Observations, evaluations, actions, errors, mistakes, sin etc

[Kermit1941]

Hello, I hope that this will be an enduring thread.

I wish to initiate a discussion around the communication process among people.

A very ineffective way to communicate your desires to other people
is to accuse them of being stupid, ignorant, or not caring about your needs.

I think that there are many ways people have learned how to
speak ineffectively, and very few ways by which people have
learned how to speak effectively.

Some of our sources of learning ineffective speaking are

(1) churches,
(2) public and private schools,
(3) TV shows, especially soap operas,
(4) some of the modern literature


One of the things people need to learn in order to speak
their needs effectively is
the distinction between
what they actually observe
and how their observations relate to their needs.

For example, suppose the employer of a group of people
extends the company meetings by telling personal anecdotes,
and the employees resent the "time wasted".

How will the employee's tell their boss their need?

If the employees tell the boss that "He has a big mouth",
it gives him no clue what they want or need.

To be effective, the employees could tell the boss that
whenever he tells personal anecdotes such as ...
(and here they should remind the boss of one of his anecdotes),
that it takes up valuable time in which employees could be doing
more useful work.

It will be helpful if the employees are willing to politely interrupt the boss when he starts to tell another personal anecdote. Allow the boss the time
to unlearn his habit of telling personal anecdotes.


I invite people to suggest principles and rules for effective communication
and to discuss what attitudes are most consistent with
peaceful resolution of conflicts among people.

Kermit Rose

[Clancy]

I'd add didactic lectures to your list of ineffective ways to communicate, and the ever popular use of big words when little ones suffice.

Hello, I hope that this will be an enduring thread.

I wish to initiate a discussion around the communication process among people.

A very ineffective way to communicate your desires to other people
is to accuse them of being stupid, ignorant, or not caring about your needs...

[Dram]

Ok, this sounds like a thread worth weaving, considering imagination is a good/bad thing. What happens when the communication process which in normal modes requires more time than is available and metaphoric shorthand can jump the gap? sparkplugs do it and your motor runs, does conversation have to be confined to the weakest link of having to explain everything and repeat yourself on a regular basis. Maybe some thoughts won't make sense except way down the road even if you put a tedious effort into attempting clarity and by the time you have explained your originating thought the thread "you" were following has escaped you?

I'm thinking communication of like minds is symphonic and to unlike minds a duress, but the hard to figure are so easily targeted by the either lazy mind or the offended ones who just looks for targets to denigrate?

Hello, I hope that this will be an enduring thread.

I wish to initiate a discussion around the communication process among people.

A very ineffective way to communicate your desires to other people
is to accuse them of being stupid, ignorant, or not caring about your needs.

I think that there are many ways people have learned how to
speak ineffectively, and very few ways by which people have
learned how to speak effectively.

Some of our sources of learning ineffective speaking are

(1) churches,
(2) public and private schools,
(3) TV shows, especially soap operas,
(4) some of the modern literature


One of the things people need to learn in order to speak
their needs effectively is
the distinction between
what they actually observe
and how their observations relate to their needs.

For example, suppose the employer of a group of people
extends the company meetings by telling personal anecdotes,
and the employees resent the "time wasted".

How will the employee's tell their boss their need?

If the employees tell the boss that "He has a big mouth",
it gives him no clue what they want or need.

To be effective, the employees could tell the boss that
whenever he tells personal anecdotes such as ...
(and here they should remind the boss of one of his anecdotes),
that it takes up valuable time in which employees could be doing
more useful work.

It will be helpful if the employees are willing to politely interrupt the boss when he starts to tell another personal anecdote. Allow the boss the time
to unlearn his habit of telling personal anecdotes.


I invite people to suggest principles and rules for effective communication
and to discuss what attitudes are most consistent with
peaceful resolution of conflicts among people.

Kermit Rose

[Hotspring 44]

“A very ineffective way to communicate your desires to other people is to accuse them of being stupid, ignorant, or not caring about your needs.”

