The most important dynamic in a relationship is trust
The most important way to convene a mutual trust is by communication
Our skill level is important in our effectiveness, and our affectivity in communication
Our integrity about our self-assessment is also crucial in the communication equation
Distillation 𝟷
Do we sacrifice our values for security?
We painfully drift through the day with hope we may have miscalculated but still we wait
Part of our intellect rejects our suspicions
Part of our intellect has faith in the glass half-full
But still we tread upon the uneven grounding in doubt
Wobbling around the cliff on a bluff of loose soil and gravel
The axiom of trust is arguably learned through trials of error
Persons with good role models stand to do better than most
The final challenge is dealing with ourselves
Have we mistaken ourselves for something we are not?
The delusion-fueled pride that is easier to see in somebody else is clear, yet we fail to see it in ourselves which can lead to a lifelong challenge for us
If we are not ourselves, than are we just a ghost of a persona we impersonate?
If we are not honest authentic beings, are we but hollow shells of an adopted person-hood?
The beginning point of meeting anyone worth befriending is someone whom will be themselves
This is not to criticize influences and artistic expression that emulates others
This is an honest expression of yourself as you relate to the world without the contrived and conscripted persona’s we sometimes use for some comedic value per se
We are agency’s of expression and not necessarily artists of expression
Distillation 𝟸
An intellectual and emotional war engaging
Two factions of a mind under assault
A minuscule war that devotes much of our sub-conscious psyche
Would it make a difference if a close friend or loved one failed to understand you, listen to you when you speak, or interact with you as if your thoughts and opinions don’t even merit heeding? When we think our opinions are the only ones worth listening to, we become arrogant and may even become braggarts espousing our thoughts to the world that should hear what we would have to say because our words should be listened to! They come from deep beliefs and have been tested from others with like minds. Right?
Family member communication dynamics usually don’t change unless some meaningful exchanges take place. This is also true for the rest of our relationships in all facets of our associations.
I think it a very arduous experience when someone you have known for many years discounts your input, ignores your thoughts and how you have come to believe in your credulity. When we do not listen to others, we alienate them from an opportunity to be fully heard and understood. Many families are subject to such practices because somewhere in their upbringing they have placed their importance above the other family members. The battle to be right is subject to be central among members who have seldom had a voice in family communications. The typical “college” student who walks away from a class on a particular subject feels empowered with their newfound “learned” information that may subject them to debates in the community. Again think about the bar scene in Good Will Hunting, when the challenges of an elitist arrogant college student belittles the Ben Affleck character before he is subdued by the Matt Damon character in his attempts to impress the nearby friends.
My favorite point made by Damon is the fact that many people do not think for themselves; they regurgitate somebody Else’s ideas pawning it off as their own thoughts. Although they may agree with another person’s belief, and provide supporting evidence on occasion for their arguments, many still fail to think for themselves and go around assuming they have the essence of knowledge and stop further analysis of the intellectual processes. We are not prophetic beings, we are limited in our knowledge and our resources, so we should extend others our full attention before we speak, interrupt, and pass judgement upon another person’s view.
The Oz Principle’s definition of accountability emphasizes the fact that accountability works best when people share ownership for circumstances and results.
Excerpt From: Craig Hickman, Tom Smith & Roger Connors. “The Oz Principle.”
“Who are you?” asked the Scarecrow when he had stretched himself and yawned, “and where are you going?”
“My name is Dorothy,” said the girl, “and I am going to the Emerald City, to ask the great Oz to send me back to Kansas.”
“Where is the Emerald City?” he inquired; “and who is Oz?”
“Why, don’t you know?” she returned, in surprise.
“No, indeed; I don’t know anything. You see, I am stuffed, so I have no brains at all,” he answered sadly.
“Oh,” said Dorothy; “I’m awfully sorry for you.”
“Do you think,” he asked, “if I go to the Emerald City with you that Oz would give me some brains?”
“I cannot tell,” she returned; “but you may come with me, if you like. If Oz will not give you any brains you will be no worse off than you are now.”
“That is true,” said the Scarecrow.
—The Wizard of Oz,
L. Frank Baum”
The book recounts a journey toward awareness; and from the beginning of their journey, the story’s main characters gradually learn that they possess the power within themselves to get the results they want. Until the end, they think of themselves as victims of circumstance, skipping down the yellow brick road to the Emerald City where the supposedly all-powerful Wizard will grant them the courage, heart, wisdom, and means to succeed. The journey itself empowers them, and even Dorothy, who could have clicked her red slippers and returned home at any time, must travel the yellow brick road to gain full awareness that only she herself can achieve her desires. People relate to the theme of a journey from ignorance to knowledge, from fear to courage, from paralysis to powerfulness, from victimization to accountability, because everyone has taken this same journey himself.
The next morning the sun was behind a cloud, but they started on, as if they were quite sure which way they were going.
