I think Schnarch's description of people who are "poorly differentiated" can be interpreted in Harley terms as people whose "Takers" and "Givers" are out of balance. I am thinking particularly that their Takers are hidden/undeveloped/supressed. Fair analysis?

it has been a while since I read that but I would agree...being poorly differentiated is an imbalance between the two.

Takers and givers, or those parts of us are totally dependent on someone else.

I say that with my eyes open and plugged in to the wall socket. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="images/icons/shocked.gif" />

<small>[ May 28, 2003, 02:36 PM: Message edited by: d_rose ]</small>

I think they are very different concepts.

The Giver and Taker are more about actions that are occuring (and can change pretty quickly) whereas differentiation is an aspect of your personality.

Your level of differentiation determines how you react to the imbalance of your giver/taker (or your spouse's giver/taker).

Schnarch makes the comment that even poorly differentiated couples can have comfortable marriages as long as the stress level stays low - I think this is the same as saying they've achieved a balance between giver/taker. He also talks about reciprocal models of intimacy (I'll meet your needs IF you'll meet mine). What happens when things get out of balance is that a poorly differentiated person focuses on the OTHER member of the couple. A more highly differentiated person will look at himself first.

While there are lots of dimensions to differentiation I think that a good simplification is that your level is related to how much responsibility you take for your OWN happiness.

Just my current state of thinking. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

Jeffers