Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication • Hacker News Board

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#221

Post by roenxi » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 8:09 AM UTC

User23 wrote: post #130

nerdponx wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NVC is a framework for direct communication. To quote the article: 1. Observe Facts - observe the specific facts that are affecting our wellbeing, and bring them up with the other person 2. Note Feelings - introspect about what exactly we are feeling in response to what we've observed, and communicate these feelings 3. Uncover Desires - figure out the desires, wants and values that are creating our feelings, and expl…

You're describing an algorithm, albeit an informal one. The problem is that there is no general algorithm for social skills, which means that this algorithm is useless in the general case. Now, if one treats your listed points as a set of heuristics rather than an algorithm and then perceptively applies them to a given social interaction, they probably will be useful. But, of course, the ability to do that is exactly…

There obviously is a general algorithm for social skills; otherwise humans couldn't socialise.

However there is no algorithm independent from what other people say and do. So any strategy that doesn't involve carefully considering what other people say and do is bound to fail.

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#222

Post by Beltiras » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 8:18 AM UTC

BasDirks wrote: post #213

I have my doubts about the honesty of these interpretations: > I feel angry because you forgot about our coffee date -> I want people to value the feelings of their friends Are you not angry because you want the person to value YOU and your time? What are these generic "people" and "the feeling of their friends" to you? > You make me feel guilty when you text me all the time -> I want there to be less pressure on my…

These feel ill formed NVC. If you lead with feeling the entire exchange becomes confrontational. First state unambiguous facts.

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#223

Post by el_benhameen » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 8:20 AM UTC

aspaviento wrote: post #208

> Felix, you always leave your dirty socks on the floor! It’s disgusting! Clean this up before you do anything else. Obviously Felix is going to respond bad to the first example because it's a demand. Someone forcing you to do something is never welcomed. > 1. Observe Facts] Felix, when I see two balls of soiled socks under the coffee table, [2. Note Feelings] I feel irritated because [3. Uncover Desires] I want more…

This may just be something that I’m sensitive to, but the “you always” part of the first statement immediately puts me in a hostile posture. I start thinking of counterarguments to the fact that was asserted (“I picked up my socks just yesterday!”), and the generality of “always” makes it difficult to come to a tangible resolution—if the collection of past transgressions is the real problem, there isn’t a way to fix them.

I think a lot of the power of the second statement comes from the fact that it primarily addresses _this_ instance of the problem, which takes away any incentive to argue with the fact asserted (the socks plainly are on the floor) and makes the path to a resolution much more straightforward: I’m sorry for leaving these socks on the floor; I’ll pick them up, and yes, I’d be happy to put them in the machine in the future.

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#224

Post by antisemiotic » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 8:23 AM UTC

friendlybus wrote: post #201

>Felix, you always leave your dirty socks on the floor! It’s disgusting! Clean this up before you do anything else. >Felix, when I see two balls of soiled socks under the coffee table, I feel irritated because I want more order in the rooms that we share in common - would you be willing to put your socks in the washing machine? These two sentences convey the same information. The speaker finds the sock to be out of o…

>The only explicit difference is the demand to do it immediately.

No. The first speaker exaggerates the issue to make a point ("you always"), makes a roundabout reference to societal norms ("it's disgusting") instead of describing what actually annoys them (socks lying on the floor right now) and why (I don't want to see them because I personally find them disgusting, not because Felix failed to meet some outside standard).

>A competent person must be able to deal with both speakers.

Sure, but you can't change how others deal with your words. You can only choose how you yourself communicate.

>Describing words as violence fundamentally undermines the "old" (aka what I grew up with) liberal western order that was do whatever you want as long as it brings no harm.

I think you describe two problems here:

* The name is indeed unfortunate. * It is percieved as an objective standard against which to judge all communication, rather than a guide for one's own actions.

As I see it, it's generally pointless to expect others to behave in a certain "right" way that you can reasonably suspect they might not, and then get annoyed when they indeed don't. Speaking in a pointlessly confrontational manner (such as making arguments from omniscience, like "you always", or "you are a ___ person" etc) is more likely to provoke an aggressive reaction than sticking to the facts (observations about your own feelings are also facts). Why not choose the latter?

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#225

Post by mettamage » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 8:26 AM UTC

lxe wrote: post #147

> There is no hard data we know of that proves whether NVC actually improves relationships and resolves conflict Just like in “Crucial Conversations” this just tries to make empathy formulaic. Formulaic communication techniques come across as dishonest. A better advice is to be hyper aware of what the other party is trying to convey, whether they are using “violent” or nonviolent way of conveying it, and respond acco…

> Formulaic communication techniques come across as dishonest.

