What if our power to care depends on our capacity to be vulnerable?!
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.Living in Compassion
At last here is an introduction to the concepts underlying the work of Robert
Gonzales. It has been a few years of devotion to his teaching for me
since I have attended the first workshop with him.
Robert was labelled as an NVC poet/philosopher. Even
though this intro might strike somebody as ‘touchy feely’ my experience with
him and with the insights he offers have been very practical, down to earth and
highly applicable in daily life. A true jewel as I see it. Enjoy:
Living In Compassion
by Robert Gonzales
My deep inquiry in life has led me to develop
practical pathways of living in the fullness and flow of life as a daily
spiritual practice—what I call Living Compassion. In my trainings and
retreats, I teach processes and offer inner maps that support transformation in
areas of inner experience that were previously inaccessible.
CULTIVATING FULLNESS IN THE BEAUTY OF NEEDS
A foundational practice of Living
Compassion is what I call cultivating and dwelling in the Beauty of
Needs. This involves specific practice in relaxing into fully embodied
energetic qualities of life (needs) and developing present moment awareness.
Compassionate Communication is a language of the heart. Yet, we are not able to
truly live the language of the heart unless we are able to access the
heart. Needs are the qualities of the heart that manifest in us as
longings or yearnings. To learn to cultivate and live in the fullness of these
qualities is the essence of living the fullness of life itself.
An important aspect of self-compassion requires the
development of simple presence. Presence is simple awareness. It’s not
complicated and it doesn’t require an intellectual understanding to come to
simple awareness of how the energies we call needs live in us.
'Both - And' Governance
If there is one concise way to describe the essence of Sociocracy, I see it in this John Shinnerer's article. I am thrilled that I found it in the infinity of cyberspace. Judge for yourself:
'Both - And' Governance
'Both - And' Governance
In recent weeks, Occupy Wall Street (OWS) and numerous local and regional Occupy actions in the USA have brought ideas of “horizontal” governance into more common awareness. Occupy groups have mostly modeled themselves on the original OWS model, where “General Assemblies” that operate through a form of active, often large-group consensus are a primary means of decision-making. Inclusiveness and equality are commonly stated values of these processes.
The term “leaderless” is also used by Occupy organizations to identify their mode of operation. In theory, there are no leaders of General Assemblies, or the groups they are used by. There are facilitators who delineate assembly processes and attempt to insure that those processes are followed. There is allegedly no one person or small group of people “in charge” of decision-making, or even of any particular decision-making process.
This is contrasted, by OWS among others, with “vertical” governance – in general, a context where decisions are made by relatively few members of an organization, while nonetheless intended to be carried out by all members. Most often the term “vertical” is used as equivalent to “hierarchical.”
So if there are no leaders – how did this all get started? Who decided how a General Assembly would operate? What if someone just joining in disagrees? How is selection of General Assembly facilitators done?
Choosing Interdependence
I see this post as an open invitation for each of us to support Bay NVC - a key organisation promoting the principles of Needs Based Communication. For those who are new to the concept, I believe the Fundrising Telesummit offers a rich and affordable source of learning.
May you be as inspired by this post as I am :)
By Miki Kashtan
Many
spiritual traditions converge with certain aspects of modern science in a basic
understanding of life as one interdependent whole. In the natural world, for
example, if predators are removed from an ecosystem, the herbivores multiply
beyond the available grass and the entire ecosystem is endangered. Our global
economy is now recognized to be interdependent as well: if one country falls
into an economic crisis, a cascading effect can destabilize the entire global
economy. On the human plane, recent developments in neuroscience lead many to
conclude that our apparently separate brains are interwoven: others’ responses
and expressions affect us in a direct way through mechanisms such as the firing
of mirror neurons. These phenomena and so many others are examples of
interdependence as a fact of life.
At the same time as our awareness of this level of interdependence is growing, our capacity as individuals to engage in behaviors that recognize and engage with our interdependence is diminishing. Interdependence as a practice invites us to consciously engage with ourselves and others in ways that honor and nurture our connection with all of life.
At the same time as our awareness of this level of interdependence is growing, our capacity as individuals to engage in behaviors that recognize and engage with our interdependence is diminishing. Interdependence as a practice invites us to consciously engage with ourselves and others in ways that honor and nurture our connection with all of life.
From Self-Sufficiency to
Self-Responsibility and Self-Reliance
“Each of us lives in and through an immense movement
of the hands of other people. The hands of other people lift us from the womb.