I essentially agree with that statement.
But I ask is it possible to communicate when somebody that actually does not care about ‘your’ needs?
Some people are emotionally and or egotistically attached to their so-called ‘ignorance’ (Bliss).
I have a hard time thinking (assuming) that it is likely for me to be able to “effectively” communicate to somebody under those conditions.
Is it worth it? Or is it a waste of time? Or in what instances is (could) it either be worth it or not a waste of time?... under either one or both of the above-mentioned circumstances;(?). Is it even possible to “effectively” communicate your needs to somebody that either is not, and/or has no desire to be empathetic?

“I think that there are many ways people have learned how to speak ineffectively, and very few ways by which people have learned how to speak effectively.”

Or listen “effectively”. Sometimes it (the lack of communication) really is not the ‘fault’ of the person who is trying to “effectively” communicate.

“One of the things people need to learn in order to speak their needs effectively is the distinction between what they actually observe and how their observations relate to their needs.”

That can get extremely complex and very difficult to figure out how to explain to somebody “effectively” but that is a good point.

“I invite people to suggest principles and rules for effective communication and to discuss what attitudes are most consistent with peaceful resolution of conflicts among people.”

I guess first of all not getting violent and not calling people names would be a good foundation.
Also realizing when somebody is absolutely closed minded; and also when to stop trying, because at some point, nothing will be effective under that circumstance.
Sometimes the most intelligent thing is to recognize certain limitations and know when to stop.

Hello, I hope that this will be an enduring thread.

I wish to initiate a discussion around the communication process among people.

A very ineffective way to communicate your desires to other people
is to accuse them of being stupid, ignorant, or not caring about your needs.

I think that there are many ways people have learned how to
speak ineffectively, and very few ways by which people have
learned how to speak effectively.

Some of our sources of learning ineffective speaking are

(1) churches,
(2) public and private schools,
(3) TV shows, especially soap operas,
(4) some of the modern literature


One of the things people need to learn in order to speak
their needs effectively is
the distinction between
what they actually observe
and how their observations relate to their needs.

For example, suppose the employer of a group of people
extends the company meetings by telling personal anecdotes,
and the employees resent the "time wasted".

How will the employee's tell their boss their need?

If the employees tell the boss that "He has a big mouth",
it gives him no clue what they want or need.

To be effective, the employees could tell the boss that
whenever he tells personal anecdotes such as ...
(and here they should remind the boss of one of his anecdotes),
that it takes up valuable time in which employees could be doing
more useful work.

It will be helpful if the employees are willing to politely interrupt the boss when he starts to tell another personal anecdote. Allow the boss the time
to unlearn his habit of telling personal anecdotes.


I invite people to suggest principles and rules for effective communication
and to discuss what attitudes are most consistent with
peaceful resolution of conflicts among people.

Kermit Rose

[Kermit1941]

I'd add didactic lectures to your list of ineffective ways to communicate, and the ever popular use of big words when little ones suffice.

:) Yes indeed.

I've noticed the big words syndrome in publications by scholars, and
research scientists.

Perhaps it would be useful for teachers at all grade levels to be on guard against the didactic lectures.


Kermit

[Kermit1941]

Ok, this sounds like a thread worth weaving, considering imagination is a good/bad thing. What happens when the communication process which in normal modes requires more time than is available and metaphoric shorthand can jump the gap? sparkplugs do it and your motor runs, does conversation have to be confined to the weakest link of having to explain everything and repeat yourself on a regular basis. Maybe some thoughts won't make sense except way down the road even if you put a tedious effort into attempting clarity and by the time you have explained your originating thought the thread "you" were following has escaped you?

I'm thinking communication of like minds is symphonic and to unlike minds a duress, but the hard to figure are so easily targeted by the either lazy mind or the offended ones who just looks for targets to denigrate?

Hello Dram.

It is true that sometimes we cannot convey, in available time, all the details that we deem important.

This suggests that we also need to develop the skill to rank by importance each of the details that we would like to convey.

Also, as you suggest, a good metaphor can convey the essential idea
even though it cannot provide proof.

