Communication Notes

10 Commandments of Clean communication:

Loving relationships are the most important factor in a man’s happiness, success, and ability to live a fully flourishing life.

And one of the most important factors in creating and sustaining these warm, intimate relationships is communication.

Unfortunately, how to communicate with one’s significant other in a healthy, positive way is something rarely taught to either men or women. As a result, many couples find that their discussions regularly turn into heated, unproductive arguments that ultimately damage their relationship. Angry fighting leads to distance and weakens intimacy. Yelling, sarcasm, insults, and name-calling undermine trust. This kind of pejorative communication creates defensiveness and alienation, which makes it nearly impossible for a couple to address their issues together. What starts as a conversation escalates into a fight in which the original issue gets forgotten, you lose track of what you’re even yelling about, and nothing gets resolved.

In contrast, couples who know how to discuss their disagreements in a healthy way are able to nip problems in the bud before they turn into big, relationship-ending issues. The key to this kind of positive interaction is what the authors of Couple Skills call “clean communication.” Matthew McKay, Patrick Fanning, and Kim Paleg (hereafter referred to as MFP) define clean communication as “taking responsibility for the impact of what you say.” By being more intentional about their communication techniques and leaving out rhetoric that wounds one’s partner and creates defensiveness, a couple creates a safe place in which to honestly and respectfully work through their differences.

What are the principles of clean communication? MFP lay out 10 “commandments” to follow when you’re talking with your significant other. While the focus of this post is communication in a romantic relationship, much of this also applies to personal interactions in all areas of your life.

The 10 Commandments of Clean Communication

1. Avoid judgment words and loaded terms.

  • “You’re acting so childish right now.”
  • “Oh boo-hoo. I’m tired of your perpetual ‘poor me’ attitude.”
  • “Maybe if you were more of a man, you’d be able to handle this.”
  • “You’d probably feel better if you got off your fat, lazy ass and finally did something about it.”

When you’re having a heated argument with your significant other, it can be very tempting to level a real zinger at them – to use words and putdowns you know will wound them and push their buttons. Such zingers aim to point our their flaws and tear down their worth. They accomplish this mission – but at the expense of trust and intimacy.

2. Avoid “global” labels.

There are two ways to criticize someone – you can critique their character or their behavior. In criticizing behavior, you’re calling out something specific and temporary – something the person can realistically change. But in assailing someone’s very identity, you’re issuing a global label – a blanket condemnation of who they are at the core; they don’t just do bad stuff, they are a bad person.

Global labels can feel highly satisfying to hurl at someone when you’re angry and can seem completely justifiable at the time. In writing the person off as incorrigible, you also essentially absolve yourself of any responsibility for your issues as a couple: “We wouldn’t have this problem if you weren’t so selfish.”

But blanket condemnations of your partner’s character are anathema to a loving relationship. They will make her feel hurt and defensive, greatly hindering any chance of communication. Global labels also make your partner feel helpless – if the problem is rooted in their very identity/personality, changing will seem impossible to them. They’re liable to answer: “I’m sorry, but this is the way I am!” Thus, in using global labels you wash your hands of any responsibility for the problem, while at the same time, your partner will feel unable and unwilling to do anything about it either…not a recipe for effective conflict resolution!

Here are some examples of global labels, and how they could be better rendered as specific critiques of behavior instead of character:

  • “You’re so self-centered and only care about yourself.” → “In forgetting my birthday, I felt like you didn’t think about my feelings.”
  • “You’re such a bitch.”→ “Questioning my masculinity is a low-blow. I’d like to try to talk to you without the name-calling.”
  • “You’re always so helpless.” → “I know you’re having trouble figuring out how to download that app, but right now I need to finish this paper. If you still can’t get it, I promise to help you tonight.”

3. Avoid “you” messages of blame and accusation.

As MFP put it, “the essence of a ‘you’ message is simply this: ‘I’m in pain and you did it to me.’ And there’s usually this subtext: ‘You were bad and wrong for doing it to me.’” When people slight us, it may be true that they are entirely, or almost entirely, to blame. But when you lead with that blame, the instigator will instantly erect walls of defensiveness that will make working through the issue together impossible. This doesn’t mean you have to pretend your significant other is not at fault when they are, it just means you use language that says the same thing in a different way – couching your message so that it actually has a chance to surmount their psychological walls and reach their brain.