IMO saying things like: use empathy are also suboptimal ways of teaching people about communication. Because those type of statements are quite vague and ambiguous and ambiguity leads to mystery. One of the cool things about our 'modern' way of thinking is the idea that we try to demistify everything and really understand how things work.

I think this should be the same with regards to learning how to communicate. Ideally that is: no mystery, only reliable knowledge that helps towards the goal of a better life for everyone.

And yes, that is asking for a lot and will take centuries, but I believe it's worth it.

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#226

Post by jillesvangurp » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 8:29 AM UTC

dec0dedab0de wrote: post #48

This seems like a guide to passive aggressively manipulating others for your own gain. Am I missing something?

Stuff like this can be abused indeed. Also worth noting that this kind of communication skills are part of most management trainings. I took some courses on coaching and selling your ideas ten years ago and this is exactly the kind of thing they teach. So in that sense, yes, this exactly the kind of tools that your average passive aggressive manager (aka. people manipulator) would use. But then, it's also a common trait for some of the best managers I've worked for to be good at this stuff.

A more productive way to think about it is in terms of leveling the playing field when dealing with people with such skills and understand what they are doing and why. Also it allows you to be more effective in day to day getting stuff done with other people; especially when you sometimes disagree with them. Finally, knowledge of this stuff can help when you realize you are being a dick. Also you now have the tools to be less of a dick by simply stating things in a different way.

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#227

Post by kd5bjo » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 8:35 AM UTC

everybodyknows wrote: post #122

phnofive wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NVC shouldn’t be practiced in uneven relationships (teacher - student, parent - child, employer - employee, customer - server) for the exact reason mentioned by GP. It’s simultaneously condescending and confusing to the party with less power, inviting them to test what leverage they can gain - usually none.

The article acknowledges this point, albeit somewhat indirectly: >We think it's important to note that NVC should only be used in situations where people have each other's best interests at heart

That caveat makes it vey hard to find situations where NVC is valid, as it relies on the motivation of both parties. It’s not enough for the speaker to have the listener’s best interest at heart (as is presumably the case with a teacher speaking to a student); the attitude must be reciprocated as well.

This is the sort of escape clause that enables No True Scotsman-like defenses of the methodology: “You did everything by the book and didn’t get your desired result. It must be because he doesn’t actually care about you.”

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#228

Post by otaviokz » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 8:36 AM UTC

_def wrote: post #12

n42 wrote: post #7

I learned this at a company retreat at some point. We all kind of rolled our eyes and went along with the exercise. I now use it to great effect almost daily in both personal and professional relationships. It takes a little care and thought to apply it well. I've found when done effectively, it can unlock difficult conversations and turn even the most hostile interactions into productive conversations. You are demon…

> We all kind of rolled our eyes and went along with the exercise. I now use it to great effect almost daily in both personal and professional relationships. Reactions like that tell me once again that a lot of people really underestimate simple stuff like this. I hope that in the future simple and useful psychology topics will find their way into our schools so that the acceptance and understanding for the usefulnes…

To be fair, I believe a big part of this kind of reaction often comes from being pushed trendy "easy fix for something important" from HR or top management quite frequently.

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#229

Post by WA » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 8:36 AM UTC

aspaviento wrote: post #208

> Felix, you always leave your dirty socks on the floor! It’s disgusting! Clean this up before you do anything else. Obviously Felix is going to respond bad to the first example because it's a demand. Someone forcing you to do something is never welcomed. > 1. Observe Facts] Felix, when I see two balls of soiled socks under the coffee table, [2. Note Feelings] I feel irritated because [3. Uncover Desires] I want more…

I agree. And now assume the latter sentence is told in an aggressive voice. Does it really make a difference?

Furthermore: What if this is a parent-child relationship and the kid actually should put the socks in the washing machine? The answer "no" would not be acceptable. So the outcome for the parent is either inacceptible, or the fact that the parent doesn't accept a "no" for an answer will make him/her voice this in a way that still feels "violent".

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#230

Post by mtsr » Wed, Oct 16, 2019, 8:38 AM UTC

BasDirks wrote: post #213

I have my doubts about the honesty of these interpretations: > I feel angry because you forgot about our coffee date -> I want people to value the feelings of their friends Are you not angry because you want the person to value YOU and your time? What are these generic "people" and "the feeling of their friends" to you? > You make me feel guilty when you text me all the time -> I want there to be less pressure on my…

Part of NVC is also similar to '5 times why'.

These might be surface desires, with the ones you mention being another layer of underlying desires. It's an interesting exercise in itself to do this with your own desires.