“If we walk far enough,” said Dorothy, “we shall sometime come to some place, I am sure.”
But day by day passed away, and they still saw nothing before them but the scarlet fields. The Scarecrow began to grumble a bit. “We have surely lost our way,” he said, “and unless we find it again in time to reach the Emerald City I shall never get my brains.”
“Nor I my heart,” declared the Tin Woodsman. “It seems to me I can scarcely wait till I get to Oz, and you must admit this is a very long journey.”
“You see,” said the Cowardly Lion, with a whimper, “I haven’t the courage to keep tramping forever, without getting anywhere at all.”
Then Dorothy lost heart. She sat down on the grass and looked at her companions, and they sat down and looked at her, and Toto found that for the first time in his life he was too tired to chase a butterfly that flew past his head; so he put out his tongue and panted and looked at Dorothy as if to ask what they should do next.
—The Wizard of Oz,
L. Frank Baum”
Victimization has infected so much of our world, from small, inconsequential acts to life-destroying abuses, that it affects us all each and every day. To be sure, the suffering a person inflicts on another poses one of the greatest dilemmas of modern life, yet the shelter of victimization can render the sufferer completely ineffective. Even the most successful people and organizations can fall prey to the virus of victimization.
Accountability: A personal choice to rise above one’s circumstances and demonstrate the ownership necessary for achieving desired results—to See It, Own It, Solve It, and Do It.
THE LION: MUSTERING THE COURAGE TO SEE IT
“Do you think Oz could give me courage?” asked the Cowardly Lion.
“Just as easily as he could give me brains,” said the Scarecrow.
“Or give me a heart,” said the Tin Woodsman.
“Or send me back to Kansas,” said Dorothy.
“Then, if you don’t mind, I’ll go with you,” said the Lion, “for my life is simply unbearable without a bit of courage.”
—The Wizard of Oz,
L. Frank Baum”
THE TIN WOODSMAN: FINDING THE HEART TO OWN IT
“I might have stood there always if you had not come along,” he said; “so you have certainly saved my life. How did you happen to be here?”
“We are on our way to the Emerald City, to see the great Oz,” she answered, “and we stopped at your cottage to pass the night.”
“Why do you wish to see Oz?” he asked.
“I want him to send me back to Kansas; and the Scarecrow wants him to put a few brains into his head,” she replied.
The Tin Woodsman appeared to think deeply for a moment. Then he said: “Do you suppose Oz could give me a heart?”
“Why, I guess so,” Dorothy answered.
—The Wizard of Oz,
L. Frank Baum”
THE SCARECROW: OBTAINING THE WISDOM TO SOLVE IT
“Who are you?” asked the Scarecrow when he had stretched himself and yawned, “and where are you going?”
“My name is Dorothy,” said the girl, “and I am going to the Emerald City, to ask the great Oz to send me back to Kansas.”
“Where is the Emerald City?” he inquired; “and who is Oz?”
“Why, don’t you know?” she returned, in surprise.
“No, indeed; I don’t know anything. You see, I am stuffed, so I have no brains at all,” he answered, sadly.
“Oh,” said Dorothy; “I’m awfully sorry for you.”
“Do you think,” he asked, “if I go to the Emerald City with you, that Oz would give me some brains?”
“I cannot tell,” she returned; “but you may come with me, if you like. If Oz will not give you any brains, you will be no worse off than you are now.”
—The Wizard of Oz,
L. Frank Baum”
DOROTHY: EXERCISING THE MEANS TO DO IT
Oz, left to himself, smiled to think of his success in giving the Scarecrow and the Tin Woodsman and the Lion exactly what they thought they wanted. “How can I help being a humbug,” he said, “when all these people make me do things that everybody knows can’t be done? It was easy to make the Scarecrow and the Lion and the Woodsman happy, because they imagined I could do anything. But it will take more than imagination to carry Dorothy back to Kansas, and I’m sure I don’t know how it can be done.”
—The Wizard of Oz,
L. Frank Baum”
The information to better relationships is not the challenge, since there are many sources that can help heal relationships that need mending. The problem is the recognition (“See it”) aspect of the dynamic. If you do not understand your disposition, you will never have the motivation to “own it, or solve it, or do it” in any of your dealings.
Knowing others is wisdom, knowing yourself is enlightenment.
Lao Tzu
Two tadpoles are swimming in a pond. Suddenly one turns into a frog and leaves the pond. Upon the frog’s return to the water, the tadpole sees the frog and asks, “Where did you go?”
“I went to a dry place, ” answers the frog.
“What is ‘dry’?” asks the tadpole.
“Dry is where there is no water,” says the frog.
“And what is ‘water’?” asks the tadpole.
“You don’t know what ‘water’ is?” the frog says in disbelief. “It’s all around you! Can’t you see it?”
