Communication that blocks compassion


A poet once wrote, “out there beyond ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing
there is a field. I will meet you there”.

Human communication has one fundamental function, which is to exchange ideas
and express our individual values and needs. They can be expressed in many
different forms; through the use of spoken language, signs or gestures. It
does not matter much which communication form one uses, what matters is the
way one chooses to express them. As we are not communicating with ourselves
but with and to people around us, we have to learn to hear what others are
saying and feeling. By doing this, we would have a better possibility to be
heard and our feelings might be registered. Mistakes and misunderstandings
are an inevitable part of human interpersonal communication, but we are well
equipped to deal with it if we just know how.

Mistakes and misunderstandings become more serious and hard to resolve, if
we lack compassion when expressing our values and needs. The lack of
compassion causes alienation from ourselves as well as from those we
communicate with.

A friend of mine once told me that there are many ways of denying someone
his or her freedom of expression. The most common one, is the denial of
freedom of expression through physical force, this form is very common in
authoritative regimes or societies. The other common one is psychological in
nature. It is the form found in families, close societies and between
friends.

It took me a long time before I fully understood what my friend meant,
especially the psychological denial of freedom of expression. How can one be
denied freedom of expression psychologically? I had this believe that a mind
is an individual thing, to be able to let you deny me my freedom of
expression psychologically I have to let you. In this case, I can not
complain been denied my individual right to express myself. It was not until
I came across a book called “Non-violent communication” written by Marshall
Rosenberg, a clinical psychologist, did I realise what my friend was trying
to tell me.

In this book Rosenberg talks about two types of communication, communicating
with compassion and communicating with less compassion, which he calls
life-alienating communication. A life alienating somebody is a person who
expresses his needs and values through moralistic judgement of others. He or
she spends more time, energy and effort in trying to determine the level of
wrongness and rightness on the part of others. Communicating with others
never goes beyond the ideas of wrongdoing and rightdoing. Whenever he or she
does things that do not accord with his or her personal moralistic teaching,
he or she will always claim, is the fault of others who make him do this or
that.

This form of communication implies wrongness and badness on the part of
people who don't act in harmony with our values. Language such as "the
problem with you is that, you are stupid, selfish or lazy" is a typical
example of moralistic judgement. Blaming, insulting, putting down others,
labelling and diagnosing are all part of moralistic judgement, they are
prejudiced and inappropriate ways of communicating.

With life-alienating communication, we can block out human ability to give
and to receive compassion. It is a kind of communication that is rich with
words that classify and dichotomise people and actions. A person who
communicates in this way always likes to turn meanings upside down
intentionally to increase the possibilities of misunderstanding. Why do
people communicate in this way?

According to Rosenberg, it is all because of the image of the tough guy who
always wins, shown to us in movies as well as in old folk sagas. It is also
a sign of reluctance to express our vulnerability in fear of losing our
authority or control. This explains my problems as I child. Whenever someone
did something I did not like, I considered the person mean and I had to pay
him back. If a teacher give me an assignment that I did not like do, he was
just after me and something should be done to stop him. I saw everyone
around me as an enemy, if they did not concur with my needs and values. My
attitude caused me dearly; problems at school, difficulties in my sport
career etc.

It is very stressful to be constantly thinking in terms of what is wrong
with others for behaving in certain ways or occasionally, what is wrong with
oneself for not understanding or responding as one would like to. In this
situation, one is more focused on classifying, analysing and determining
levels of wrongness, rather than on what others and oneself need and not
getting. If the reason for us communicating with each and other is to
express our values and needs, then moralistic judgement is unnecessary and
inappropriate. It is also a tragic way to express personal needs and values.

One example of a typical everyday moralistic judgement is the following. If
my colleague is more concerned with details than I am, he is picky and
compulsive. On the other hand, if I am more concerned about details than he
is, he is sloppy and disorganised. Expressing our needs and values in this
way, we increase defensiveness and resistance to them among the very people
whose behaviours are of concern to us.

People might agree to act in harmony with our values when we use
life-alienating ways of expressing them, but they are then likely to do so
out of fear, guilt or shame. We all pay dearly when people respond to our
needs and values out of fear, guilt or shame, because sooner or later their
goodwill towards us diminishes.

Classifying and judging others can be seen as a way of promoting violence
too. All form of inhuman actions against a group of people or communities is
always a result of classifying and judging. Others are described and seen,
as inferior to ones owns group. In a society where different groups, values
and need are in competition such kind of communication can be very
destructive not only for the group in question but for the society as a
whole. It can facilitate unlawful and inhuman actions against others. All
minority groups around the world are living examples of what moralistic
judgement is capable of.

Life-alienating communication obscures us the awareness of personal
responsibility for our own feelings and thoughts. This is a very common form
of communication in many societies and cultures, especially among those who
hold positions of authority, be it political or intellectual. A moralistic
judgmental person believes that his or her job is to change people, make
them behave as he or she feels is "right". Requesting is not the same as
demanding, most of the time we demand when we actually mean to request. The
mistake lies within the language we choose to communicate our feeling with,
when we demand, the listener hears threatening with blames and punishment if
they fail to comply.

Life-alienating communication is associated with the concept that certain
action merit reward while others merit punishment. This assumes people, who
act in certain ways should be punished to make them repent and change their
behaviour. I think everyone has interest in seeing people change, not in
order to avoid punishment, but because they see the change as benefiting
themselves. Most of us grew up speaking language that encourages us to
label, compare, demand and pronounce judgement rather than to be aware of
what we are feeling and needing and not getting. Life-alienating
communication both stems and supports hierarchical societies, the function
of which depends upon larger numbers of docile, subservient citizens.

When we humans are in contact with our feelings and needs, we no longer make
good slaves and underlings.

Communicating with compassion is easy, but it seems to be a forgotten
language. We should learn to separate our evaluation of what others are
saying or doing, from our interpretation of what is happening or what has
being said. If you try it both in writing and speaking, you will soon find
out that the chance of misunderstanding will be minimal. And when it does
occur, it will be much easier to resolve. Try not to label, insult or to put
down others and always take responsibility of your mistakes and
misunderstandings.

J. Krishnamurti, an Indian philosopher, once remarked, observing without
evaluating is the highest form of human intelligence.


Modou




_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~