[HN Gopher] Be a thermostat, not a thermometer (2023)
___________________________________________________________________
Be a thermostat, not a thermometer (2023)
Author : dillonshook
Score : 282 points
Date : 2024-09-11 23:50 UTC (23 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (larahogan.me)
(TXT) w3m dump (larahogan.me)
| gleenn wrote:
| This metaphor immediately rang true to me but the article is
| definitely worth the whole read. There are a bunch of linked
| articles too which also have some very sound advice. I really
| like a tactic in hard situations which was saying "What I
| learned..." followed by "What I'll do is...". It makes someone
| feel heard and that you'll follow through with some action to
| make someone feel like you have akin in the game with their
| concern. I really liked a lot of other somewhat generic but still
| oft-ignored advice like lean in a bit, make eye-contact, and the
| title which is just that if someone is making you feel off,
| instead of just reacting like a thermometer and also potentially
| aggravating the weirdness, do things that help regulate and
| relieve those human tendencies based on feelings of fear etc.
| Excellent read.
| 8n4vidtmkvmk wrote:
| You'd better follow through and do the thing you said though.
| If you start saying things when people are riled up and then
| don't do it... They're going to notice.
| gleenn wrote:
| I agree, when you say you're going to do something then
| obviously you should also do what you say and say what you
| do. But my guess is even just saying I learned you don't feel
| heard about xyz and I will try to pay more attention to you
| your concerns when you're talking about xyz shouldn't be hard
| to commit to if you care at all about whomever you're talking
| to. Hopefully they are a bit disarmed and realize you're
| trying. I don't think this is a silver bullet, and I think
| the article makes that point at least a few times. The point
| is to try and stabilize and correct the vibe if it isn't
| really justified. If you are going into a warzone then you
| probably need different advice, hopefully this isn't the norm
| though and you aren't a hostage negotiator or something.
| detourdog wrote:
| There is also a class of people that will always provide
| reason or task that is the issue. The list of problems will
| never end and they will never be satisfied.
|
| Some people would rather complain then reflect on their
| inner workings.
| klabb3 wrote:
| Definitely gonna borrow this language, it's a really important
| aspect of social life. I've always been very, very thermometer-
| like, with a strong tendency to mirror which allows me to connect
| with people 1 on 1 easy, but on the flip side I absorb vibes I
| don't want. My coping mechanism is to avoid bad vibes,
| confrontational situations, etc. Even being in a social group for
| long can affect me negatively if the people there have values I
| don't agree with, even if I have no desire to change them. Any
| tips for how to manage that better?
| Trasmatta wrote:
| Therapy helps. Building a stronger sense of self and with it,
| more internal boundaries between your thoughts and beliefs and
| those of others.
|
| I'm this way as well, and it's like your emotions are totally
| porous, absorbing everything from those around you. It's a
| blessing and a curse. Generally stems from a childhood where
| you had to be very in tune with the emotions of your caregiver
| in order to stay safe.
| sethammons wrote:
| Oof. Being in tune with your caregiver hits hard. My mom was
| a manic, bi-polar, depressive person also suffering from
| schizophrenia. I learned to read some situations like you
| mention but toss in some randomness so it gets real dicey.
| hi_hi wrote:
| Thank you. This lines up with my experiences, which I never
| knew were connected. Prefer 1:1, alcoholic mum growing up who
| had good days and bad days. I could tell which it would be
| from the "vibe" when I walked through the door after school
| before seeing anyone.
| jjj123 wrote:
| Wow I've always felt much more comfortable in 1:1 situations
| than group situations, but I never framed it the way you have
| here. Your comment really resonates, thank you!
| dmoy wrote:
| > Make sure you're squarely facing the person
|
| Awww shit that's gonna be hard for my inner Minnesotan. All that
| deep listening stuff needs to be done at a 135-165 degree angle,
| so you're both vaguely looking in the same-ish direction but can
| make occasional side glance eye contact
| 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
| Right? The only way some of us can discuss emotion is if we're
| pretending we're manning the Wall against ice zombies
| vvanders wrote:
| This is giving me strong How to Talk Minnesotan vibes[1] (in a
| good way :D).
