After almost half a century of empirical observation, this author concluded that opposition between siblings was a constant and reliable factor among the numerous families she observed. It should be noted that these were mainly families whom the author knew well rather than simply random candidates who were recruited to participate in a research study. She looked into families that were close and well-known to her, such as those of her parents, her own family, friends, relatives, close acquaintances and neighbors. This meant that the author had in-depth knowledge about the internal psycho-social workings of those families and knew all the characters involved for many years. It was from this position that she was finally and conclusively able to formulate DOLF theory and, like a new world map, describe its uncharted territory. On noticing the repetition of the pattern among the siblings in these families, she wondered whether there is a hidden factor at play that is influencing the behavioral outcomes in the children.
Proof of DOLF theory can also be found through simple statistical analysis. The essential questions to be addressed are the same as for any other type of proof: WHY does opposition and behavioral divergence among siblings ALWAYS occur between the first two siblings in every family, and WHY do adjacent siblings ALWAYS show opposite and opposing character traits of docility, compliance and social likeability on the one hand, and difficult, socially undesirable or uncomfortable behavior on the other hand. WHY does this happen every time we delve deeply into the dynamics of any family? WHY is the phenomenon so predictable? HOW can so much certainty, even predictability that results in mathematical formulae, occur in psychology, a field we think of as highly complex, as well as “touchy-feely” or “fuzzy”, and in which we expect to have few constant, stable or reliable parameters?
The idea that there can be anything constant, absolute and predictable in human psychology is admittedly shocking because there is little if anything in the universe that happens with 100% certainty every time we examine it. WHY then are sibling relationships such a glaring statistical anomaly? When we look closely at the repetition of the pattern among siblings in family dynamics, we must wonder whether there is an hidden, unidentified factor at play that is influencing this behavioral outcome in our children.
To set the scene, let’s refer to the historical example of a famous French scientist, Mme. Curie who, as we know, discovered a new chemical element in her era. Through persistence, research and empirical observation she became convinced that there must be something missing from the known pool of knowledge of the time. She then used deductive reasoning and followed her gut instincts, pursuing many years of painstaking experimentation. She ultimately concluded that although the mysterious element exists, it must be both invisible and intangible. Surely she first had to overcome her own skepticism and disbelief, but ironically, she was soon faced with the burden of convincing others of its existence. Once accomplished however, she named the element “Radium”, put forth her proof to the scientific community and went on to win a Nobel prize.
Likewise, DOLF embodies a major discovery that features the supremacy of Emotional dynamics in the Mind of a Child and focuses on how this differs from the feelings and thoughts that comprise our Adult Minds. The author recognizes that the DOLF concepts are invisible and intangible and require some stretch of the imagination before they can become accepted or incorporated into scientific knowledge. Like Marie Curie’s discovery, DOLF works backward by gathering historical and empirical information, and then progresses forward to arrive at a formula for family dynamics. It then reaches into the future by following this with prescriptions for treatment.
If we remain unconvinced and still want statistical proof beyond looking to examine real-life SIBLING WARS and incongruent personality types wherever we look, we can start by taking a coin and flipping it 100 times. In probability language, our best prediction is that we will get 50 heads and 50 tails, or thereabouts.
Now if we take two coins and flip them both 100 times, our best prediction is that we will see heads-heads 25 times, tails-tails 25 times, heads-tails 25 times and tails-heads 25 times. This means that 50 times out of a 100, the coins will land on the same sides that is, both heads or both tails and be matched in 50% of cases, while the other 50 times the coins will land on opposite sides and be mismatched.
Our simple conclusion from this exercise is that is impossible to flip two coins and have them each land on the same side ALL the time, and also impossible to flip two coins and have them land on opposite sides ALL the time. So we can ask again: How is it possible that every time we closely examine the behavior and personality of the first adjacent siblings we ALWAYS FIND THEY HAVE OPPOSITE PERSONALITIES? By standard statistics, and even by common sense, it is impossible.
Of course, one obvious objection would be that sibling relations are far more complex than the mere flipping of a coin or two, once or even hundreds of times. Also, one might object because while siblings may be reliably different, they cannot be considered exactly opposite, but just simply different, which can send their behavior in wildly varying, but not necessarily opposite, directions. We might also say that the DOLF formula is itself amazingly simple and even too stupid to be true. Moreover, if it were so obvious and true, why wasn’t it discovered earlier, either in ancient times, or modern times by our advanced state of science? And this author would have to agree with ALL these criticisms. There is no doubt that human relationships are far more complex than flipping coins, or that DOLF theory sounds far too simple to have had to wait this long to be discovered and is even, by our Intellectually dominated adult reckoning, an imbecile notion.
Yet fortunately or unfortunately, the rules of DOLF theory are fixed and do not change. And its prescription is so entirely predictable that it arrives at a standard formula that in itself is shockingly mathematical and rigid. Our contention is that humanity, like all other animals, is governed by immutable INSTINCTS, but that these INSTINCTS are exclusively human and NOT the same as those of any other animal. Our best clue to how the human mind operates is the Mind of a Child, because it specifically outlines human instincts, human Emotional reactions, and the way in which these must slowly amalgamate with the special human endowment of Intellectual functions in order to bring about adult human cognition and maturity. This pattern has never changed throughout history, and will never change, but is routinely acted out every day by every woman, man and child who was ever born on this earth, and who ever will be born.
The reader is reminded too that these rules were NOT created by the author of this treatise, Vera Rabie, who is a Doctor of Psychology, but were merely uncovered by her. She intuitively felt that something in our pool of knowledge of psychology was missing, and upon setting her mind to exploring the mystery, dared to diverge from what is believed to be known and accepted in the field. Almost serendipitously, she came upon a silent, invisible factor that is unaccounted for in our understanding of human psychology and followed her suspicions using all her educational and personal knowledge to present it formally to the popular and scientific communities as best she could. She readily admits that it is a strange phenomenon that seems to defy the laws of the universe with which we are currently familiar.
Why was this not discovered earlier by conventional research methods? A possible explanation is that the exposure of Favoritism on our part sounds offensive. Its mere mention and possible repercussion of blame conjures up our Anger, Anxiety and spontaneous resistance. Are parents to blame entirely for our children’s foibles, problems and mishaps in life? The theory also challenges our morality by including Anger as a basic human Emotion. In addition to the positive human social feelings that we like to harp on, is the behavior and personality of every human being also driven by negative social feelings in terms of competition, envy and jealousy? Are we condemned to living with eternal conflict and strife in our midst? The assumptions reach to the heart of our decisions and the way we choose to act and make our judgments in everyday life. It leads us to dispute whether we are wrong in the way we understand and behave toward our most precious and prized commodity – our children. Are we being fair to them, or are we falling prey to our own inclinations to Favor some children because they conform to our moral, religious and personal standards and please us with the ways they behave, but Disfavor others because they challenge and resist our bidding? Have we been tricked and trapped by our children into loving some more than others for all this time? It makes us question not only how we could have been duped this way, but how our ignorance could have gone unremarked and uncorrected for so long. It makes us wonder: Are we oblivious, or is there really an underground world of Instinct, Emotion and conflict over human LOVE that we are all complicit in hiding? We have to ask: Even if this author was educated to a high level, are we to believe the case she builds purely based on her experiential and observational studies, and not on hard science? It remains for you, the reader, to be the judge and jury of these discussions.