The moral of the story: To understand others you must first understand yourself.
Extending the analogy, in the “pond of culture” values and assumptions are analogous to water. So immersed are we that we take them for granted. The tadpole can’t understand water until it leaves the pond and experiences dry, just as I can’t understand my own culture until I experience another.
This is the essence of gaining a cross-cultural perspective: it lifts you out of the pond, and in doing so raises sensitivity to others. Understanding other cultural perspectives raises self-awareness, which in turn creates favorable conditions for communication and cooperation.
Advice given from a sibling, parent, or a friend can be a troubling liability and will probably meet resistance from the recipient if it is unwelcome. They may wish to impart wisdom to aid you, but many times we do not benefit from having another person give us advice unless it is sought out in the first place. We in defiance of these verbal gems may just be able to figure it out ourselves, yet we are often stifled in the process when others impose their own thoughts upon our concerns. For me, the purpose for telling others my struggles is not so much in asking them for their opinions and seeking out their counsel, as it is rather to hear myself working through the episode aloud and gain an empathetic allegiance from others knowing that I am perfectly capable of solving most of life’s curve balls.
If indeed they do listen to us, the act of which becomes a powerful talisman, can allow us to become silently supported without intervention of another opinion, and use our creative powers to free ourselves from the binding structures of our own creations. They wish no harm to us, and they only want to help, but in replying to us by way of offering us guidance can lead to complete communication failure. They are diminishing their respect for us and only promoting their solutions to “our problems”, something they do not own, nor in most cases have any involvement with.
People become transfixed into solving problems, and often make the mistake of offering their opinions about how to “fix” the problems other people are having when hearing their narratives. Unfortunately these offerings only bring about a convoluted result. They diminish the other person in that others often reach out for “understanding”, not necessarily soliciting others for information on “how” to fix the situation they are in. Many times our situations do not need “fixing”. Contrarily, I contend that the telling of our agitations to others in the presence of being “understood” elevates the psyche with strong medicinal factors to those that are ailing from these vexations. It is not that we are incapable, it is only that we need understanding and thus supported in the process of listening over hearing any opinions on what the solutions may be to our healing.
If we lose our audience, we lose our trust in them. My belief is largely based on my studies as an undergraduate in psychology. I am disposed to thinking that Carl Rogers’ approach in his consultations was key in establishing a healthy working dynamic in communication. Rogers believed that a therapist who embodies these three critical and reflexive attitudes will help liberate their client to more confidently express their true feelings without fear of judgement.
Congruence – the willingness to transparently relate to clients without hiding behind a professional or personal facade.
Unconditional positive regard – the therapist offers an acceptance and prizing for their client for who he or she is without conveying disapproving feelings, actions or characteristics and demonstrating a willingness to attentively listen without interruption, judgement or giving advice.
Empathy – the therapist communicates their desire to understand and appreciate their clients perspective.
To do this, the client-centered therapist carefully avoids directly challenging their client’s way of communicating themselves in the session to enable a deeper exploration of the issues most intimate to them and free from external referencing.Rogers was not prescriptive in telling his clients what to do, but believed that the answers to the patients’ questions were within the patient and not the therapist. Accordingly the therapists’ role was to create a facilitative, empathic environment wherein the patient could discover the answers for him or herself. If we draw a line of comparison to human relationships in general, the implications and successful communication dynamics are largely influenced by the work achieved from Rogers.
It is my bias, my understanding, and my study that have led me to conclude that human communications are indeed a highly esteemed skill to employ. I am by no means an expert, I am by no means an authority, but when my inner fortitude becomes subject for an outsiders quibble (no matter how well intended they may be); and I find myself hearing the feedback from those whom may want to engage me with their psychological summations and epilogue’s, I lose all confidence in their credulity and am fully disenchanted.
“The Sound Of Silence”
Hello darkness, my old friend,
I’ve come to talk with you again,
Because a vision softly creeping,
Left its seeds while I was sleeping,
And the vision that was planted in my brain
Still remains
Within the sound of silence.
In restless dreams I walked alone
Narrow streets of cobblestone,
‘Neath the halo of a street lamp,
I turned my collar to the cold and damp
When my eyes were stabbed by the flash of a neon light
That split the night
And touched the sound of silence.
And in the naked light I saw
Ten thousand people, maybe more.
People talking without speaking,
People hearing without listening,
People writing songs that voices never share
And no one dared
Disturb the sound of silence.
“Fools,” said I, “You do not know –
Silence like a cancer grows.
Hear my words that I might teach you.
Take my arms that I might reach you.”
But my words like silent raindrops fell
And echoed in the wells of silence
And the people bowed and prayed
To the neon god they made.
And the sign flashed out its warning
In the words that it was forming.
And the sign said, The words of the prophets are written on the subway walls
And tenement halls
And whispered in the sound of silence.
You must be logged in to post a comment.