To do this, you want to swap out your you-centered accusations for statements that emphasize “I” – how you feel when your partner does certain things. Here are some examples:

  • “You always leave the house such a mess.” → “When the house is so cluttered I end up feeling stressed out.”
  • “Your moodiness is ruining our relationship.” → “When I can’t predict your moods, I’m not sure how to approach you, and I feel like that’s eroding the intimacy in our relationship.”
  • “You’re always late and it’s driving me crazy.” → “I feel embarrassed when we arrive late to events.”

 4. Avoid old history.

  • “You’re just being ungrateful like always. Remember when I spent all weekend cleaning the house before your folks arrived and you never even said thank you?”
  • “You don’t trust me? At least I’m not the one who cheated last year.”
  • “It’s always the same damned thing with you. You’re sorry about spending too much on the couch, just like you were sorry for going over budget on the kitchen remodel, and sorry for spending so much on the dress for our wedding…”

When you’re addressing a certain problem, stick with the issue at hand instead of slinging mud, or engaging in what my friend calls “closet-fighting” — i.e., reaching back into the closet of your past for old grievances to buttress your current accusations. When we closet-fight, MFP write, “The message is: ‘You’re bad, you’re bad, you’re bad. You’ve always had this flaw, and it’s not getting any better.’” While talking about your history together may be useful when you’re both calm, MFP recommend sticking to the present when things are heated, as “anger turns references to the past into a club rather than a source of enlightenment.”

Resurrecting old beefs will ratchet up the intensity of your discussion, and will invariably send it off in a different direction and away from resolving the original issue. Plus, your partner will likely be hurt that you’re still holding onto something she thought you’d forgiven her for, and you both will feel like your relationship isn’t progressing. It’s hard to move forward if you keep rehashing the past; instead, let sleeping dogs lie.

5. Avoid negative comparisons.

  • “You’re so irrational, just like your mom.”
  • “None of my exes were ever as clingy as you are.”
  • “Why can’t you be more fun like Derek’s girlfriend is?”

Being compared negatively to someone else sure can sting. We oftentimes want to think we’ve evolved past the flaws of our parents, so to hear “you’re just like your dad” feels like a punch to the gut. So too, our identities are very much based on comparing ourselves to our peers, and to have the person we love say we don’t stack up to them cuts at our sense of worth. Making negative comparisons also tells your partner that you’ve been thinking about someone else, and how that other person measures up to her, which can provoke hurt feelings and jealously.

6. Avoid threats.

  • “If you’re going to act like that, then I’m not going with you to your parents’ house this weekend.”
  • “If you can’t get your act together, then maybe we should get a divorce.”
  • “If you don’t want to be more adventurous in bed, I can find plenty of other women who are willing to be.”

MFP write that “the basic message of a threat is: you’re bad and I’m going to punish you.” It’s a way of trying to compel desired behavior, but since it shuts down the whole discussion, even if it works in the short term, the underlying issue will remain unresolved. If your partner complies, she’ll only be doing it to avoid the consequences of your threat, and if she doesn’t, the argument is going to escalate and/or keep reoccurring.

There is a place for quasi-ultimatums in a relationship, but they come after you’ve completely exhausted every attempt to communicate and compromise about the problem in a positive way. Too often people resort to a threat as an easy way to resolve things, and will even drop the D word to scare their spouse into compliance.

An “or else” statement shouldn’t be thrown around, and it shouldn’t be punitive. That is, if your partner is unwilling to meet your needs, create a plan to meet those needs yourself, but don’t do so in a way that’s specifically designed to punish your partner. So for example, if you want to spend more time with friends, but your significant other won’t budge on giving her blessing, you might say, “I’m going to start spending every Saturday morning with them,” and then follow through on that action. A punitive ultimatum, on the other hand, would be something like deciding to skip out on a concert you agreed to attend with her, in order to do something with your buddies.

