#169 | psy00 – Karpman drama triangle

Hi guys,

Did you see the news about the last NASA challenge for 3D printing habitat on Mars? Some of my contacts sends me the result and the propositions are really awesome. The participant give very good proposition and on particular the Kahn-Yates proposition caught my attention since the idea concept is quite close from my project. The idea of using parametric model to enhance light luminosity and biophilic architecture, plus the shape use by the previous proposition of Search+. But well, I don’t exactly know every details of the propositions but it is clearly very interesting concept. These teams are way better to the one guy proposition of mine haha… Gosh, it hurts but it makes me feel nonetheless excited! It means that Mars habitats proposition will be more and more important because it will be one more step to the reality!

Oh by the way, Bach is a bit busy and he has some business at the Defcon in Las Vegas so he won’t be able to write a lot. He will probably explain you everything later. So, you will probably have to handle me for a while, (not) sorry.


So, yeah. I have no idea about what to talk about in this post. So I will talk about something that will affect me in the next week (so mysterious). This category will be about psychology and in specifically about systemical psychological approach based on a holistic analysis. In short, it is a psychological approach to examine the system (all the connections) of relationships of an individual in the overall rather than on one particular issue. This concept is a way to find the “error” in the system. It means, what past relationship could affect the present ones. The school of Palo Alto for example, is well known for this approach. This method is used for short term therapy in contrary of the full psychoanalysis concept.

What I will talk about is a controversial patterns in relationship called “the Karpman drama triangle” that could explain the destruction of social interaction. To be short, this concept is based on a simple principle: there is three types of way to interact (Except the neutral one) based on a conflicted map structure.

Victim > Persecutor > Rescuer > Victim > etc.

1) The Victim is the guy who will be generally be dependant by the Rescuers protection. He will be unable to do any actions by his own. The Rescuers can obviously enhance this state of inability and passive behaviour.

2) The Persecutor is someone who will use aggressive, abusive and, oppressive behaviour to interact with people.

3) the Rescuer is the savior who will seek to protect everyone and in particular, the victims. However, the negative part is the way his actions can be like inhibitor to the Victim behaviour.

Of course, one individual can act differently depending on the situation. He can be a Persecutor, Victim and Rescuer. The true goal on this structural schema is to know how to unlock some issues in relationship due to excessive and destructive interaction that result from social manipulation.

The controversial point is this one: if someone is drowning, this individual will be the victim, the person who will help that person will be the rescuer bit does it mean that the water is the persecutor? Of course, the idea is to tell that a person can be a persecutor and victim at the same time, and objects can also be a persecutor the alcohol for alcoholic persons. It is important to make the difference between neutral interaction and a destructive interaction. So, the Karpman drama triangle can’t be used on everything.

Thanks for the reading! See you next time!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *