Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

clearerthinking.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 355 posts

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#341

Post by joshuamorton »

confidantlake wrote: post #330
joshuamorton wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sounds manipulative to me Amusingly, "would you only eat the food that you buy" was a suggestion by another person for a less manipulative suggestion. What most people took issue with wasn't the "only eat what you buy" part, but the "would you be willing to ?" part, which many people took as forcing the other party to answer "yes". Again, if you're coming from the preconception that someone (normally the other pers…

Thinking about it a bit more, I prefer "did you eat my food"? That way you are not accusing someone, after all maybe they didn't. To me the issue of asking "would you" sounds like the request is optional and they can say, "no I won't". In this case there is no negotiating.

> To me the issue of asking "would you" sounds like the request is optional and they can say, "no I won't". In this case there is no negotiating.

If the answer is no, then like I said, negotiation probably won't work, so you escalate. The point of something like NVC is to avoid escalation when possible. Sometimes it isn't possible.

Another way of putting this is: NVC assumes good intent. When that assumption is invalidated, other strategies are superior, but you lose very little by assuming good intent for a while.

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#342

Post by BinaryBurrito »

QualityReboot wrote: post #313
firepoet wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disagree 100%. “just talk directly to people” reads to me like an ill-informed tactic that allows all our worst habits to run amok. Studying these techniques and making them habitual is the key to a kinder, more thoughtful, and even more effective and productive teamwork experience. I had a coworker who addressed my team about some difficulty they were having collaborating with us. They spoke directly, telling us we…

What's wrong with saying "hey dude, no need to get angry, let's figure out how to get you better requirements. how about we try xyz and you come back to us in 2 weeks and tell us if we're doing better"? If he apologized to everyone but you, maybe say "I heard you apologized to some people about last week's tension, I just wanted to let you know that we're all on the same team and there's no hard feelings, your concer…

A direct approach used carelessly can cause the other side to feel a lack of psychological safety, which is an important characteristic to effective teams. For example, in your comment, you effectively invalidated the previous commenter's feelings and implied they were crazy for feeling that way. If your goal was to create an environment for collaboration and a meaningful dialogue, you probably failed to do so, since you come across as someone who won't bother empathizing. Were you in the same team as this individual, they would also likely be hesitant to collaborate with you, which ultimately impacts your and your team's ability to achieve desired outcomes and goals.

So, theoretically, you read that previous paragraph and didn't feel anything negative (annoyance, anger, or whatever). And if you're able to do that, I commend you-- but you need to realize that not everyone can do that. Feelings exist in other people, regardless whether you think they're valid. And if you're truly interested in solving problems effectively with other people, then you're going to have an easier time adjusting your communication style rather than telling someone to feel emotions in a way they may have no control over.

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#343

Post by mikorym »

soared wrote: post #327
mikorym wrote: post #262

What if you don't want nonviolent communication? I can think of many examples; an oppressive government, a physically oppressive/abusive relationship or rape, a religously delusional cult, etc. Maybe the assumption is that you are excluding such situations? Sometimes you have to fight for justice. What is your priority, peace or truth? I understand that point 1. should address this, but the opposite can happen as wel…

This is explicitly covered in the reading. > 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. It isn't helpful in abusive relationships....

I missed that part, and I think that is a rather necessary assumption.

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#344

Post by teddyuk »

avar wrote: post #214
TeMPOraL wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ending at third step and leaving request unstated sounds highly manipulative to me, because the other party now has to figure out what you really want. Going straight to the request makes the tone do all the work - whether the exact request is even registered by the other party, or whether they feel forced to abandon their plans, all depends on how you voice your words. Perhaps people are different, but I'm of the ty…

> I'm of the type that I absolutely want to hear both what you want and reasoning why you want it. Skipping straight to the 4th step doesn't preclude us from discussing that, we can always backtrack and talk about that. It's just skipping straight to the point. Consider this: We've agreed to go to a specific restaurant tonight, you change your mind for whatever reason and feel strongly about it. You had a burger at l…

This doesn't happen to me in the real world, this is how it goes with my wife:

> "Hey, mind if we do to Subway instead?" > "Okay" > a night of arguing > "I didnt even want to go to Subway, I wanted to go where we were going"

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#345

Post by DangitBobby »

yahwrong wrote: post #290
im3w1l wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way the name reads to me is that if you aren't following their styles, then your communication is violent.