If I find I need to repeat ideas, then I assume I posed the ideas in an incorrect order, and would benefit by re-considering my order of presentation.


Also, the person to whom you are explaining things may require time
to integrate the first few details of your thread, before being able to
follow the next. This suggests that some ideas cannot be communicated within a short time period.


A mathematician can explain mathematical ideas easily to people who already understand most of the idea to be explained. It is extremely difficult for a mathematician to explain mathematical ideas to people who have become convinced that they have no mathematical ability.


"lazy" mind is an evaluation.

"easily offended" mind is also an evaluation.

One of the things to help us communicate more easily is to
avoid thinking that evaluations are observations.

One quality of observations is that people can easily agree on the
observations.

One quality of evaluations is that, since people may have different goals, needs, and values, people can easily not agree on evaluations.


Kermit Rose

[Kermit1941]

“A very ineffective way to communicate your desires to other people is to accuse them of being stupid, ignorant, or not caring about your needs.”

I essentially agree with that statement.
But I ask is it possible to communicate when somebody that actually does not care about ‘your’ needs?
Some people are emotionally and or egotistically attached to their so-called ‘ignorance’ (Bliss).
I have a hard time thinking (assuming) that it is likely for me to be able to “effectively” communicate to somebody under those conditions.
Is it worth it? Or is it a waste of time? Or in what instances is (could) it either be worth it or not a waste of time?... under either one or both of the above-mentioned circumstances;(?). Is it even possible to “effectively” communicate your needs to somebody that either is not, and/or has no desire to be empathetic?

Hello HotSpring.

It is true that there is no point to, for example,
try to convince a "true believer" that there is no afterlife.


However in the case where interaction between two people is necessary
in order that both their needs be satisfied,
the resolution is swift provided at least one of the two people is
skilled in listening to the needs of the other.

“I think that there are many ways people have learned how to speak ineffectively, and very few ways by which people have learned how to speak effectively.”

Or listen “effectively”. Sometimes it (the lack of communication) really is not the ‘fault’ of the person who is trying to “effectively” communicate.

You make a good point. Also, when a person feels listened to,
that person is more able to listen.

“One of the things people need to learn in order to speak their needs effectively is the distinction between what they actually observe and how their observations relate to their needs.”

That can get extremely complex and very difficult to figure out how to explain to somebody “effectively” but that is a good point.

Yes. However, with practice, and the reward of being more closely
in touch with other people, it becomes easier and simpler.

“I invite people to suggest principles and rules for effective communication and to discuss what attitudes are most consistent with peaceful resolution of conflicts among people.”

I guess first of all not getting violent and not calling people names would be a good foundation.
Also realizing when somebody is absolutely closed minded; and also when to stop trying, because at some point, nothing will be effective under that circumstance.
Sometimes the most intelligent thing is to recognize certain limitations and know when to stop.

I agree.

Kermit Rose

[Shandi]

I agree with everything you said, and my thought is that you may be
as they say, "preaching to the choir". This is not to say that we can't all be better communicators. Part of the problem may be that when emotions are flaring and feelings hurt, people don't usually stop and reflect or evaluate how to effectively communicate their feelings.

They are like little children, emoting without reflecting. In other situations
where we may be in a business situation or a spiritual situation, we are usually more able to modulate our response, because we want to make a good impression, in order to convince others of our perception.

Although sometimes even then, we allow our emotions to take over, and jump in with both feet in mouth.

I applaud anyone who wants to become a more effective, considerate, respectful communicator, and actually takes steps in that direction.

The other aspect of all of this is that I find that most people don't have a clear idea of what they want, or want they want to communicate. So, I'm
thinking that the fundamental element in effective communication is knowing what you want to get or accomplish.

I'll be watching this thread with interest.

Shandi (Sandy)

Hello, I hope that this will be an enduring thread.

I wish to initiate a discussion around the communication process among people.

A very ineffective way to communicate your desires...

[Kermit1941]

Part of the problem may be that when emotions are flaring and feelings hurt, people don't usually stop and reflect or evaluate how to effectively communicate their feelings.

