 

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
WRT the Obama/McCain debate - who won the election? ;)
 

FDG

pathwise dependent
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,903
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
7w8
I can't understand this concept :(
 

Anja

New member
Joined
May 2, 2008
Messages
2,967
MBTI Type
INFP
I'm think this evaluation of conversation and personal power is appropriate in some settings. In a social setting it becomes a mind game and can be a lose/lose situation.

If the goal in a social conversation is to further one's understanding of the other while self-disclosing for their benefit, who triumphs is a hinderance to the goal.

For me it is possible to enter into the paradigm the initiator choses and still maintain my own, perhaps opposing, world view. I would hope for the same from my conversationalist.
 

V Profane

New member
Joined
Aug 16, 2008
Messages
119
MBTI Type
INTP
A textbook demonstration on how not to frame (assuming they aren't lying about their intentions) can be found by studying the work of Matt Nisbet and Chris Mooney.
 

LostInNerSpace

New member
Joined
Jan 25, 2008
Messages
1,027
MBTI Type
INTP
I don't know that much about NLP, but I'll keep it in mind next time I'm at the bookstore. Can you, Lost, find this model off the web and post it here? (Please? :))

NLP is touted as model building system. It's a collection of modeling techniques. I studied it for a while. I personally don't buy into it much anymore. There is some good stuff there. Some of it just goes too far. I heard Richard Bandler actually say people should go jogging in their minds to avoid polution. Presumably this is why he weights 300lbs. That was the point I walked away. And NLP practitioners seem to claim anything that works as validation of their system.

This is an outstanding book:

Amazon.com: Influence: Science and Practice (5th Edition): Robert B. Cialdini: Books

I discovered it because it was recommended reading on an NLP site. The author mentions nothing of NLP. I've discovered a few books like that.

This is another good example. This guy talks about "Mirroring for hypnotherapy" as an NLP technique:

YouTube - Mirroring for hypnotherapy (an NLP technique)

Are they now claiming hypnotherapy and mirroring as part of NLP?
 
Top