Your partner may come to accept the implementation of your ultimatum or it may drive a wedge in your relationship. If the latter, it may spell the end; clean communication offers the best possible chance of relationship success, but doesn’t guarantee it if you just aren’t right for each other.

7. Describe your feelings rather than attack with them.

Your demeanor can truly be wielded like a weapon. When we raise our voice, withdraw into cold hostility, adopt a sneering tone, or employ biting sarcasm, we can wound those we love. Especially when it comes to communicating with women, you would be surprised how a cutting tone of voice can make them feel almost physically hurt. Instead, do your best to keep your voice level and calm.

As you discuss what’s bothering you, describe your emotions as specifically as possible. “In so doing,” MFP write, “your partner can hear what you’re feeling without being overwhelmed or bludgeoned by it.” Here are some examples:

  • “I feel disrespected when you make jokes at my expense when we’re out with your friends.”
  • “I feel jealous when I see you texting your ex.”
  • “I feel hurt when you ignore me when I come home from work.”

8. Keep body language open and receptive.

Even more than what we say, our body language conveys how we’re actually feeling. You may tell your significant other that you’re not angry and are willing to talk things through, but if your posture and facial expressions say otherwise, they will assuredly pick up on it. They’ll also likely match your defensive stance, and the discussion will get off to a rocky start.

To keep things amicable, adopt an open, rather than closed posture. Folding your arms, tensing your jaw, squinting, looking disgusted, balling up your fists, fidgeting in an irritated way, and rolling your eyes are all behaviors that make you seem closed off, hostile, and unwilling to communicate. Create sincere, inviting body language by relaxing your face, making warm eye contact, leaning forward, keeping your arms uncrossed, and nodding to show you’re listening.

9. Use whole messages.

Oftentimes, you may think you’re getting your message across to your significant other, but the result is a big miscommunication. They hear something much different than you intended. What we say makes total sense to us, because we have the entire context of it in our heads. But what actually comes out of our mouths may only be a slice of that bigger picture – a partial fragment that is then misconstrued by our partner.

To avoid this, strive to deliver “whole messages” when speaking with your significant other. Whole messages consist of 4 parts:

  • Observations: “Observations are statements of fact that are neutral, without judgments or inferences,” write MFP. “The house is a mess,” vs. “I’ve noticed you’re a slob.”
  • Thoughts: MFP describe this component as “your beliefs, opinions, theories, and interpretations of a situation. Thoughts are not conveyed as absolute truth but as your personal hypothesis or understanding of a situation. ‘My idea was…I wondered if…I suspected that…I worried that…The way I saw it was…’”
  • Feelings: Describe your feelings in a specific way that doesn’t blame your partner. “I’m concerned about our budget,” vs. “Your spending is out of control and really stressing me out.”
  • Needs/Wants: Too often we expect our partner to be mind readers, but as MFP note, “No one can know what you want unless you tell them.” For an in-depth guide to expressing your needs in a relationship, check out this post.

Here’s an example of a whole message:

“We haven’t been spending as much time together [Observation]. It seems like you’ve been busier, and I don’t know if that’s just because your classes are hard this semester or you just haven’t been as interested in hanging out [Thoughts]. I’ve been feeling distant from you and confused about the status of our relationship [Feelings]. I’d like for us to be more committed as a couple and to know what you think about the future of our relationship [Needs].”

10. Use clear messages.

Just as a partial message can be misconstrued, so too can a “contaminated” message. This occurs when you mix some of the 4 elements together or “mislabel” them in order to disguise your real intent. Your partner might say, “Hmmm, that’s an interesting way to do it,” when they really mean, “You’re doing it wrong.” Or for example, you might say to your wife, “And here you are finally, late as usual.” You’re pretending to make a straightforward observation, but you’re really mixing in your judgments, thoughts, and feelings. It would be better to say, “I’ve been waiting here for 20 minutes. It seems like you struggle to be on time. When I’m left waiting I end up feeling frustrated and disrespected. Do you think you could make more of an effort to be on time?”