Hello Shandi.

I agree that this is part of the problem.
To make precise this idea, I think of imaginary example.

On Tuesday, the husband blames Alice for not washing the dishes. On Wednesday, the husband blames Alice for not leaving his favorite plate
out where he can find it.

Alice has several choices for how to respond.

Alice # 1:

Yes dear. I see that I have not been sufficiently considerate of your feelings.

Alice # 2:

Hey! I don't have to accept your blame. I washed the dishes last night,
and I put the dishes away where I felt they belonged.

You are perfectly capable of learning where I think your favorite plate belongs. Besides, perhaps you should grow up and realize a plate is a plate.

Alice # 3:

When Alice is blamed for not washing the dishes, she feels a brief pang of guilt, then realizes that that feeling comes from perceiving that her husband is blaming her. She realizes that her guilt comes from her perception of her husband's words as blame. She realizes that it is her choice how to respond to her emotions.

Alice asks her husband. Why is it so important to you that the dishes be done immediately?

Hopefully, this opening question from Alice resulted in a easy resolution.
It might be that Alice would have many other difficulties in maintaining
both her own integrity and good feeling between her husband and herself.

On the next day, if the "favorite plate" issue had not yet been resolved,
then Alice would ask questions like, "What is it that makes that plate your favorite plate?"

They are like little children, emoting without reflecting. In other situations
where we may be in a business situation or a spiritual situation, we are usually more able to modulate our response, because we want to make a good impression, in order to convince others of our perception.

Have you heard the story of the child who is a model student at school, never misbehaving, but is a stress on her parents, because,
as she says,
"At school, I'm not allowed to misbehave, but at home, I have more freedom."

I suggest that the ideal is that we emote and reflect on our emotions, in all situations.

Although sometimes even then, we allow our emotions to take over, and jump in with both feet in mouth.

:) It's not so much that the emotions take over, but that we have not yet developed the habit of precisely understanding our emotions. Perhaps it will help to translate our feelings into words.

I applaud anyone who wants to become a more effective, considerate, respectful communicator, and actually takes steps in that direction.

:) As do I. Thank you.

The other aspect of all of this is that I find that most people don't have a clear idea of what they want, or want they want to communicate. So, I'm
thinking that the fundamental element in effective communication is knowing what you want to get or accomplish.

Excellent point.

I'll be watching this thread with interest.
Shandi (Sandy)

[Kermit1941]

Suppose that you are an expert on effective communication.

You are on your lecture tour, going from city to city.

At each lecture, you introduce your theory by a thirty minute lecture,
and then invite comments and questions from the audience.

This particular time, the first person to speak after your thirty minute lecture
says "You are the most arrogant speaker that we have ever had."

How do you respond?

[Shandi]

In your first sentence, I'd like you to consider the possibility of removing
the terms, "good or bad". I think that one thing could be a major element of effective communication.

Imagine for a moment or two....what communication would look like if we
made a conscious decision to eliminate those words from our communication, period! If we still feel the need to label something or "someone", we could actually replace those words with these words:
"wanted or unwanted". This is not my original idea, but taken from my
studies of the Law of Attraction.

It lays the responsibility for judgment on the person judging, rather than on
who or what is being judged.

When I first heard this a couple of years ago, I was thrilled to have a way to communicate more responsibly. It has served me well, and I invite everyone to test it out.

Another element which has served me well, is something I learned way back in the day, about 30+ years ago. It's something I'm sure almost all or most of you are familiar with. That is to start your communications of "judgment"
with the simple word...."I". It again provides the speaker with the personal responsibility for thinking, feeling, sensing, hearing, or assuming things. And when the listener hears the word "I", they have no need to be defensive.

On the other hand, if you start your communication with the word "You",
the listener is put on notice, in a way, and will become aware of the possibility of needing to defend, or be "defensive." We're all too familiar with the statement "You make me feel....." I've always thought that was a lot of power to give to another person. But it's so ingrained in our communication, we use it with no thought to how impossible it really is.

