The Fearless Heart: The What and the Why in Human Needs:
by Miki Kashtan
Anyone who becomes acquainted with Nonviolent Communication (NVC) quickly learns about the critical role that human needs ...
Halleluja
It's been almost 2 months since I posted a blog. I have had a challenging time and many joys of my life have been put on the margins of it. I also realised that I want the posts shorter, so they would function more as an ornament to my site rather then the gist of it.
And here I am today lunching a new trial of posting potent, perhaps provocative yet hopefully inspiring ideas in a form of short snippets.
Let me know if it works for you. Thanks.
Let me start with a quote from Miki Kashtan from her latest blog:
And here I am today lunching a new trial of posting potent, perhaps provocative yet hopefully inspiring ideas in a form of short snippets.
Let me know if it works for you. Thanks.
Let me start with a quote from Miki Kashtan from her latest blog:
The more I thought of
it, the more I’ve come to conclude that fairness separates people from each
other instead of bringing them together. The vision of finding solutions that
work for everyone is so much more appealing to me than the prospect of trying
to find out what’s fair.
The Fearless Heart: Who Benefits From Empathy?
The Fearless Heart: Who Benefits From Empathy?: by Miki Kashtan When we are in conflict with someone, or are adversely affected by someone’s actions, even without personal interaction...
Conflict upside down
It’s not about having no conflict; it’s about having conflict that leads to more understanding and more satisfaction.
Miki Kashtan, The Fearless Heart
Miki Kashtan, The Fearless Heart
Inner Empathy
I am amazed how long I have kept overlooking the work of Jerry Donoghue. I just got his book and it is blowing my socks off! I labeled it as 'heady' at the first sight. Yet after reading a bit I shifted dramatically. I see it now as dense and rich. Here is a part of introduction to the book:
Introduction To Inner Empathy
One
of the presuppositions operating in this course is that cultivating Inner
Empathy will naturally extend outwards, allowing us to act more empathetically
and compassionately towards others. Our external actions will be informed by
this inner sense of empathy and compassion. For example, when you make a
mistake, if you learn to empathize with the part of you that becomes intolerant
or hostile with mistakes, then this very same empathetic awareness and compassionate
regard for yourself naturally and effortlessly will be extended to others who make
mistakes in situations that could otherwise stimulate anger. How we treat
ourselves, either consciously or unconsciously, seems to be how we treat
others. I see this inside-out approach as an important practice no matter what
path, religious affiliation, or secular belief system we might hold.
The
deeper invitation presented in this course is for you to learn and practice
tangible and systematic ways to cultivate your own self-presence. This
self-presence will help you to stabilize and abide in empathetic awareness when
faced with internal and external challenges.
As
we learn to engage our core feelings/needs with empathy and compassion, we are
naturally developing our capacity for deeper connection with ourselves and
others. These deeper connections give us an opportunity to meet ourselves and
hold a loving, empathetic presence for aspects of ourselves that have never
received such support. Often these deeper aspects represent core needs that
have been disowned and banished from conscious awareness. In my experience, experientially
disclosing core needs and allowing them to be held by empathetic awareness is powerful
work! I view these deeper inner connections as huge contributions to
cultivating what is called “NVC consciousness” within the NVC community.
Are Judgements Wrong?
Greetings,
This piece was born out of my ongoing confusion about how to talk about the vision of living beyond right and wrong thinking. Two questions repeatedly arise, and I am not always satisfied with my responses to them. As different as they may seem, both, to me, are indicative of the same challenge. One question is some version of: “Are you saying that it’s OK to kill someone?” The other takes the form of: “Aren’t you saying that judgments are wrong?” My one word answer to both of them is simply “no.” So, what, then, am I saying?
If, instead, the speaker speaks of their experience, what they say becomes incontrovertible and invites a different quality of relating. No one can argue with me about whether or not I liked a certain movie. Anyone could argue with me about whether or not this was a bad movie. Speaking of our own experience, our own inner frame of meaning, and taking responsibility for that being my frame instead of some truth that lives outside of me, has different effects.
For myself, based on years of learning, practicing, and teaching, I can say with definite clarity that I prefer the consequences of speaking without judgments to what happens when I use judgment words. The quality of connection and dialogue, and the capacity of people to work together to create something they can both live with, increase with the former. In part, this is because saying things from a personally owned perspective tends to be more vulnerable and therefore, again in my experience, invite a response that is also more vulnerable. In part, this is because when the speaker expresses things in that way, there tends to be more of an explanation of a “why” that the other side can then relate to.
for a year or so I have been trying to get clear, formulate and practice a way of expressing myself free of claims, a way that would convey purely my subjective take on things. I found it a hard work.... and rewarding.
Now, this Kashtan girl nailed it... and I hope she did for you too.
Are Judgments Wrong?
by Miki Kashtan
This piece was born out of my ongoing confusion about how to talk about the vision of living beyond right and wrong thinking. Two questions repeatedly arise, and I am not always satisfied with my responses to them. As different as they may seem, both, to me, are indicative of the same challenge. One question is some version of: “Are you saying that it’s OK to kill someone?” The other takes the form of: “Aren’t you saying that judgments are wrong?” My one word answer to both of them is simply “no.” So, what, then, am I saying?
Our Words Have Consequences
My rather arbitrary starting place in disentangling the many threads in this knot is to explore the significance of our choice of words. Saying that something is “wrong”, or “right”, or “beautiful”, for that matter, has consequences for the speaker as well as for the person hearing the words. This form of speaking assumes a standard of what these words mean that is external to the speaker and the listener. The speaker is not taking full responsibility for being the one making that judgment. The listener is subtly invited to agree with the speaker rather than to understand the speaker. The ensuing conversation, if one takes place, is less likely to be one of exploration and connection than one of making pronouncements and, in the case of disagreement, debate, possibly acrimony.
If, instead, the speaker speaks of their experience, what they say becomes incontrovertible and invites a different quality of relating. No one can argue with me about whether or not I liked a certain movie. Anyone could argue with me about whether or not this was a bad movie. Speaking of our own experience, our own inner frame of meaning, and taking responsibility for that being my frame instead of some truth that lives outside of me, has different effects.
For myself, based on years of learning, practicing, and teaching, I can say with definite clarity that I prefer the consequences of speaking without judgments to what happens when I use judgment words. The quality of connection and dialogue, and the capacity of people to work together to create something they can both live with, increase with the former. In part, this is because saying things from a personally owned perspective tends to be more vulnerable and therefore, again in my experience, invite a response that is also more vulnerable. In part, this is because when the speaker expresses things in that way, there tends to be more of an explanation of a “why” that the other side can then relate to.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)