MFP note that one “effective way to contaminate your message is to disguise it as a question”:

  • “Why didn’t you take out the trash last night?”
  • “Is there a reason all the dishes have been left in the sink?”
  • “Why don’t you take our finances more seriously?
  • “Do you really think that’s a good idea?”

The questioner adopts the posture of soliciting information from their partner, but they already know the answer and their feelings about it; they’re really just making an accusation and showing their disapproval for their partner’s choice. To be honest, it seems like women do this more than men (sorry ladies), perhaps because they’re often less comfortable being assertive.

Muddy messages create distance and contention in a relationship. Your partner either will not be sure what you’re driving at, or will take umbrage at your not simply saying what you mean. Give it to ‘em straight, and give it to ‘em cleanly.

________________________

Source:

Couple Skills by Matthew McKay, Patrick Fanning, and Kim Paleg. I read through a bunch of relationship advice books recently looking for some good bits that might be helpful to pass along to readers. This was definitely the best in the bunch. It’s written by men (one of which runs a men’s support group) and includes lots of concrete, useful, practical tips. 

Leave a comment

What is time?

What is 10/28/2014, how about 28-10-2014? The earth can rotate around, orbit the sun two thousand or so times, yet is it not funny how we call this time?

If life is but a blink in eternity, whose eyes see that a billion rotations mean nothing except: the love in our hearts and the mind to inform our will that affect the actions we put forth to affect our eternal destination

So yes, borrowing from CS Lewis, and observing of my own eyes, when we involve ourselves with things eternal, this is actually when we are present in time as eternity is where the real present is.

Hopefully 2014 reminds us of the gift of Jesus because of Mary two thousand and fourteen years ago, that we may choose to be present in time, this day

Leave a comment

Courage and Magnanimity

“It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.” Theodore Roosevelt

Leave a comment

Meaningfulness matters more than Happiness

As a Christian, I found this article about a Jewish Holocaust survivor enlightening; while the article didn’t really speak of suffering specifically, I think it is pretty applicable:

A Psychiatrist Who Survived The Holocaust Explains Why Meaningfulness Matters More Than Happiness

“It is the very pursuit of happiness that thwarts happiness.”

In September 1942, Viktor Frankl, a prominent Jewish psychiatrist and neurologist in Vienna, was arrested and transported to a Nazi concentration camp with his wife and parents.

Three years later, when his camp was liberated, most of his family, including his pregnant wife, had perished — but he, prisoner number 119104, had lived. In his bestselling 1946 book, Man’s Search for Meaning, which he wrote in nine days about his experiences in the camps, Frankl concluded that the difference between those who had lived and those who had died came down to one thing: Meaning, an insight he came to early in life. When he was a high school student, one of his science teachers declared to the class, “Life is nothing more than a combustion process, a process of oxidation.” Frankl jumped out of his chair and responded, “Sir, if this is so, then what can be the meaning of life?”

As he saw in the camps, those who found meaning even in the most horrendous circumstances were far more resilient to suffering than those who did not. “Everything can be taken from a man but one thing,” Frankl wrote in Man’s Search for Meaning, “the last of the human freedoms — to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way.”

Frankl worked as a therapist in the camps, and in his book, he gives the example of two suicidal inmates he encountered there. Like many others in the camps, these two men were hopeless and thought that there was nothing more to expect from life, nothing to live for. “In both cases,” Frankl writes, “it was a question of getting them to realize that life was still expecting something from them; something in the future was expected of them.” For one man, it was his young child, who was then living in a foreign country. For the other, a scientist, it was a series of books that he needed to finish. Frankl writes:

This uniqueness and singleness which distinguishes each individual and gives a meaning to his existence has a bearing on creative work as much as it does on human love. When the impossibility of replacing a person is realized, it allows the responsibility which a man has for his existence and its continuance to appear in all its magnitude. A man who becomes conscious of the responsibility he bears toward a human being who affectionately waits for him, or to an unfinished work, will never be able to throw away his life. He knows the “why” for his existence, and will be able to bear almost any “how.”