No person or situation has the ability to make another person feel or think any way. Even some people in jail or concentration camps, have held on to
their beliefs, thoughts and feelings, in spite of harsh punishment, starvation, mental and emotional torture.

I had previously said that many times, people don't get what they want,
because they don't know what they want. But I'll place another element even before that. That is.....to take "personal responsibility" for our thoughts, words, feelings, and actions. I look at a world where people look for someone to blame, someone to take responsibility, someone to make our lives better. Someone, anyone.......but us.

So, I'm just communicating that I think the best thing we can do is to be courageous in taking responsibility to discover what we want, and to communicate in a respectful way, to that end. If we're feeling angry, triggered by our thoughts, that may not be the best time to communicate.
A time out is not just for children, but may be the best thing adults can do,
to avoid communicating when feeling upset, angry, or even violent.

When my boys were small (3 and 4 yrs.) they fought over various things. I
felt upset when I saw this, and yet I knew that this was the only way they
knew to express themselves. If things escalated, I would have them each go in a separate room to cool off. If I, on the other hand, was stressed and upset, I would also ask them to go in their rooms, so I wouldn't have them as targets to focus my anger on.

I love to hear new parents telling their children "Use your words". It has a way of diffusing the temper tantrums that most children have. I used to work with a nanny, who cared for a little boy about 2. When he'd get upset and throw a tantrum, she'd pick him up, and sit with him in her lap,
holding him close to her, as he went through his emotional outburst. I saw that on a few occasions, she got hit by him, but she didn't let go, until his
anger had subsided. I've never seen anyone else do this kind of thing, but
it gave me a great respect for her as a child care worker. She has the patience of an angel. She was well loved by the children she cared for. She's still a nanny, at 72.

That's my story, and I'm stickin' to it.

Sandy

Ok, this sounds like a thread worth weaving, considering imagination is a good/bad thing. What happens when the communication process which in normal modes requires more time than is available and metaphoric shorthand can jump the gap? sparkplugs do it and your motor runs, does conversation have to be confined to the weakest link of having to explain everything and repeat yourself on a regular basis. Maybe some thoughts won't make sense except way down the road even if you put a tedious effort into attempting clarity and by the time you have explained your originating thought the thread "you" were following has escaped you?

I'm thinking communication of like minds is symphonic and to unlike minds a duress, but the hard to figure are so easily targeted by the either lazy mind or the offended ones who just looks for targets to denigrate?

[Shandi]

I'm going to evaluate the statements below in a way that reflects my personal beliefs and thoughts.

1. First of all, I don't believe that Alice needs to be the "designated dishwasher", unless she has agreed to that, or if she is being paid to wash dishes as a job.

2. I don't know how long this hypothetical couple has been married, or how long he's had this favorite plate, but if he wants it in a particular place , I'd say the "responsibility" for communicating that is on him. She may be responsive and put it there, although there may be times that she is in a hurry or distracted, and puts it in the "wrong" place. (Human error...it's always with us.) Beyond that, he could go even further by washing his very own favorite plate, and putting it where he wants it, himself! Because, if she was to break that plate, I can imagine what that might look like. (Domestic Violence?) It's happened over even more minor upsets.

My thought is that if I have a favorite plate, cup or glass, (which by the way, I do) I take care of it myself so as not to risk having it broken or misplaced by someone else. I'd still be upset if I broke it, but at least I wouldn't be able blame anyone else. Again, by giving the responsibility to
Alice, and Alice taking it, she also can be "blamed". It's so convenient, but
dangerous, in many ways. I wonder if anyone else sees the "danger" in this
situation?

3. I think the "guilt" that the wife feels is in direct relation to how she feels about herself. I believe that "guilt and worry", are the most useless of feelings. If we were to rid ourselves of these emotions, consider how much
easier and healthier our lives would be.

The time to feel "guilty" is before you act. The time to worry is when we want to project a negative outcome, since we have no control over future events, and we may draw to us what we fear.