|
| [edit] 10:50! https://www.tptoriginals.org/how-to-talk-
| minnesotan/
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Talk_Minnesotan
| from-nibly wrote:
| > Noticing a change in someone's behavior
|
| Well I guess I'll just excuse my ADHD having self outa this one.
| jawon wrote:
| Interesting. I have the exact opposite issue. Hypervigilance
| and all that.
| deisteve wrote:
| While the article has some good points about the importance of
| emotional intelligence and awareness, I'm skeptical about the
| idea that we can simply "choose" to be thermostats. Humans are
| complex and emotional creatures, and our emotions can be
| triggered by a multitude of factors beyond our control. The
| article's suggestions, while well-intentioned, feel like a form
| of emotional labor that can be exhausting and unsustainable. Can
| we really expect people to be constantly "on" and aware of their
| emotional impact on others?
| theultdev wrote:
| It's less emotional labor and less exhausting the more you are
| aware of your emotions.
|
| You can recognize the stimuli and rationalize it before
| becoming upset.
|
| The more you do it, the easier it becomes and the less stressed
| you become.
| deisteve wrote:
| totally understand where you're coming from, but I think
| there's a difference between being aware of your emotions and
| trying to suppress or fake them. The article isn't suggesting
| that we should be constantly 'on' and pretending to be
| someone we're not. Rather, it's about developing self-
| awareness and learning to manage our emotions in a way that's
| authentic and sustainable.
|
| Recognizing the stimuli that trigger our emotions is a great
| first step, but it's not just about rationalizing it away.
| It's about understanding what's driving our emotions and
| learning to respond in a way that's healthy and constructive.
| This takes practice, patience tho
| theultdev wrote:
| I didn't say suppress or fake your emotions, I said to
| rationalize them.
|
| If they are irrational you prevent the emotional knee-jerk
| response in the first place.
|
| If they are rational then you know the root cause to work
| through so you can fix the issue.
|
| For those rational emotional responses, recognizing the
| stimuli can still be helpful. It's still stressing, but you
| know the exact problem and can work to resolve it, the
| opposite of suppressing it.
| deisteve wrote:
| you're advocating for a proactive approach to emotions,
| where we acknowledge and rationalize them to prevent
| irrational responses, while still allowing ourselves to
| feel and work through rational emotions. This approach
| seems to strike a balance between emotional awareness and
| emotional regulation.
|
| I think this is a great way to approach emotions, and
| it's refreshing to see a nuanced discussion about
| emotional intelligence.
| theultdev wrote:
| Thank you, these are things I developed to manage my
| emotions and it's the first time to put them in words, I
| tried my best to serialize it.
|
| The cool thing is, if you do this enough, you can always
| recognize the stimuli.
|
| There's one exception, hormonal imbalance (bipolar,
| seasonal depression, etc.), because there is no stimuli.
|
| But once you realize there is no external stimuli, you
| know it's hormonal. It is then classified as a irrational
| reaction. The difference of an internal irrational
| reaction is it takes more investigation and sometimes a
| few emotional knee-jerk reactions slip through before the
| hormonal cause is detected.
|
| Also the irrational brain can misattribute the imbalance
| and attribute it to an external stimuli, but you can
| immediately correct it with evaluation and communication
| if the misattributed stimuli is a person. (ask for
| clarification, if it's not what you assumed, apologize
| after snapping and solve the conflict immediately).
|
| My wife and I can tell when she's nearing her time of the
| month because it effects both of us. The hormone change
| unbalances us a week or so before sometimes causing
| fatigue or snippiness. It's nice to recognize it as to
| not contribute it the fatigue to burnout or take the
| snapping to heart.
|
| We just overcompensate in communication and directly ask
| what the other person meant to not take something the
| wrong way once we recognize we're in this temporary
| state.