In 1991, the Library of Congress and Book-of-the-Month Club listed Man’s Search for Meaning as one of the 10 most influential books in the United States. It has sold millions of copies worldwide. Now, over twenty years later, the book’s ethos — its emphasis on meaning, the value of suffering, and responsibility to something greater than the self — seems to be at odds with our culture, which is more interested in the pursuit of individual happiness than in the search for meaning. “To the European,” Frankl wrote, “it is a characteristic of the American culture that, again and again, one is commanded and ordered to ‘be happy.’ But happiness cannot be pursued; it must ensue. One must have a reason to ‘be happy.'”

girls dancing shadow silhouette happyFlickr/Christian HaughenEven though American happiness levels are at a four-year high, 4 out of 10 Americans have not discovered a satisfying life purpose.

According to Gallup, the happiness levels of Americans are at a four-year high — as is, it seems, the number of best-selling books with the word “happiness” in their titles. At this writing, Gallup also reports that nearly 60 percent all Americans today feel happy, without a lot of stress or worry. On the other hand, according to the Center for Disease Control, about 4 out of 10 Americans have not discovered a satisfying life purpose. Forty percent either do not think their lives have a clear sense of purpose or are neutral about whether their lives have purpose. Nearly a quarter of Americans feel neutral or do not have a strong sense of what makes their lives meaningful. Research has shown that having purpose and meaning in life increases overall well-being and life satisfaction, improves mental and physical health, enhances resiliency, enhances self-esteem, and decreases the chances of depression. On top of that, the single-minded pursuit of happiness is ironically leaving people less happy, according to recent research. “It is the very pursuit of happiness,” Frankl knew, “that thwarts happiness.”

***

This is why some researchers are cautioning against the pursuit of mere happiness. In a new study, which will be published this year in a forthcoming issue of the Journal of Positive Psychology, psychological scientists asked nearly 400 Americans aged 18 to 78 whether they thought their lives were meaningful and/or happy. Examining their self-reported attitudes toward meaning, happiness, and many other variables — like stress levels, spending patterns, and having children — over a month-long period, the researchers found that a meaningful life and happy life overlap in certain ways, but are ultimately very different. Leading a happy life, the psychologists found, is associated with being a “taker” while leading a meaningful life corresponds with being a “giver.”

“Happiness without meaning characterizes a relatively shallow, self-absorbed or even selfish life, in which things go well, needs and desire are easily satisfied, and difficult or taxing entanglements are avoided,” the authors write.

How do the happy life and the meaningful life differ? Happiness, they found, is about feeling good. Specifically, the researchers found that people who are happy tend to think that life is easy, they are in good physical health, and they are able to buy the things that they need and want. While not having enough money decreases how happy and meaningful you consider your life to be, it has a much greater impact on happiness. The happy life is also defined by a lack of stress or worry.

Most importantly from a social perspective, the pursuit of happiness is associated with selfish behavior—being, as mentioned, a “taker” rather than a “giver.”

The pursuit of happiness is associated with selfish behavior—being, as mentioned, a “taker” rather than a “giver.”

The psychologists give an evolutionary explanation for this: happiness is about drive reduction. If you have a need or a desire — like hunger — you satisfy it, and that makes you happy. People become happy, in other words, when they get what they want. Humans, then, are not the only ones who can feel happy. Animals have needs and drives, too, and when those drives are satisfied, animals also feel happy, the researchers point out.

“Happy people get a lot of joy from receiving benefits from others while people leading meaningful lives get a lot of joy from giving to others,” explained Kathleen Vohs, one of the authors of the study, in a recent presentation at the University of Pennsylvania. In other words, meaning transcends the self while happiness is all about giving the self what it wants. People who have high meaning in their lives are more likely to help others in need. “If anything, pure happiness is linked to not helping others in need,” the researchers, which include Stanford University’s Jennifer Aaker and Emily Garbinsky, write.

What sets human beings apart from animals is not the pursuit of happiness, which occurs all across the natural world, but the pursuit of meaning, which is unique to humans, according to Roy Baumeister, the lead researcher of the study and author, with John Tierney, of the recent book Willpower: Rediscovering the Greatest Human Strength. Baumeister, a social psychologists at Florida State University, was named an ISI highly cited scientific researcher in 2003.