Fear can be useful, but I'd replace it with "caution or awareness" when faced with a dangerous situation. FEAR is usually an "immobilizer", and can
make us even more vulnerable to danger, whether real or imagined. Consider those people who are in fear of going outside their homes, or driving, or flying, or any number of risky actions.

See my responses to your statements below:

Hello Shandi.

I agree that this is part of the problem.
To make precise this idea, I think of imaginary example.

On Tuesday, the husband blames Alice for not washing the dishes. On Wednesday, the husband blames Alice for not leaving his favorite plate
out where he can find it.

Alice has several choices for how to respond.

Alice # 1:

Yes dear. I see that I have not been sufficiently considerate of your feelings. Poor Alice.......I doubt if she's going to get very far with her submissive attitude and guilt. He will just continue to abuse her emotionally.

Alice # 2:

Hey! I don't have to accept your blame. I washed the dishes last night,
and I put the dishes away where I felt they belonged.

You are perfectly capable of learning where I think your favorite plate belongs. Besides, perhaps you should grow up and realize a plate is a plate.
(This response seems tweeked in a way even I can't comprehend.)

Alice # 3:

When Alice is blamed for not washing the dishes, she feels a brief pang of guilt, then realizes that that feeling comes from perceiving that her husband is blaming her. She realizes that her guilt comes from her perception of her husband's words as blame. She realizes that it is her choice how to respond to her emotions.

Alice asks her husband. Why is it so important to you that the dishes be done immediately?
I don't believe that asking "why" will result in a resolution. Why is never the question to ask when you want a resolution. Any answer can be given, but it really doesn't make any difference. If her husband wants her to do things a certain way, it doesn't matter why. She needs to do what he wants, or does she? What if he answers "because I want it that way", or "because my mommy broke my favorite plate when I was 5, and I never got over it", or "because I like to eat my pretzels in it", or because........xyz, take your pick.

Hopefully, this opening question from Alice resulted in a easy? resolution.
I don't think so; this is the tip of the iceberg with Alice and her husband.
It might be that Alice would have many other difficulties in maintaining
both her own integrity and good feeling between her husband and herself.

Alice is unable to maintain a good feeling between her husband and herself, mainly because she has no control over him, only over herself, but if she has subjected herself to his control, that's a whole other conversation.

On the next day, if the "favorite plate" issue had not yet been resolved,
then Alice would ask questions like, "What is it that makes that plate your favorite plate?"

Again, this is a similar question to "why". It can be answered with any of the answers I proposed before, and we could add "because my mommy gave it to me before she died, and I'm very attached to it. I couldn't go on
if it got broken or lost." SOLUTION?????? I don't think so, but it's just my opinion. By the way, I'd love to have a talk with Alice.

I can hardly believe that you'd suggest this kind of communication between
Alice and her husband.

Do you have training in communication? Just curious....

Sandy

[Kermit1941]

I can hardly believe that you'd suggest this kind of communication between
Alice and her husband.

Do you have training in communication? Just curious....

Hello Shandi.

I am not a professional. I have not had formal training in communication.

I recently discovered a book by a professional in communication, and
saw it's potential to help people avoid and solve interpersonal conflicts.

All my life I have wished that people could get along with each other.

I started this thread in Wacco because I thought that I could help other people resolve their conflicts if they followed principles of effective communication.

I also felt that posts by others in this thread would help me understand better the ideas presented in the book that I am still reading, and intend to re-read as many times as necessary to completely understand all aspects of the theory.

Kermit.

[Kermit1941]

Suppose that you are an expert on effective communication.

You are on your lecture tour, going from city to city.

At each lecture, you introduce your theory by a thirty minute lecture,
and then invite comments and questions from the audience.

This particular time, the first person to speak after your thirty minute lecture
says "You are the most arrogant speaker that we have ever had."

How do you respond?

Marshall Rosenberg,
the author of
"Nonviolent Communication",
gave this response to this charge.

I quote exactly from his book, page 32.

