Harmonious Communication

Resolving conflict, ending arguments, and finding better ways to communicate shouldn’t be that difficult. Anyone who has struggled to get their point across or who ended up flabbergasted, at ones wits end and completely raged after a verbal battle knows that it ain’t easy. Everyone can make sense and prove why they are “right” during a verbal battle, which is the reason why they often end with anger. There can be no victor in the quest to be right because all you have is two sides who are right.

The cause of such difficulties has very little to do with what does or does not make sense and more to do with where we look for the problem. When an individual gets angry with someone else and voices there displeasure with what was done to them, they just caused the conflict. They think that what caused the conflict is what was done to them, but it is their angry reaction that is the source of the misunderstanding. Let me explain.

Socratic Dialogue Versus Narcissism

What I am hoping to do is encourage individuals to come from a place of power instead of force during their communicative exchanges. The bottom line is that it really doesn’t matter who is right or who is wrong when the goal is harmony. When the intended purpose of all exchanges is harmony and mutual respect, then all energies are put towards understanding opposing points of view. When an apposing point of view is understood, then the two parties can begin to negotiate on how to meet each other half way. It is in this way that peace can be achieved; peace between individuals, partners, business associates, countries, apposing religions, etc. The overly critical mind or elitist and self-rightious perspective needs to make others wrong or bad. Those with little faith or conviction in their beliefs act in this negative and debilitating way. Without realizing it, they need to validate their truth by making someone else wrong. When this happens, their faith and ideas are dependent on outside forces and the only way they can feel secure is by making themselves better than others. This attitude in its extreme is best described as Narcissism, which is a personality disorder where an individual needs to be “grander” than everyone else by making everyone else “less than.” The reality of course is that these individuals are extremely insecure and may even reach a state of self-loathing. Without the strength to deal with these feelings, they simply play a mind game with themselves by falsely making themselves superior to others. Even the ability to make themselves equal to another is very difficult. This disorder is linked to effective communication in that rather than seeking mutual understanding they communicate, they choose to be overly critical, negative and shaming of others.

Those with true conviction, passion and faith in their beliefs allow others to hold apposing views as well. The Socratic Dialogue discusses what it means to strive for truth. The Socratic Model of dialogue mirrors this attempt at increasing consciousness, objectivity, and openness to a discussion. Socratic dialogue is best used when individuals clearly disagree and when they hold strongly to their positions. The participants have freely chosen to participate, and choose to do so as friends in search of the truth by following the Logos or principle standard. Great emphasis is placed on not steering too far off the topic at hand to prevent confusion and clouded perceptions. Their search for truth means that they trust its existence and great pains are taken to reveal all questions and concerns, while putting aside those that are not supported by clarity and facts. Friendship is the most important thing of all. “In a friendly dialogue, it is of no concern who is right or wrong. Dialogue demands the spirit of friendship because dialogue requires a relationship or spirit of care, trust, understanding, and fairness. To the degree that co-workers share a common goal they must work in unity, and that unity of purpose, in the Greek sense, is a kind of friendship” (Apatow, 1999). Finally, when people dialogue, they must follow the words spoken because the word is a direct expression of the speaker’s mind. Great care must be taken here, as each word represents a certain reality when spoken, and without care false truths and realities become manifest. Individuals need to take complete ownership of what they say without false excuses, defensive responses or “passing the buck.” Until this ownership of consciousness occurs within individuals, people will continually butt heads with each other. If folks don’t learn to own their consciousness, they are like puppets being bounced about by their puppeteer. In this scenario, an individual’s consciousness acts like a puppeteer until it is controlled. They become victims to whatever random thought that pops into their heads, or by whatever feelings they have, and will continually say things that they don’t really mean. Mass consciousness of fear, doubt, begrudgement, entitlement, and opposition within individuals has resulted in our current state of affairs regarding effective dialogue. Attempts at owning and expressing more positive and optimistic thoughts could help create a more unified interpersonal setting. Judgments that words like appreciation, faith, hope, and love – especially love – are too “touchy-feely.” However, such judgment obviously comes from their internal fear, and until each individual decides to challenge these negative functions or negative thoughts, there is little hope of creating the unity that is so desperately needed.

Simple Tips

1. If you find yourself really angry angry at someone or in extreme frustration about something they said or did to you it is because YOU have not yet accepted that behavior in yourself.

2. Never begin sentences with “You shouldn’t have done or you should do.” because your opinion on what they should have done is irrelevant. ASK them if they are willing to try a different behavior.

3. Asking them to try something doesn’t mean they will do it, so ask without expecting them to comply. If you ask and get angry because you didn’t get the answer you wanted, then you didn’t ask but demanded and were acting in a passive aggressive way.