The hands of other people grow the food we eat, weave the clothes we wear, and
build the shelters we inhabit. The hands of other people give pleasure to our
bodies in moments of passion, and aid and comfort in times of affliction and
distress. It is in and through the hands of other people that the commonwealth
of nature is appropriated and accommodated to the needs and pleasures of our
separate, individual lives. And, at the end, it is the hands of other people
that lower us into the earth.” -- Jim Stockinger
Sociocracy in a workplace
Gregg Kendrick is yet another person (after Jerry Koch-Gonzales) that uses the amalgam of Needs Based Communication (AC or NVC - call it what you want) and Sociocracy. What a hit for me!
Check it out!
Check it out!
Gregg Kendrick talks about how to
change work environments into places where people can thrive. He gives insights
of his own business and the structures he changed. He formerly was co-owner
& CEO of a software technology training firm for 19 years
whose clients were mostly large
corporations & government agencies. In 2004, he founded Basileia LLC with
the mission of co-creating organizations where people thrive amidst
authenticity, connection, interdependence and solidarity using the processes of
Needs Based Communication and Sociocracy...
Lost in Translation
Yesterday I got a reminder that learning how to live NVC is a long journey. I enjoy such reminders because they keep me on my toes, provide rich learning and help reconnect with myself and others when I’m mentally and emotionally somewhere else.
Yesterday evening I was laying on bed with Mona and Emma (wife and daughter, respectively) reading as part of Emma’s bed time routine. Emma passed the book to Mona to which Mona said to me, ‘I would you like you to speak to Emma more’.
I heard the words accurately in my ears, yet what I heard in my head was, ‘You don’t talk to Emma enough.’ and for a few minutes reacted quite strongly to that.
Time to care
I'd like to celebrate Robin Youngson's book 'TIME TO CARE. How to love your patients and your job'.
I see the thinking behind the book still coming from the 'domination paradigm' we all have been brought up in, at the same time I see it as ground breaking in its strive to describe the reality of many healthcare professionals and offer compassionate alternatives.
I hope that those of you who choose to check the book will find it inspiring.
Here is an excerpt from the first chapter:
I see the thinking behind the book still coming from the 'domination paradigm' we all have been brought up in, at the same time I see it as ground breaking in its strive to describe the reality of many healthcare professionals and offer compassionate alternatives.
I hope that those of you who choose to check the book will find it inspiring.
Here is an excerpt from the first chapter:
Becoming an AC virtuoso
I found this article on Ian Peatey's ever inspiring website.... and I got sold within seconds. Let me know your response. I'd love to know that there is somebody actually reading my posts. Thanks :).
Here comes Ian's post:
I’m delighted to feature this article by Susan Clarke, a music teacher in Australia.
Here comes Ian's post:
I’m delighted to feature this article by Susan Clarke, a music teacher in Australia.
Susan posted a comment on one of the NVC forums I follow about learning NVC and she drew an analogy to learning to play a musical instrument. I enjoyed her comment so much I contacted her and asked if she would like to expand it into a full article.
And here it is!
Weariness as a form of reactivity.
In the following story we will focus on Dan and how the things might be different if he were coming from a NVC consciousness.
My boyfriend, Dan, and I had a semi-cheerful conversation on the phone. Then we meet at a pub. He doesn't really smile, nor look at me or say much. I feel disappointed and resentful that I don't see enthusiasm about his seeing me, so I don't offer enthusiasm to him. We leave the pub, we're both feeling tension. Later, I'm unhappy and ask "Can we talk about what happened". He is tense, won't talk about it, and asked me to "let it go". Instead of honoring his request, I insisted on talking about my feelings. (As I understand from other conversations with him, one of his biggest complaints of me is that I don't let things go.) He doesn't cooperate. The evening ends without connection. The morning after, he is tense and doesn't talk much to me; spends an hour in his room. I say nothing for a while, but feelings of fear and anxiety build. I'm telling myself he doesn't care. An hour later, I finally speak "Would you talk to me" (with jackal thoughts in and out). He says "I don't want to". He asks for a few days apart. I cried and left reluctantly. I felt afraid and anxious, and later said things trying to convince him that I'll change and be less reactive. He tells me he's tired of the negativity that seems pervasive in our relationship.