| darby_nine wrote:
| I don't see how recognizing an emotion as irrational
| gives you certainty of calming it. Generally speaking,
| emotions don't arise from a conveniently rational level
| of consciousness. If they did they would be referred to
| with terms ofther than "emotion".
| theultdev wrote:
| > I don't see how recognizing an emotion as irrational
| gives you certainty of calming it
|
| When you realize it's an irrational reaction you
| automatically reprocess the stimuli and get a rational
| reaction.
|
| Let's say someone close to you is unusually quiet and
| short with you. You irrationally think they are mad at
| you or ignoring you because they are being short. That
| makes you feel mad because you didn't do anything to
| them! Upon receiving the feeling you start rationalizing
| the response and realize that you have no evidence that
| they are mad at you and there are many times you don't
| want to talk. You then simply ask them if anything's
| wrong and they say they have a headache! Whew, it wasn't
| about you at all, it was just a headache! You then
| empathize with them and want to help so you ask if you
| can get them some advil and know not to be loud or talk
| too much until they start feeling better (acting
| normally)
|
| > Generally speaking, emotions don't arise from a
| conveniently rational level of consciousness.
|
| What makes you say that? Emotions commonly arise from
| rational thought. There are rational reasons to be
| mad/happy/sad/etc.
|
| But what I'm suggesting though is the opposite, to make
| it a habit upon receiving every powerful emotional to
| verify it with rational thought.
| wruza wrote:
| I don't believe in this theory and my experience with
| therapy suggests it just makes little sense. Emotional
| outbursts (like being startled/angered/in pain) may be
| temporarily irrational your own logic-wise, but your
| regular emotional background absolutely reflects what you
| actually believe is happening and the way you think. So
| unless you're doing emotional logging and are really
| managing your beliefs, deep settings, etc afterwards,
| this is simply impossible. I mean you _can_ learn
| therapy, but it's not a knowledge you're born with as a
| regular guy and it's a whole "learn C++ in 21 days"
| thing.
|
| There is a level of being still not broken enough, but
| then emotions aren't a problem in the first place. You
| usually end up trying to manage them when you're already
| lost and what people do is simple suppressing, thinking
| that's how "adults" do.
|
| To be clear, I provide no answer to this thread, only a
| comment.
| theultdev wrote:
| > Emotional outbursts (like being startled/angered/in
| pain) may be temporarily irrational your own logic-wise,
| but your regular emotional background absolutely reflects
| what you actually believe is happening and the way you
| think.
|
| Yes your emotional background reflects what you believe
| is happening, but you can correct your belief if you
| analyze and rationalize the emotional response when you
| feel it, which then updates your emotional background.
|
| > So unless you're doing emotional logging and are really
| managing your beliefs, deep settings, etc afterwards,
| this is simply impossible.
|
| That's exactly what I'm suggesting you do.
|
| Upon receiving every major emotional reaction you make it
| a habit to analyze it immediately afterwards.
| wruza wrote:
| I find it very hard to impossible to do immediately
| afterwards. I can detect it, which is somewhat obvious,
| and write down the situation, but finding the source of
| it immediately I find unrealistic.
|
| Either we talk about different things here, or I lack
| some Sherlock Holmes level skills that you have.
|
| Anyway, if something bothers me that hard, making it
| unbother me is an improvement to work in a stupid
| situation, not self-normalization.
|
| For example, recently I got frustrated when an
| inexperienced relative wrongly measured airport hand
| baggage (pure geometric cluelessness) and insisted
| airport will do it that way too. I find this frustration
| absolutely normal and don't really want to get rid of it,
| cause it's immediately actionable and the response is
| correct-ish.
|
| Otoh, I successfully defeated my non-actionable fear of
| being late, but it took me a couple of advanced
| techniques I didn't even know existed, some movie-level
| talk to your childhood stuff.
|
| So there's so much to it that I just don't see how to
| "just do afterwards" (at least it sounds like that).
