THE FIRO THEORY OF INTERPERSONAL BEHAVIOR

William C. Schutz University of California (Berkeley)

The first section of this paper describes the elements of a formal scientific theory and the relevance of a formal theory to the field of educational administration. For this purpose, educational administration will be considered an applied science--one that makes use of the basic data from at least psychology, sociology, political science, and economics, adapting and applying these data to its particular situation.

In discussing formal theories, it will become evident that, in a strict sense, no theories of educational administration exist at present. Some authors have presented frameworks and terminology (e.g. Getzels and Guba, 1954; Stogdill, 1948), but no one has so far undertaken the systematic development of a formal theory. The second part of this paper is devoted to a discussion of an embryonic attempt to create a social science theory--the FIRO (Fundamental Interpersonal Relations Orientations) theory of interpersonal behavior. For a more detailed presentation of this material see Schutz (1958).

Formal Theory

In the literature of the philosophy of science and increasingly in the empirical sciences there are references to "formal systems," "axiomatic systems," "postulate systems," or, now somewhat more in vogue, "mathematical models" or simply "models." All these terms refer to attempts to construct a language from certain basic terms and laws governing the relations of these terms, that will "fit" a certain part of the world. That is, if these terms are given coordinating definitions (that is, connected with some empirical phenomena), then the phenomena will follow laws parallel to those in the model language. In other words, as scientists, we try to find the structure of reality and to put it into words. These words suggest consequences, which can then be checked empirically. A more detailed discussion of a formal system may help to clarify this point.

Elements of a Formal Theory

A formal theory consists of the following elements:

1. Basic or primitive terms.

2. Defined terms.

3. Formation rules.

4. Transformation rules (or rules of inference or deduction) 5. Postulates (or axioms, or primitive propositions)

6. Theorems (or derived propositions)

Normally, for application to empirical material the language of logic and mathematics is utilized without making it a part of the theory. This language includes the formation and transformation rules.

The primitive terms are not defined within the formal system but represent the minimal set of terms needed to develop the theory. Defined terms are introduced into the theory as equivalent to certain combinations of primitive terms. The postulates of the system are a minimal set of propositions from which all true statements in the logical system are derivable. The most familiar example of a formal system is Euclidean geometry. All the elements of a formal system are present: primitive terms, for example, "point"; defined terms, for example, "triangle"; axioms, for example, "If a straight line meets two straight lines, so as to make two interior angles on the same side of it taken together less than two right angles, these straight lines, being continually produced, shall at length meet on that side on which are the angles which are less than two right angles" (the famous "parallel postulate"); and rules for deducing the theorems from the axioms, for example, "If B is true whenever A is true, and A is true, then it follows that B is true (modus ponens)."

Presentation of scientific material in the framework of a formal system has many important advantages over more informal or discursive presentations, particularly with regard to the scientific utilization of the material. Some of these advantages are:

1. To achieve conceptual clarity. The necessity to state ideas explicitly leads to the identification of contradictions, omissions, repetitions, and confusions. Formalization fosters clear statements, explicit definitions, and clear logical sequences. For example, although the ideas of Harry Stack Sullivan (1954) are extremely provocative, it is difficult to find explicit statements in his work about several vital areas, for example, dimensions of personality.

2. To detect hidden assumptions. Formalization requires that all steps leading to the statement of a theorem be made explicit. If the chain of reasoning is incomplete, a hidden assumption may be revealed. For example, the fact that several social theories apply only to a particular culture is often not made explicit because of the range of applicability of the theory is not systematically stated.

3. To gain from indirect verification. If the relations between theorems are made explicit, then the verification of one theorem may indirectly verify the other because they are parts of a logically interconnected system. For example, in Newtonian mechanics, evidence for the laws of falling bodies gives indirect evidence for laws of movement of astronomical bodies since these sets of laws are logically connected.

4. To specify the range of conceptual relevance. Formalization makes clear which aspects of a theory are affected by particular data. It makes explicit which theorems follow from which postulates and therefore which theorems and postulates are affected by a particular experimental result. For example, because of the weak formal properties