4. Remember that the goal is to negotiate towards mutual understanding and VARIATIONS of what you want to get out of situations. That means giving up some of what you wish.

5. For EVERY situation where an injustice happened to you, you were at least 50% responsible for the problem. Example: If someone hits you, then you are partially responsible for that act.

5. Good and bad or right and wrong are illusions. It is far better to strive to create value or focus on what choices work or are effective in getting you what you want in a given situation.

6. What worked in one situation may not work when the same situation occurs again. This is what makes human interaction so challenging and interesting. We have to keep trying until it sinks in.

7. When an argument begins, do your best to express what you did to influence the problem first and then express what you didn’t like about the other person. Do this with sincerity and honesty.

8. What you don’t like about what another person is or does doesn’t mean that they were wrong, but that you just don’t like it. Which doesn’t mean that they should change, but that you might want to consider accepting that part of them.

9. Each of us is ALWAYS right. And two contradicting “rights” can exist at the same time. Example: your boyfriend might laugh too loud and passionately hate that type of laughter.

10. It is more difficult to get another person to change than it is for you to let them be who and what they choose and practice acceptance.

___________________________________________________________________

“In fact, our brains are malleable, ever changing, reconfiguring their wiring according to new thoughts and experiences. And as a result of learning, the function of individual neurons themselves change, allowing electrical signals to travel along them more readily. Scientists call the brain’s inherent capacity to change ‘plasticity.’ This ability to change the brain’s wiring, to grow new neural connections, has been demonstrated in experiments such as one conducted by Doctors Avi Karni and Leslie Underleider at the National institute of mental health. In that experiment, the researchers had subjects perform a simple motor task, a finger-tapping exercise, and identified the parts of the brain involved in the task by a MRI brain scan. The subjects then practiced the finger exercise daily for four weeks, gradually becoming more efficient and quicker at it. At the end of the four-week period, the brain scan was repeated and showed that the area of the brain involved in the task had expanded; this indicated that the regular practice and repetition of the task had recruited new nerve cells and changed the neural connections that had originally been involved in the task.” (Dalai Lama and Cutler, pg. 44).

Bibliography

Apatow, Robert. “Socratic Dialogue.” Executive Review 16.5 (1999): 2pp. Online. Internet.

The Dalai Lama and C. Cutler. “The Art of Happiness.” New York: Penguin Putman, Inc., 1998.

Transferance and Projection

Let’s continue our discussion on effective communication by addressing two very interesting concepts: Transference and Projection. These are two concepts that exist in the realm of psychology or psychotherapy, but I will address them as essential to creating effective communication. Let’s begin with a clear explanation of both Transferance and Projection. Following these explanations, I will discuss how these concepts can negatively effect communication and how to create harmonious dialogue when they occur.

Transference occurs when an individual associates something that is said or done with a past experience and so relives the emotions of that past experience in the present. When this happens, an adult may relive an emotional trauma from childhood within a situation that does not resemble the childhood situation at all. Let’s use an extreme example for clarity purposes. Let’s say someone had been sexually molested as a child and had blocked most of the experience from their memory. If someone looked at this person in a similar way that they were looked at during the childhood molestation, it could trigger the same emotions from childhood. And so, this person would be having an emotional experience of being molested while having a conversation at a cocktail party. The emotions of the past have been transferred to the present. This can all be a conscious or unconscious experience. If it is an unconscious experience, then the adults may act out in an adult way to protect themselves from being molested even though they are in no danger at all. If conscious, then the adults can allow themselves to feel the traumatic feelings and make new healthier choices, which enable them to heal the emotional trauma.

Now let’s get a better understanding of what Projection means. In this case, a person projects his/her own feelings, emotions or motivations onto another person without realizing that their reaction is really more about them than it is about the other person. For example, a person may have had a history of lying and deceiving their past romantic partner and had never forgiven themselves for doing it. In their current relationship, they would often insinuate that the person they are currently dating is always deceiving them. This accusation isn’t real but is projected onto the “other” to create a perceived equal footing. If their partner lies also, then they feel less guilty about the deceptions of their past. The projection part has to do with the fact that the person doing the pointing does not acknowledge that they feel bad about their past deception. Another example would be if a person who desperately wants to have a meaningful romantic relationship decides that they are going to spend the rest of their life with someone they just met without taking the time to really get to know them. Again, a profound initial romantic connection may have in fact occurred, but to project the result they are seeking (committed romantic partner) right away is projecting the qualities they seek in a romantic partner onto someone that they don’t even know. There is no interest in getting to know another human being, but to shape them to preconceived ideas that they want them to be. Needless to say, this is a very controlling and delusional way of going about things!