|
| Again, feels we are talking different things here, not
| sure. And sorry for the stream of consciousness.
| theultdev wrote:
| I coded my thought process of a specific example if it
| helps clarify what I'm talking about:
|
| https://gist.github.com/TheUltDev/fc8386e42205504c55d1cf2
| 127...
|
| (as this is a state of mind and logic thing, a program of
| state and logic is a better way to describe it vs words)
| aspenmayer wrote:
| > Otoh, I successfully defeated my non-actionable fear of
| being late, but it took me a couple of advanced
| techniques I didn't even know existed, some movie-level
| talk to your childhood stuff.
|
| Can you elaborate on these techniques?
| wruza wrote:
| The downward arrow (cbt) with elements of self-hypnosis.
|
| You basically log-trace your mind at emotional points,
| including pulling up automatic thoughts (somewhat
| difficult, they tend to escape). Datetime, situation,
| emotion, thoughts, levels. Then intersect it all through
| time, because different situations disturb different sets
| of facets of your problem, but only one facet is primary.
| This discovers intermediate beliefs and coping
| strategies, makes them explicit. And then you logically
| realize your core belief. It may happen quickly or slowly
| (weeks), depends on how conscious you are about it and
| how often it happens.
|
| In my case it was: unable to do anything 4-5 hours before
| an appointment or even a friends meeting. Set up a few
| timers, got ready step by step, doing mostly nothing in
| time buffers. Check for clean clothes, etc. Afraid of
| forgetting time and being late. Coping: long preparation,
| timing processes, checking time in the car. Intermediate
| belief: if I prepare I'll be on time. Core belief: being
| late is atrocious and intolerable.
|
| Realizing is only half the job. To destroy a core belief
| you have to remember how [irrationally] it formed, that's
| where hypnosis kicks in. I couldn't sleep/relax in a
| session, but took homework. Basically before you go to
| sleep you ask yourself "when it was", as if there was
| some entity inside you who could answer. Few minutes
| later it just flashed in pre-sleep in every detail. It's
| akin to thinking "I _will_ wake up at 6:30" and doing so,
| a similar process and feeling.
|
| I was few hours late from school when my grandma waited
| for me and couldn't get to work (strict schedule). She
| was afraid of giving me the keys. I was tired that
| everyone plays after classes and I cannot, so decided to
| just _not care_. She was very angry and terrified, hit me
| and went away like I was an enemy.
|
| Next week after therapy, for the first time in 25 years I
| was being intentionally late to a doctor, said hi, sorry
| for being late. She said it's fine, smiled and asked what
| I came with.
|
| I realize I have serious issues here (like many others
| probably). But I believe either there's no easy way to
| "just reflect afterwards", or these issues aren't really
| that hard to make this process explicit. I, for one,
| don't understand how you get an emotion if a logical
| counter is readily available in your mind. It won't
| happen for me in the first place then. Maybe on the
| contrary, I'm... healthier?
| Suppafly wrote:
| I think you can consciously learn a skill by practicing it
| enough. You can choose to project positivity and like most
| things in life, fake it until you make it.
|
| >feel like a form of emotional labor that can be exhausting and
| unsustainable
|
| There definitely some wisdom in knowing when to draw back for
| your own sanity.
| deisteve wrote:
| On one hand, I completely agree that deliberate practice and
| intentional positivity can be powerful tools for growth and
| skill-building. The 'fake it till you make it' approach can
| be especially helpful for building confidence and momentum.
|
| I think the key is finding that balance between pushing
| ourselves to grow and being kind to ourselves when we need to
| rest. It's okay to take a step back, recharge, and prioritize
| our own well-being. In fact, that's often where the real
| growth happens - in the moments of quiet reflection and self-
| care.
| jeffhuys wrote:
| I don't know why and I might be wrong, but (parts of) some
| of your comments read exactly like an LLM response, while
| other parts feel like you typing additional stuff "around"
| the response.
| dr_dshiv wrote:
| I got the same vibes, fwiw.