As Dan makes his way to the pub to meet his girlfriend, he notices a sluggishness coming over him. He makes his first new critical decision. He pauses, gets off his bike and sits down on a bench. He takes a moment just to notice the change in him. An hour earlier he felt fine and now that he is going to meet Sara he feels heavy and kind of down.
My boyfriend, Dan, and I had a semi-cheerful conversation on the phone. Then we meet at a pub. He doesn't really smile, nor look at me or say much. I feel disappointed and resentful that I don't see enthusiasm about his seeing me, so I don't offer enthusiasm to him. We leave the pub, we're both feeling tension. Later, I'm unhappy and ask "Can we talk about what happened". He is tense, won't talk about it, and asked me to "let it go". Instead of honoring his request, I insisted on talking about my feelings. (As I understand from other conversations with him, one of his biggest complaints of me is that I don't let things go.) He doesn't cooperate. The evening ends without connection. The morning after, he is tense and doesn't talk much to me; spends an hour in his room. I say nothing for a while, but feelings of fear and anxiety build. I'm telling myself he doesn't care. An hour later, I finally speak "Would you talk to me" (with jackal thoughts in and out). He says "I don't want to". He asks for a few days apart. I cried and left reluctantly. I felt afraid and anxious, and later said things trying to convince him that I'll change and be less reactive. He tells me he's tired of the negativity that seems pervasive in our relationship.
As Dan makes his way to the pub to meet his girlfriend, he notices a sluggishness coming over him. He makes his first new critical decision. He pauses, gets off his bike and sits down on a bench. He takes a moment just to notice the change in him. An hour earlier he felt fine and now that he is going to meet Sara he feels heavy and kind of down.
Vulnerability, Difference and Belonging
by Miki Kashtan
Any of you who’ve been reading this blog for a while or know me otherwise have heard me talk countless times about how vitally important the path of vulnerability has been for me. I’ve been walking this path for twelve years now, about as long as I’ve been using and sharing Nonviolent Communication in the world. The vulnerability path has been the occasion for profound liberation for me and I can say without exaggeration that it is the foundation on which I continue to do all of my learning about being human, about leadership, about power, about interdependence, and even about social change.
Any of you who’ve been reading this blog for a while or know me otherwise have heard me talk countless times about how vitally important the path of vulnerability has been for me. I’ve been walking this path for twelve years now, about as long as I’ve been using and sharing Nonviolent Communication in the world. The vulnerability path has been the occasion for profound liberation for me and I can say without exaggeration that it is the foundation on which I continue to do all of my learning about being human, about leadership, about power, about interdependence, and even about social change.
So it has been a great treat for me to discover a
fellow traveler. Some time ago, I watched Brené Brown’s first TED talk, The Power of Vulnerability, and was astonished
and delighted by the content. This past Sunday I watched her recent talk,Listening to Shame. I was spellbound. First, I
found the content captivating, because it is so aligned with my own experience
and what I teach. My most favorite quote is that “vulnerability is the most
accurate measure of courage,” which fits entirely with my own efforts to
re-frame vulnerability from an expression of weakness to a source of strength.
I was also completely taken, again, by her personality and presentation style,
which I found engaging, warm, and entertaining, even as she spoke of sensitive
and painful subjects.
Restorative Circles
What are Restorative Circles?
A Restorative Circle is a community process for supporting those in conflict.
It brings together three parties to a conflict:
- those who have acted,
- those directly impacted and
- the wider community
The circle is organised as a dialogue of equals.
Participants invite each other and attend voluntarily.
The dialogue process used is shared openly with all participants, and guided by a community member.
The process ends when actions have been found that bring mutual benefit
Dominic has been organising those circles in Rio de Janeiro - one of the most challenging environments on the planet - with astonishing results. Please check out the 8 minute video and judge for yourself.
As you will see the principles of Authentic Communication play a key role in the process.
Enjoy
.
A Restorative Circle is a community process for supporting those in conflict.
It brings together three parties to a conflict:
- those who have acted,
- those directly impacted and
- the wider community
The circle is organised as a dialogue of equals.
Participants invite each other and attend voluntarily.
The dialogue process used is shared openly with all participants, and guided by a community member.
The process ends when actions have been found that bring mutual benefit
Dominic has been organising those circles in Rio de Janeiro - one of the most challenging environments on the planet - with astonishing results. Please check out the 8 minute video and judge for yourself.
As you will see the principles of Authentic Communication play a key role in the process.
Enjoy
.