The study participants reported deriving meaning from giving a part of themselves away to others and making a sacrifice on behalf of the overall group. In the words of Martin E. P. Seligman, one of the leading psychological scientists alive today, in the meaningful life “you use your highest strengths and talents to belong to and serve something you believe is larger than the self.” For instance, having more meaning in one’s life was associated with activities like buying presents for others, taking care of kids, and arguing. People whose lives have high levels of meaning often actively seek meaning out even when they know it will come at the expense of happiness. Because they have invested themselves in something bigger than themselves, they also worry more and have higher levels of stress and anxiety in their lives than happy people. Having children, for example, is associated with the meaningful life and requires self-sacrifice, but it has been famously associated with low happiness among parents, including the ones in this study. In fact, according to Harvard psychologist Daniel Gilbert, research shows that parents are less happy interacting with their children than they are exercising, eating, and watching television.

“Partly what we do as human beings is to take care of others and contribute to others. This makes life meaningful but it does not necessarily make us happy,” Baumeister told me in an interview.

Meaning is not only about transcending the self, but also about transcending the present moment — which is perhaps the most important finding of the study, according to the researchers. While happiness is an emotion felt in the here and now, it ultimately fades away, just as all emotions do; positive affect and feelings of pleasure are fleeting. The amount of time people report feeling good or bad correlates with happiness but not at all with meaning.

Meaning, on the other hand, is enduring. It connects the past to the present to the future. “Thinking beyond the present moment, into the past or future, was a sign of the relatively meaningful but unhappy life,” the researchers write. “Happiness is not generally found in contemplating the past or future.” That is, people who thought more about the present were happier, but people who spent more time thinking about the future or about past struggles and sufferings felt more meaning in their lives, though they were less happy.

Having negative events happen to you, the study found, decreases your happiness but increases the amount of meaning you have in life.

Having negative events happen to you, the study found, decreases your happiness but increases the amount of meaning you have in life.

Another study from 2011 confirmed this, finding that people who have meaning in their lives, in the form of a clearly defined purpose, rate their satisfaction with life higher even when they were feeling bad than those who did not have a clearly defined purpose. “If there is meaning in life at all,” Frankl wrote, “then there must be meaning in suffering.”

***

Which brings us back to Frankl’s life and, specifically, a decisive experience he had before he was sent to the concentration camps. It was an incident that emphasizes the difference between the pursuit of meaning and the pursuit of happiness in life.

In his early adulthood, before he and his family were taken away to the camps, Frankl had established himself as one of the leading psychiatrists in Vienna and the world. As a 16-year-old boy, for example, he struck up a correspondence with Sigmund Freud and one day sent Freud a two-page paper he had written. Freud, impressed by Frankl’s talent, sent the paper to the International Journal of Psychoanalysis for publication. “I hope you don’t object,” Freud wrote the teenager.

While he was in medical school, Frankl distinguished himself even further. Not only did he establish suicide-prevention centers for teenagers — a precursor to his work in the camps — but he was also developing his signature contribution to the field of clinical psychology: logotherapy, which is meant to help people overcome depression and achieve well-being by finding their unique meaning in life. By 1941, his theories had received international attention and he was working as the chief of neurology at Vienna’s Rothschild Hospital, where he risked his life and career by making false diagnoses of mentally ill patients so that they would not, per Nazi orders, be euthanized.

That was the same year when he had a decision to make, a decision that would change his life. With his career on the rise and the threat of the Nazis looming over him, Frankl had applied for a visa to America, which he was granted in 1941. By then, the Nazis had already started rounding up the Jews and taking them away to concentration camps, focusing on the elderly first. Frankl knew that it would only be time before the Nazis came to take his parents away. He also knew that once they did, he had a responsibility to be there with his parents to help them through the trauma of adjusting to camp life. On the other hand, as a newly married man with his visa in hand, he was tempted to leave for America and flee to safety, where he could distinguish himself even further in his field.