| sethammons wrote:
| > Can we really expect people to be constantly "on" and aware
| of their emotional impact on others?
|
| Of course we can and should. Emotional regulation is a sign of
| maturity and being an adult. Children should be practicing
| emotional control.
|
| Can you be mentally and emotionally wrung out and grace given
| for emotional outbursts? Sometimes. I also have punched a wall
| when I stubbed my toe. We should expect me to not lash out at
| the door and it can still be understandable why I did. I have
| also sat stewing in a mood and it affects those around me. I
| can fix my attitude or I can remove myself for a spell.
| brigandish wrote:
| What is emotional labour?
| rocqua wrote:
| The effort someone chooses to put in to manage and help the
| emotions of others.
|
| It ranges from listening to someone talk about their day to
| driving over at night to a friend who's upset, to organizing
| an entire intervention.
|
| It is often considered to fall more heavily on women.
| Notably, as work that often doesn't fully get redistributed
| when women enter the workforce, much like housekeeping often
| doesn't.
| brigandish wrote:
| Some emotions are tiring - anger, frustration, depression,
| anguish, to name a few.
|
| I can't think of any that involve supporting a colleague at
| work. I could certainly get tired of shenanigans at work,
| but that would be from frustration et al, but support?
|
| Like the other comment that's responded, I just don't see
| the link between the description for the term and the
| situations in either the blog or a workplace.
|
| I've certainly not noticed a difference in the level of
| emotional support given in the workplace by women either.
| Whose emotions are they managing? Men's?
| lynx23 wrote:
| > It is often considered to fall more heavily on women.
|
| Citation needed.
| joelfried wrote:
| Here you go: https://www.simplypsychology.org/emotional-
| labor.html
|
| > Hochschild (1983) suggested that jobs requiring more
| emotional labor are performed primarily by women. These
| jobs typically involve creating feelings of well-being or
| affirmation in others - responsibilities usually assigned
| to women.
|
| Hochschild, A. (1983). 1983 The managed heart. Berkeley:
| University of California Press.
| mock-possum wrote:
| Think of it like the difference between idly leafing through
| a book, versus studying a textbook as if your life depended
| on it - one is an inconsequential pastime, the other is an
| exhausting task made all the more stressful by its
| importance.
|
| Emotional labor is dealing with other people's emotions, not
| in the first sense described in the paragraph above, but in
| the second - paying close attention, thinking critically,
| interpreting what you see and hear and feel in an effort to
| help someone in some way. It's shouldering their emotional
| burden, to some degree, to support them, as best you can -
| same as physical labor might be.
| brigandish wrote:
| I read the blog, and the situations given - which are
| common in most workplaces - wouldn't lead me to compare
| them to a life or death situation in any way.
|
| I also can't imagine thinking that concentrating on
| someone's speech while in conversation with them as taxing,
| beyond the normal difficulties that attempting
| concentration can bring.
|
| Perhaps I'm missing something. The only time I could think
| of such things as _laborious_ would be when faced with
| intransigence or my own frustration, and that 's really
| about not getting my own way.
|
| Isn't it normal to try to have good, productive
| conversations, pay attention to others, and give support
| where needed?
| bfung wrote:
| > I'm skeptical about the idea that we can simply "choose" to
| be thermostats.
|
| Well, it's like most things, it takes practice and time to be
| good at it if natural talent isn't there.
|
| Sure, things out of our control can trigger emotions, but one
| incredible ability of humans is to rationalize those emotions
| and act in more constructive ways than to immediate react back.
|
| It can be quite liberating and fun to understand and process
| these things, much like understanding code and data structures
| in order to recombine them into things you want to achieve.
| grvdrm wrote:
| Completely agree with you. I think (like you) it is about
| VERY deliberate action. My phrase: a conscious turn in the
| other direction.
|
| The more I practice changing or revamping my
| reactions/approaches to situations, the more those things
| improve.
|
| Not everyone will agree but IMO - the skeptic is simply not
| that willing to try. That's ok. But it's the reality.