Okay, so now we need to understand how these two concepts are related to effective communication. First of all, if individuals are caught in one of these two situations then they will be engaging in the communication of false truths as I explained above. This will naturally result in conflict between the two individuals as each try to defend their point of view. The best way to manage this type of situation is to connect to your feelings when it is happening rather than just trying to prove your point. By connecting to one’s feelings during the transference situation a person will be able to make the distinction that even though they are feeling “attacked,” it is obvious that there is no real threat going on at the cocktail party. Without connecting to and identifying one’s feeling, they will simply be reactive to them and unable to clearly distinguish between the feelings of their past trauma and their current adult reality. The same holds true with the projection scenario. By connecting and identifying the feelings that are being felt, the person doing the projecting will be able to realize that they still feel guilty about what they did in the past and begin the process of forgiving themselves for it. The communicative technique is to begin the dialogue with, “I am feeling…” versus “you are doing…” “I am feeling” connects the person to themselves versus focusing on the other person with the “you are doing” comment. When this happens, they will, over time, be able to distinguish between blaming someone else and taking ownership of something they are doing. A final communicative note. If you find that you are totally angry or frustrated at something someone is doing, then that means that it is something that you tend to do. Total anger or frustration equates to a lack of empathy and compassion. And it is with empathy and compassion that individuals can create a harmonious dialogue. Remember, when you find yourself being overly critical and judgment of another then you are unconsciously masking a tendency that you yourself do! The ego behaves in this way, while our humanity would never be so negative.

Effective Communication

No matter how much people get along, they will always have moments where they don’t see things ‘eye to eye.’ In these situations, effective communication is necessary to ensure that individuals can come to a peaceful resolution while simultaneously meeting their needs. There are three simple steps that individuals can take that allow for mutual respect, understanding, and proactive co-existence: Honest Ownership, Listen to Understand, and Offer Solutions.

1. Honest Ownership: Honest ownership begins with the understanding that each person is at least fifty percent responsible for whatever misunderstanding that exists. This can be difficult to do, especially when someone has been lied to regarding some issue. Yes, even when one party has been lied to, both parties are equally responsible for the misunderstanding. Let’s say, for example, that one party had the tendency of blaiming the other or had the tendency to put undo pressure on them to do things that they were not comfortable doing. Even though they had not done the lying, they influenced the “lie” through behavior that lacked compassion and sensitivity. Empathy is a requirement for the type of ownership that I am suggesting here. When you understand that our minds are dualistic in nature, which means that they live in opposites. One is right and the other is wrong and both can’t be right. That would go against the logical nature of our thinking. Awareness allows for the breakdown of the limitations of dualistic thinking into a more open and inclusive type of thinking. When I say inclusive, I mean thinking that expands its scope to include contradictory truths simultaneously. For example, as we discussed above, when an obvious injustice has occured (i.e. lying), both parties are partially responsible for the lie.

2. Listen To Understand: Listening to understand begins with the way our minds think. Our minds job is to know or be right or to find answers to the many questions that present themselves to us from moment to moment. This is a very valuable quality and necessary for our very survival. Yet, this “knowing function” in its extreme can result in narcissism. The narcissist will always need to be right even when that knowledge can cause harm to themselves or others. So, as much as we need to establish conviction in our beliefs, we must simultaneously allow a space for receiving new information so that we can continue to grow and learn new ways of being and doing. Learning to listen to understand versus listening to prove our point of view is the difference between healthy dialogue and needless debating. When we communicate with our friends and family, we need to open our hearts and really care about what our co-communicators are trying to say. In essence, listening to understand requires that we connect to our internal state of being while communicating our point of view. Caring comes from this place and not our intellectual faculties. Heartfelt communication is also the source of being truly powerful and enables us to create value no matter how desolite the situation might seem. Listening to understand is the source of co-creation versus co-destruction.

3. Offer Solutions: When a problem presents itself, individuals can easily fall into the trap of a communicative exchange that focuses on the problem versus offering solutions to the problems. It is very easy to communicate on what is going wrong because that requires very little thought or reflectivness. It’s like saying, “Hey look, a tornado is coming right towards our house,” without considering ways to get to safety. If you pay attention when you are communicating with others, you might be very suprised at how much communicative energy is spent on what went wrong or who screwed up a situation. It is so wasteful to be this way, because all that occurs is a reliving or recreating of the problem. The most interesting thing about communication that lacks solutions is that it exemplifies the epitomy of unconsciousness. If we are not addressing problems with solutions we are always unconscious because our conscious minds will always strive for a way or various ways to fix the problem. I’ve had clients ask me how they can prevent this type of uncosciousness and it is a difficult answer because if you’re unconscious you don’t really know all that is going on. The best way is to practice observance through meditative techniques on a daily basis.