Maybe it's just your internal emotions making you think the title is suggesting something it isn't. Maybe you should read the article.

Words do actually have meaning.

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#346

Post by munmaek »

temp1999 wrote: post #332
bovermyer wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

May I refer you to the second definition of violence, per Merriam Webster? https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/violence Violence, by definition , is not always physical.

The same dictionary that defines literally as both literal and not literal. Dictionaries are descriptive not prescriptive, and so they also account for incorrect but common usage.

If enough people use literally in that manner than it is indeed correct. This is how language works, regardless if you like the change or not. Languages are always evolving and dictionaries reflect that.

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#347

Post by totalrobe »

randrews wrote: post #308
roystonvassey wrote: post #299

The older I grow, the more I realize that, in its barest essence, we are all 'good' human beings. But, thanks to self-help advice of the kind that aspires to teach you to be 'powerful', 'assertive', 'effective', 'take no for an answer', we are fed ideas that we need to behave/talk differently to be successful. But, it is not what we should be striving for. It is meaningful connections. By treating others the way you…

I would say, other than a tiny minority of sociopaths, we're all good human beings to people we perceive as also being humans. There are plenty of people who are perfectly nice and decent who would think nothing of ripping off a giant corporation for a few bucks because it's a giant corporation and they'll never notice.

Corporations that have paid over $9 billion in wage theft penalties since 2000....https://www.goodjobsfirst.org/sites/default/files/docs/pdfs/...

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#348

Post by floatinthecloud »

Mirioron wrote: post #269
laurex wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NVC is a great framework. I've watched the 9 hour training by Marshall Rosenberg on YouTube more than once, and I keep finding ways that it can be useful in all relationships. It's basically a way to be both non-passive-aggressive and compassionate, while having boundaries. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLPNVcESwoWu4lI9C3bhkY...

> It's basically a way to be both non-passive-aggressive and compassionate But the examples given as "observation" read as passive-aggressive to me. Whether you say "Eleanor procrastinates" or "Eleanor wait to do all her studying the night before the exam" it's still the same thing. If you hear this type of comment regularly (eg you have ADHD) then it'll still affect you negatively.

I completely agree. Several members of my family are NVC practitioners, but I usually hear their comments as passive aggressive. As a result, NVC sometimes seems more confrontational to me due to the effort put into disguising what is said.

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#349

Post by dghughes »

catalogia wrote: post #131
dghughes wrote: post #125

I've seen this and it's fascinating but nobody I mention it to seems interested. So I say to them if anyone is a real-life Spock it's Marshall Rosenberg.

Do many people earnestly want to work with Vulcans? Comparing users of NVC to vulcans seems more derogatory than complimentary.

My reasoning for the compliment is I admire the logic and calm reasoning not lack of emotion. Yes I meant it as a compliment.

Anyone who can calmly deal with successful or complex situations seems wise to me. And often such calm people are highly educated.

Re: Interested in improving your relationships? Try Nonviolent Communication

#350

Post by mikorym »

Uhuhreally wrote: post #263
mikorym wrote: post #262

What if you don't want nonviolent communication? I can think of many examples; an oppressive government, a physically oppressive/abusive relationship or rape, a religously delusional cult, etc. Maybe the assumption is that you are excluding such situations? Sometimes you have to fight for justice. What is your priority, peace or truth? I understand that point 1. should address this, but the opposite can happen as wel…

"when you beat me I feel pain...I don't like to feel pain, perhaps you could stop beating me" "I enjoy inflicting pain...your pain makes me happy...perhaps you could continue feeling the pain I inflict on you"

What I mean is if the other person is oppressive, then you shouldn't give them control over you.
Post reply on HN