81–90 of 355 posts
Unbiased evidence is violent to some people. "Don't confront me with evidence, care about how I feel !"
I think non-violent communication is great when you actually have to ask someone to change something about the way they operate in the world. If you want to improve your relationships though, make rule zero "minimize the extent to which you require other people in the world to change."
I've found that some of my most worthwhile relationships have been with people that pushed me out of the comfort zone. I'd say make sure that if you do push people to change, it is for their benefit rather than yours.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've received NVC training and I think using it in this discussion is an ironic way of getting my point across, since the point is that I have no respect for people who use NVC. Suggested course of action: stop talking to people using modes of communication you learned at corporate seminars.
I can see why you feel dehumanized—since you weaponize your words against others, it’s understandable that they would take an exaggerated high ground in their tone with you.
As you said, NVC is good for 'forcing people to do something they don’t want.'
I've read "Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life" and found it helpful in personal & work communication. I _hate_ the name, though. I don't want to suggest to someone that they read about non-violent communication because that suggests they're being violent when they're not. I'd prefer almost any other name. Some better names: "observational communication", "non-judgmental communication", "empathetic communica…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you are empathetic it is easier to force people to do something they don’t want. It costs less political capital and you won’t suffer as much of a backlash.
> 'force people to do something they don’t want.' This is why it unnerves so many people who aren't acclimatized to corporate artificiality.
Brilliant marketing move though, calling it "nonviolent communication", implying that any other form of communication is violent. The only better example of this tactic I've seen is "pro-life" (implying that those who don't want to ban abortion are anti-life).
If you use this conversation style, you will get a bimodal response. Conversations with some people will be a little smoother, but conversations with others will be much worse. To those people, you will come off as assuming that they are weak and can't take criticism. Or worse, you'll come off as a mealy-mouthed phoney.
I cannot emphasize enough just how condescending I find this style of speaking. I think the only way a conversationalist could annoy me more would be to clap between every word.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you give some examples of how you use this? Do you use the words by themselves? If your partner is being overbearing and annoying do you just say “soufflé” and they stop talking?
So if the washer/dryer is on (which is in the kitchen) and one of us is in the kitchen and the other is not, and someone starts talking, nobody can hear so its a reflexive “applesauce factory”, which means at least one person has to move closer to the other so they can hear clearly. Soufflé is typically said like “I’ve had a rough day and I’m peopled-out. I need to soufflé”. “Sure! I’ll let our friends know that it’s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 'force people to do something they don’t want.' This is why it unnerves so many people who aren't acclimatized to corporate artificiality.
It’s a tool like a hammer. You can use it to do good or bad things. Like any form of communication. At least NVC is better at empowering people to get their needs met, compared to the alternatives.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can see why you feel dehumanized—since you weaponize your words against others, it’s understandable that they would take an exaggerated high ground in their tone with you.
Believe it or not, but I'm generally a pretty pleasant person. But when somebody adopts an formal impersonal tone like NVC, they make it clear that they don't see me as their friend and that I shouldn't consider them my friend either. As you said, NVC is good for 'forcing people to do something they don’t want.'
I’m not sure why the “not a friend” part comes into it. Most people I talk to are not my friends. When people who aren’t friends treat me like a friend, it is creepy and alarming.
Nonviolent communication comes up on HN every few months and it's always the same praises and criticisms. I've been on the receiving end of NVC quite a few times in my career, and every single time it comes off as patronizing bullshit. I'd rather people yell at me than couch everything in, "I feel X" or "Would you be willing to Y". When important things must be done well, do you think this sort of language is used? O…
Every single one of the non-violent communication strategies you listed from the article were specifically singled out as things we should never say when asking questions to students. It was actually difficult to get out of the habit, since most of us in the class were used to couching our phrases that way.
By the end of the term, we had all gotten much better at speaking in a direct and pointed fashion, and our teaching abilities showed considerable improvement.