| theultdev wrote:
| > It can be quite liberating and fun to understand and
| process these things, much like understanding code and data
| structures in order to recombine them into things you want to
| achieve.
|
| This thread actually made me realize it's much easier to
| express this in code vs words since it deals with state and
| logic:
|
| https://gist.github.com/TheUltDev/fc8386e42205504c55d1cf2127.
| ..
|
| This is the my process of rationalization and resolution. The
| flow is the same for all scenarios, but I only coded logic
| for one scenario I described in another comment:
|
| Let's say someone close to you is unusually quiet and short
| with you. You irrationally think they are mad at you or
| ignoring you because they are being short. That makes you
| feel mad because you didn't do anything to them! Upon
| receiving the feeling you start rationalizing the response
| and realize that you have no evidence that they are mad at
| you and there are many times you don't want to talk. You then
| simply ask them if anything's wrong and they say they have a
| headache! Whew, it wasn't about you at all, it was just a
| headache! You then empathize with them and want to help so
| you ask if you can get them some advil and know not to be
| loud or talk too much until they start feeling better (acting
| normally)
| germinalphrase wrote:
| As a topical extension, there are entire therapeutic
| modalities (like Cognitive Behavioral Therapy) that assist
| people in doing this kind of in-the-moment emotional
| reflection and recontextualization. If this sort of thing
| is difficult, seeking out a therapist that specializes in
| these modalities can be helpful (and seeking the support of
| a therapist does not require a person to be 'mentally
| ill').
| dv35z wrote:
| What's the best book on CBT technique that you would
| recommend?
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| "I'm skeptical about the idea that we can simply "choose" to be
| thermostats."
|
| I agree. Try being thermostat to someone who is on meth or
| someone who is drunk.There are many reasons someone is raising
| he temperature in a room.
|
| Not to mention the fact that there might be a good reason some
| one is angry, like low wages, discrimination, or wage theft.
| And you coming in being a thermostat is just prolonging
| everyone's nightmare.
|
| I will tell you, when I saw people doing that BS to me I knew
| right away they were trying to manipulate me. We all have the
| right to be angry and you do not have the right to use
| neurological tricks to manipulate people because you are
| uncomfortable with "weird vibes".
| downWidOutaFite wrote:
| I read this article as intended for an HR or management
| audience whose job is to always be the professional in the room
| since your voice is interpreted as the company's voice.
| patrickmay wrote:
| > Can we really expect people to be constantly "on" and aware
| of their emotional impact on others?
|
| We can expect that of ourselves. It's a skill that can be
| learned and practiced.
|
| "Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space
| is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our
| growth and our freedom." -- Viktor Frankl
|
| I've found that a meditation practice allows me to find that
| space more easily in real life situations. At the very least,
| you'll know when you're being "amygdala hijacked" (per the
| article).
| tyberns wrote:
| I have never heard that quote before. Gonna tuck that away
| for future use because it serves as a great reminder that we
| are not powerless to our emotional response. Its the
| difference between a reaction and a reflex.
| fnord77 wrote:
| things you can't really do on zoom meetings...
| sethammons wrote:
| If this resonated with you, consider reading Nonviolent
| Communication by Rosenberg, the ultimate guide in thermostat-
| speak. You focus on stating unmet needs. Good stuff.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| When I hear people trying to use "Nonviolent Communication" it
| only makes me more angry. It is manipulation and so transparent
| and condescending.
|
| Sometimes communication needs to be violent.
| callmeal wrote:
| I'm reminded of this supposedly ancient proverb I was taught
| in school:
|
| He who raises his voice first, loses.
| johnmaguire wrote:
| What makes you believe that nonviolent communication is
| manipulation? It focuses on ways to hear unmet needs in
| others and to express unmet needs in a way that can be heard
| by others.
|
| Have you read the book by chance?
