41–50 of 76 posts
For the record, the original, descriptive and not next-to-useless title: "How to talk to angry people: the CLARA method of de-escalation". HN guidelines say: "please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait." Maybe it's time to add "or if it's vague and non-descriptive" ?
I had to learn this technique when I was living with friends that had undiagnosed and untreated personality disorders. Remaining calm while they're blowing up simply didn't work, and led them to think I was patronizing them. So I'd start making the same points I was trying to make to them, only with a raised voice. I would get completely invested in the argument, while remaining in full control of myself. Soon they would calm down.
It usually wound up being a cathartic experience for them. They'd break down after the whole thing was over, sometimes even cried. At first I thought I was doing God's work, but eventually I realized that that sort of thing just wasn't ever going to 'fix' them, and they needed treatment. For most of us, major cathartic events happen once a month to once a year and provide opportunities for permanent personality growth.
But when you have a personality disorder, no amount of catharsis will change your behavior, because your brain isn't wired the same way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But... If you have to still do this with adults, it means the adults haven't learned to regulate their emotions well enough to listen to a rational argument even while they're upset. It's gotten so bad that some adults never listen to things they don't emotionally agree with, even when they're not initially upset (hearing contrary facts makes them upset). That is a catastrophe for rational thought and discourse. If a…
I get what you're saying, though I've found that handling the emotional part of a discussion first makes the "rational" stuff way easier. One thing to keep in mind is that many people out there have mental disorders (treated and untreated) that make it difficult on a chemical level to control these things. For example, ADHD destroys inhibition (causing the classic "speak before you think" behavior) on a deep level th…
I have friends in politics and I have even run for office (School Board 17 people ran for 5 positions and 4 were re-elections I got 6th :( but my friend I was running with she got 5th :). My job every election is to go to where the screamers and yellers are. For some reason the election official leaves these people outside that will yell and throw a tantrum if anyone even mentions a different opinion, which lowers vo…
I volunteered for my town Planning Commission last year and have to deal with this all the time now. Residents are constantly ranting on social media accusing us of moving town borders, down-zoning our enemies, holding secret votes, and cutting deals. In reality, the only thing we did last year was approve a swimming pool and do some research on parking. It's extremely stressful for me as an introvert, but I quietly…
We should have great respect for anyone with even remotely good intentions who is willing to plow through this mess of misguided humanity to get something useful done. I'm pretty sure I can't do it, so if I want to see change happen I have to support those who can.
Coincidentally on the frontpage together with the rant of Linus Torvalds
When he's angry about a major issue in the kernel, he uses curse words to bring the spotlight to where he needs it. He's angry because, in his view, top-tier devs are doing sub-par work on an important problem.
He's not blinded by emotion, he's just being forceful.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never got the impression that DE-escalation was Linus’ goal.
Isn't it? If you're the unchallenged dictator of a project, it seems to me that saying "I will brook no more of this nonsense" is a better de-escalation strategy than inviting further discussion. Edit: I hope my downvoter understands the irony in their actions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> So far however, it seems each situation and personality makes it difficult to pin down an effective process. Well, obviously: using one-process-fits-all without appreciating local context is a recipe for disaster, isn't it?
Everything can have a process. A process doesn't eliminate skill and judgement but establishes standards and guidance leading to improvement.
This technique is extremely powerful in parenting. These are exactly the steps you take to reason with a toddler. Before anything else you have to get them out of their temper ta tantrum and articulating why they are angry. Then you segwey from listening to dialog.
But... If you have to still do this with adults, it means the adults haven't learned to regulate their emotions well enough to listen to a rational argument even while they're upset. It's gotten so bad that some adults never listen to things they don't emotionally agree with, even when they're not initially upset (hearing contrary facts makes them upset). That is a catastrophe for rational thought and discourse. If a…
So that's fine. They will listen, then later mull it over and integrate it.
Just because anger arose for them in that moment they were interacting with you does not mean they can't be rational.
But more importantly, by creating a positive interaction you may have started to reduce their tendency to outgroup you and 'your tribe'. This can lead to more productive dialogue in the future.
Also, as to why that person is angry. No one can know what life experiences that person may have had. Happy well adjusted people from happy families usually, don't fly into a blind rage that easily.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't it? If you're the unchallenged dictator of a project, it seems to me that saying "I will brook no more of this nonsense" is a better de-escalation strategy than inviting further discussion. Edit: I hope my downvoter understands the irony in their actions.
I rather believe Linus' goal is to change Intel. Some curse words got it escalated to the Hacker News frontpage and that publicity helps. Why de-escalate?
Also I interpreted it as a more general claim, not specifically about this fairly unusual instance where nerd talk interacts with stuff that's in the public consciousness.