As Anna S. Redsand recounts in her biography of Frankl, he was at a loss for what to do, so he set out for St. Stephan’s Cathedral in Vienna to clear his head. Listening to the organ music, he repeatedly asked himself, “Should I leave my parents behind?… Should I say goodbye and leave them to their fate?” Where did his responsibility lie? He was looking for a “hint from heaven.”

When he returned home, he found it. A piece of marble was lying on the table. His father explained that it was from the rubble of one of the nearby synagogues that the Nazis had destroyed. The marble contained the fragment of one of the Ten Commandments — the one about honoring your father and your mother. With that, Frankl decided to stay in Vienna and forgo whatever opportunities for safety and career advancement awaited him in the United States. He decided to put aside his individual pursuits to serve his family and, later, other inmates in the camps.

The wisdom that Frankl derived from his experiences there, in the middle of unimaginable human suffering, is just as relevant now as it was then: “Being human always points, and is directed, to something or someone, other than oneself — be it a meaning to fulfill or another human being to encounter. The more one forgets himself — by giving himself to a cause to serve or another person to love — the more human he is.”

Baumeister and his colleagues would agree that the pursuit of meaning is what makes human beings uniquely human. By putting aside our selfish interests to serve someone or something larger than ourselves — by devoting our lives to “giving” rather than “taking” — we are not only expressing our fundamental humanity, but are also acknowledging that that there is more to the good life than the pursuit of simple happiness.

Leave a comment

A poem from the heart

I love you yet it seems I love you not as much as I desire for you
open up me that I may be yet more open
oh Mary, eyes see not without light and the sun shines not without your son

Joy what is, what is not joy?
my peace not as you not peace
suffer me that you suffer as we suffer without we

I want to be more for you; it seems trust is a state of being more than an action except:
to surrender to what is
to be still
to risk: to love enough to enter fear to melt away fear

Leave a comment

Hypocrisy

Examples of Hypocrisy:

Leave a comment

Trust and connecting with people

I’m learning that it seems nobody will listen nor read what I would have to say if they don’t first trust me. Seems like an obvious statement but it seems at least for me I need the reminder.

It seems people in general are too self-absorbed, too busy and distracted to take the time to actually think about what one might assert and actually try to see where one might be coming from. Or they simply just do not understand me.

Not that I want anybody to listen to me for my sake, it’s just I want to give something I feel is very valuable and enriching to give.

What can foster an environment of trust?  Some ideas:

  • Actions not words:
    • actions seems like its own language that implicitly reveals one’s intent; if it is authentically good, people may feel that its safer to trust
    • don’t be an ass
  • Reflective Listening:
    • implicitly by listening one shows:
      • respect
      • sincere interest
      • care
    • this may may make it easier to trust
  • Nothing that could be interpreted as threatening
    • being sensitive to context and individual history
  • Possess an inner peace with God
    • Forgive and be forgiven that nothing would trigger an emotionally charged response that could be interpreted as threatening
    • Lighten up the environment
    • Remember if they don’t trust it’s not your fault, with God love help where you can
  • Find points in which you can relate with the other person(s)
Leave a comment

Competent people don’t think they are very competent

I’ve learned that the more one knows something it seems the more they know they don’t know much.

Rather than suffer from the the Dunning-Kruger effect, I’d like to assume I don’t know much, that I may have a beginner’s mind, such that I can be open to all the data being presented to discover the truth. Understanding other viewpoints only strengthen my own viewpoint if my viewpoint is valid in the first place.  I see no purpose in a conversation or debate if the object of the discussion is not about finding the truth i.e. what is valid, what is real. I believe it is one aspect of being humble as humility is about what is true – supernaturally, we are all created in the image of God, each of us has something to contribute as we are unique reflections of God, and before God [who is bigger than the universe], we really don’t know much and the learning process never ends.

If you’re incompetent, you can’t know you’re incompetent. […] the skills you need to produce a right answer are exactly the skills you need to recognize what a right answer is.

—David Dunning[7]

This is why when I am certain I will use the word “is” while when I use the word “seems” it is my postulation and an invitation for feedback while I am in the process of learning.

Leave a comment