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| Yes, read the book and my nephew teaches a form of it. It
| balmes the victim for the most part. It reminds of of"you
| are acting hysterical" and gaslighting.
|
| Maybe read some critiques about it.
|
| https://realsocialskills.org/2014/07/17/nonviolent-
| communica...
|
| https://www.collectivelyfree.org/nonviolent-communication-
| pr...
| sethammons wrote:
| The first link, that is a big stretch and misses half the
| response. They almost capture it and then flub to spread
| wrong information.
|
| They got this far:
|
| "I notice that when your partner talks to other men, you
| express feeling hurt and ask her not to. It sounds like
| you feel hurt and maybe even betrayed when she has those
| conversations. I hear that respect is really important to
| you, and you want to feel valued in the relationship."
|
| What they totally missed: Suggesting alternative
| strategies that meet both parties' needs without harm.
|
| "Can we explore ways for both of you to feel respected,
| while also honoring her autonomy and connections with
| others?"
|
| This is NOT emotionally abusive to the woman or lower-
| powered individual in the exchange. This is acknowledging
| the emotions of the abuser and still coming back to
| honoring the woman's unmet needs. These techniques have
| been used between waring tribes with family that has been
| murdered. The book has a particularly harrowing passage
| about NVC saving a near-rape-and-murder victim.
|
| The second link is marginally better but I disagree on
| nearly every point. Instead of writing a counter post for
| each, but to say that overall I think they missed the
| message of the book. They seem set on the word choice and
| power dynamics. Word choice is mostly unrelated: it is
| conveying unmet needs and acknowledging the unmet needs
| of others. Simple as that. And then to go on about body
| language as a point against NVC is strange as the NVC is
| about spoken communication. They are digging for reasons
| to talk against the book. I assume there is some agenda.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| >They are digging for reasons to talk against the book. I
| assume there is some agenda.
|
| You have an agenda as well.
|
| The problem is that you need BOTH parties to engage in
| NVC for it to work. and what happens is the person who
| does not want to use NVC is blamed. This is denying the
| person their agency.
| sethammons wrote:
| I feel that you desire agency on both parties. I believe
| that agency already exists. Like: "Let's play a game"; "I
| don't want to"; .... "ok?"
|
| NVC, yes, is a cooperative framework. The agency is to
| accept that, propose something different, or withdraw
| from communication. This has nothing to do with denying
| agency. It is tooling for communicating needs. I don't
| find the criticism to make sense.
|
| Perhaps you can help me understand by proposing an
| alternative or let me know where I am not understanding
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| >I feel that you desire agency on both parties.
|
| That is such an artificial way of talking and it is
| making me not want to talk to you. You are actively
| cutting of communicating with me if you keep talking to
| me this way.
|
| Now you will blame me, and not yourself.
|
| I have lived all my life, cooperated with people of all
| kinds. Never used NVC.
| sethammons wrote:
| >That is such an artificial way of talking and it is
| making me not want to talk to you. You are actively
| cutting of communicating with me if you keep talking to
| me this way
|
| cool, communication for the win and I can modulate to
| hopefully better understand you. how would you like to be
| acknowledged or how would you like me to check
| understanding? NVC is a framework to do that and you
| don't want artificial sounding exchanges. Cool. Is this
| still artificial? I don't really know. I am attempting to
| communicate with you and that takes checking
| understanding. I haven't blamed you for anything. And,
| yeah, as a throw back to the previous comment, I have an
| agenda: I am trying to understand and evaluate criticisms
| against NVC and I am not convinced by what those posts
| said. I want to know these because if I am giving bad
| advice by recommending NVC I want to stop.
|
| You may have cooperated with people of all kinds, but in
| this exchange, I feel I am working extra hard to
| understand your position and finding cooperation
| difficult.
|
| > Perhaps you can help me understand by proposing an
| alternative or let me know where I am not understanding
|
| >> I have lived all my life, cooperated with people of
| all kinds. Never used NVC.