Defensive Routines

Last month we made clear the distinction between dialogue and debate. Simply, debate has as its foundation the need to be right versus establishing what is true. We also discussed how a better understanding of our thinking habits can enhance our quality of communication. One of the most common thinking habits that occurs, in my assessment, is known as defensive routines or defensiveness. When individuals debate, they are usually engaging in unconscious and irrational defensiveness, which occurs when individuals want to protect themselves from anxiety. This protection is established through diversionary and intimidation tactics or by distorting reality. Defensive communication can lead to one-sided conversations, where individuals only want to prove their point versus wanting to also understand the point of view of those that they communicate with.

These unconscious psychological defensive mechanisms include repression, rationalization, projection, reaction formation, displacement, identification, regression, fantasy formation, intellectualization/isolation, and denial. Most individuals who are overly defensive are trying to protect themselves from a threat that does not really exist. Before I breakdown the various types of defensive routines, it should be known that everyone uses defense mechanisms and that it is quite normal to do so. Problems arise when they are overly or habitually used.

---

Types of Defensive Routines

Repression: The primary ego defense that give life to all other defensive routines. Its prime function is to prevent anxiety and helps individuals deal with everyday problems. It often occurs in response to conflict and pain from one’s past history, whether that conflict actually exists or not. Repressed memories can drain our creative energy, cause stiffness of character and lead to more serious psychological challenges. It is important to know that repressed memories don’t ever go away and that the goal is to create a better understanding of the negative feelings associated with that memory. Such identification allows us to associate more positive feelings with the old memory. The difficulty with this is that the only way to associate a new feeling with an old memory. is to actually feel the repressed pain associated with it. Trained professionals can help individuals through that process. It is through the darkness (pain) that we find the light (something other than pain).

Rationalization: In order to cope with anxiety, our ego uses reason to “explain them away.” This reasonableness is often seen in dishonest explanations for various acts, or justifying those acts with complete disregard to how hurtful those acts may have been. This rationale is often clouded in delusion, which results in an over sense of superiority. The bottom line is that those who overly use their rational faculties to justify their acts are really implementing impaired judgment.

Projection: In this case, individuals transfer their own personality traits onto other people, places or even things. It is the unconscious act of labeling or attributing to others one’s own feelings, thoughts or intentions.This actually happens a great deal and is one of the highest forms of delusion. An example might be when someone accuses another person of being a coward and too afraid to achieve something, when in actuality they are talking about themselves. How do we know if we are projecting to others? Simply, every time we assume to know the intentions of another person without asking them about what they are doing with an “ear” of respectful acknowledgment of that persons capabilities.

Reaction Formation: This is used by the ego to primarily control the expression of “forbidden” impulses by repressing them consciously. This repression is justified by making that impulse (i.e. sexual lust, seeking wealth, only doing a job you love, etc.) unworthy or unjust, regardless of whether or not those impulses are valuable. One becomes the crusader against the forbidden urge, often resulting in compulsiveness, exaggeration and an all or nothing attitude.

Displacement: This occurs when an instinctual impulse is redirected from a more threatening activity, person or object to a less threatening one. For example, you might yell at your dog because you are too afraid to yell at your significant other. Injustice is what describes this defensive routine best; the innocent becomes the victim.

Identification: In this case, individuals take on the characteristics of someone admired or considered successful; hero-worship. In doing so, they are able to bolster their sense of self-worth by protecting themselves through the illusion that they are giving themselves an identity, albeit a false one. If used too often, it results in feelings of inauthenticity and a sense of separation from others.

Regression: Reverting to an earlier child-like stage of development, which one views as a more secure period. Individuals act as if they are very tired or fatigued, ill and often will throw tantrums.

Fantasy Formation: Individuals gratify frustrated desires by thinking of imaginary achievements and satisfactions; thinking that they are something that they are not. This allows the individual to transport themselves away from real problems. It can be difficult to communicate with people who display this defensive routine.

Intellectualization/Isolation: Unpleasant emotions are suppressed by engaging in detached analyses of threatening problems. Feelings of anxiety are ignored and not allowed to reach one’s conscious awareness. Becoming a third party to issues to prevent them from emotionally attaching to the feelings associated with the issues. Obviously, these individuals have difficulty with intimacy.

Denial: The ego refuses to acknowledge the existence of threatening events by refusing to believe in them. It can assist an individual in getting through difficult times and can be very valuable if they are willing to address the issue at a later date.