Nicole Foss in New Zealand
Dunno much about Nicole... at the same time i have listened to her presentation and it dramatically changed my outlook on our possible immediate financial and social future as a civilization.
Her interview with Kim Hill on National Radio New Zealand is here.
Even Kim struggled to keep a pace with the 'Foss Machine Gun' :)
On the other hand I struggled to get engaged with her website, yet we all like different things.
Here's some blurb about her I found on the web as well as the schedule of her presentations in New Zealand:
Conflict and the Illusion of Safety
Thursday, February 23, 2012 Subscribe here to Miki Kashtan's blog The Fearless Heart
“I will do everything in my power to resolve every conflict, however small.” -- Thich Nhat Hanh
I think I am not alone in nursing the fantasy that if I only got the “right” people in some “right” configuration, we would essentially have no significant conflict. Of course I know better. From personal relationships to organizations, conflict is an integral part of life. Still, when conflict arises, especially for the first time in any particular grouping, I recognize in myself and know in others a kind of disappointment, a loss of some hope that maybe this time we can have it be different, perfect.
I think about these things a lot. I am blessed to have some very few relationships which are, essentially, conflict-free. What makes it possible, I keep wondering, and why is it not replicable in other instances? Is there something present in these relationships that’s missing in other places? So far, I’ve identified two main ingredients for this magic. One I call the assumption of innocence, which is about a fundamental, implicit trust of each other. In these unique relationships, when one of us does something the other doesn’t like, we nonetheless trust each other’s basic care; we assume the best about each other’s intentions. The second ingredient is that when conflicts do arise, we attend to them. The two aspects reinforce each other. As we get to understand fully what the situation meant to each of us, we get to know ourselves and each other better, and the level of trust between us increases. At the same time, the assumption of innocence makes it easier to engage with each other when in conflict.
Why would this be the exception? What is it that makes it so easy for people to jump to conclusions about each other while at the same time keeping them from approaching a friend, colleague, or family member when their actions are not to their liking?
“I will do everything in my power to resolve every conflict, however small.” -- Thich Nhat Hanh
I think I am not alone in nursing the fantasy that if I only got the “right” people in some “right” configuration, we would essentially have no significant conflict. Of course I know better. From personal relationships to organizations, conflict is an integral part of life. Still, when conflict arises, especially for the first time in any particular grouping, I recognize in myself and know in others a kind of disappointment, a loss of some hope that maybe this time we can have it be different, perfect.
I think about these things a lot. I am blessed to have some very few relationships which are, essentially, conflict-free. What makes it possible, I keep wondering, and why is it not replicable in other instances? Is there something present in these relationships that’s missing in other places? So far, I’ve identified two main ingredients for this magic. One I call the assumption of innocence, which is about a fundamental, implicit trust of each other. In these unique relationships, when one of us does something the other doesn’t like, we nonetheless trust each other’s basic care; we assume the best about each other’s intentions. The second ingredient is that when conflicts do arise, we attend to them. The two aspects reinforce each other. As we get to understand fully what the situation meant to each of us, we get to know ourselves and each other better, and the level of trust between us increases. At the same time, the assumption of innocence makes it easier to engage with each other when in conflict.
Why would this be the exception? What is it that makes it so easy for people to jump to conclusions about each other while at the same time keeping them from approaching a friend, colleague, or family member when their actions are not to their liking?
Meeting Criticism with Criticism
by LaShelle Lowe-Chardé · March 22, 2012 · Subscribe Here
You regularly listen with empathy to others and have worked hard to cultivate this skill. Yet, there are those particular situations or relationships in which you can't seem to find your giraffe ears (have empathy for another).
You regularly listen with empathy to others and have worked hard to cultivate this skill. Yet, there are those particular situations or relationships in which you can't seem to find your giraffe ears (have empathy for another).
It's likely that in these situations one of two things is happening. You perceive a threat to one of your most basic needs, like safety, security, belonging, autonomy, and/or acceptance. Or you are unwilling to feel the hurt and grief of needs unmet.
Being consciously aware that you perceive a threat to a basic need isn't always as simple as you might think. Perceptions of threat often hide out in political arguments, complex analyses, spiritual pronouncements, grand theories, or any sense of righteousness. Uncovering perceptions of threats is easier if you know the symptoms:
-You can't find empathy for the opposing view or another person.
-You feel tense every time you think of the situation.
-Your are not open to changing your view in the face of new information.
-You find yourself quickly moving to overwhelm or anger.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)