This dialogue occurred during a workshop I was conducting. About half an hour into my presentation, I paused to invite reactions from the participants. One of them raised a hand and declared, "You're the most arrogant speaker we've ever had!"

I have several options open to me when people address me this way. One option is to take the message personally; I know I'm doing this when I have a strong urge to either grovel, defend myself, or make excuses. Another option (for which I am well-rehearsed) is to attack the other person for what I perceive as their attack upon me. On this occasion, I chose a third option by focusing on what might be going on behind the man's statement.


MBR: (guessing at the observations he was making) Are you reacting to my having taken 30 straight minutes to present my views before giving you a chance to talk?

Phil: No, you make it sound so simple.

MBR: (trying to obtain further clarification) Are you reacting to my not having said anything about how the process can be difficult for some people to apply?

Phil: No, not some people --- you!

MBR: So you're reacting to my not having said that the process can be difficult for me at times?

Phil: That's right.

MBR: Are you feeling annoyed because you would have liked some sign from me that indicated that I have some problems with the process myself?

Phil: (after a moment's pause ) That's right.

MBR: (More relaxed now that I am in touch with the person's feelings and need. I direct my attention to what he might be requesting of me.) Would you like me to admit right now that this process can be a struggle for me to apply?

Phil: Yes.

MBR: (Having gotten clear on his observation, feeling, need, and request, I check inside myself to see if I am willing to do as he requests.) Yes, this process is often difficult for me. As we continue with the workshop, you'll probably hear me describe several incidents where I've struggled ... or completely lost touch with this process, this consciousness that I am presenting here to you. But what keeps me in the struggle are the close connections to other people that happen when I do stay with the process.

[Kermit1941]

What is it that inhibits our listening to other people?

I suggest that it is that we believe we already know what they are going to say or what the answer to their problems are.

When I worked at the Florida State University computing center, I was very aware that I and almost everyone else had no interest in learning new computer languages if they already knew a perfectly good and useful computer language.

I suggest it is much the same mechanism at work when we interact with other people. It is much easier to exchange ideas with people who share our personal philosophy of life.


One way to circumvent this difficulty is to find some topic that appears to be neutral to personal philosophy. What is your daily work? What do you think about ..... some particular event? etc

But since no topic is really neutral to personal philosophy,
we have a wedge in which to see the other person.

What are some ways to make use of these wedges?

To a person whose hobby or career is photography, I ask,
" Of the photographs that you have made, what is your favorite photograph?"

The explanation of why it is the favorite photograph gives insight into the goals and values of the other person.

However, I avoid consciously forming a theory about the other person.
I do not try to consciously form a theory because I know that doing so invites my making false assumptions. False assumptions about a person will prevent me from seeing or hearing facts which are contrary to my assumptions.

Kermit Rose

[Kermit1941]

Hello Wacco friends.

I received this email from my friend Cindy,
and am forwarding it to you,
because I believe you will find it interesting.


About Nonviolent Communication (NVC)
NVC can dramatically improve our relationships by helping us
focus our attention on

1) Empathic understanding of others without compromising our own
values, and

2) Expressing our real feelings and needs openly and honestly,
yet without blame or criticism.

NVC delineates four components of communication:
1) Observations free of evaluations;
2) Feelings straight from the heart;
3) Needs, values and longings; and
4) Requests expressed clearly in positive action language.

Together these tools help create the kind of dialogue that can
foster resolutions satisfying for everyone without painful
sacrifice. Even in situations of longstanding conflict or
hostility, the NVC process can open new doors to compassionate
connection and action.

Learning NVC is Learning to:

* Build relationships based on compassion and understanding
* Accurately understand other people's feelings and needs
* Be assertive and negotiable at the same time
* Break patterns of thinking that lead to anger and depression


MORE RESOURCES:

* more information about NVC, from the CNVC website
The Center for Nonviolent Communication

* more information about NVC, from Puddledancer Press
About the Nonviolent Communication Process


-----
Cindy Landis Bigbie, Ph.D.
[email protected]
9105 Copperfair Lane
Tallahassee, FL 32317
850-216-1061