|
| I think you are attempting help me understand your
| position, but I am having to stretch. You've cooperated
| and self-report to never have used NVC. OK, and what am I
| supposed to take away from that? I never said that NVC is
| the only way cooperation can be achieved. The claim is
| that by stating unmet needs and communicating those in a
| way that both parties can acknowledge and understand,
| that conflicts can be resolved. Conflicts can be resolved
| lots of ways, including walking away. Cooperation can
| happen even when you don't intend it. NVC is but a tool
| and one that I am still not sure what you object too.
|
| Are you against the suggested words and sentence
| structure proposed by NVC? If so, again, I think that is
| missing the point.
| johnmaguire wrote:
| I won't repeat what the sibling commenter has stated
| except to say that I agree that these authors seem to
| have missed the point.
|
| Anecdotally, my partner and I have found a ton of value
| in it within our relationship.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| "Serenity now, insanity later."
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJVIX-4OyT0
| sethammons wrote:
| in my quest to better understand your position, I once
| again believe you missed the point. I think you are
| suggesting that NVC is artificial and smooths over chaos
| that needs to be experienced else things go worse later.
| NVC is expressly about not repressing your feelings and
| letting them be known via your unmet needs. Again, if I
| got this wrong, you are invited to correct me.
|
| Mostly I'm just bored between meetings and not enough
| time to push anything productive forward and having a
| back and forth is pleasantly distracting. Might not reply
| again since work is nearly beckoning.
| nicbou wrote:
| I haven't read NVC, but "stating unmet needs" is a strong
| aspect of "No more Mr. Nice Guy" and "Models". Being up front
| about who you are and what you want is a lot more likely to
| work than being nice and hoping your needs are met in the way
| that you expect. It's also a way to cut your losses early if
| the other person is not interested in providing whatever you're
| after.
| sethammons wrote:
| > You're being a thermometer. When they're subtly giving off
| weird vibes--they're frowning, answering your questions with
| fewer words than normal, etc.--you've noticed that their
| temperature is different.
|
| And if you are doing this as a coping mechanism from having an
| unstable parent and you are like me (also maybe a bit of adhd):
| you internalize the person's chilled behavior and often assume it
| is your fault.
|
| In case you need to hear it: You are not responsible for other's
| emotions (though you are responsible for your actions)
| dailykoder wrote:
| I know this and I have learned more than enough about it to
| internalize it, but it just doesn't work. I can't find a way to
| stop the automatic jumping to conclusion and self blame.
|
| It takes hours to get over it and that's exhausting. I am
| trying for years to find a way out, but it just hasn't
| internalized yet
| andruby wrote:
| Any tips for the person on the other side?
|
| I often mention something without implying blame (or even
| assuming blame), but it's still processed that way.
|
| I'm trying to be conscious of this though.
| dailykoder wrote:
| I don't think there is much you can do. Everyone has
| different trigger points and a different past. Personally I
| often feel misunderstood or not taken seriously. So from my
| point of view just be genuine, maybe paraphrase what you
| heard (just a tiny bit) and the usual "start with something
| positive first". The latter can be hard for me too though
| because then I might think "no they can't have such a
| positive view of me" - it's complicated and I even have a
| hard time explaining it.
|
| So no real tips, sorry. "we" just have to learn how to live
| with it ourselves
| detourdog wrote:
| If this is a consistent person in your life or a partner.
| The communication has to improve. Improving communication
| maybe impossible but I think it's the only way.
| lynx23 wrote:
| I have given up on people that can not process criticism.
| Its a vital aspect of working together, or even just living
| together. If everything I say is put on a scale, I simply
| dont interact with such people anymore. If you can't take
| criticism without the blame-game, you're not worth my time
| and effort.
| fragmede wrote:
| > If you can't take criticism without the blame-game,
| you're not worth my time and effort.
|
| QFT
| willismichael wrote:
| Quantum Fourier Transform?
| johnmaguire wrote:
| Hard to say exactly what you're dealing with, but you could
| take a look at Nonviolent Communication.
| detourdog wrote:
| What one has to figure out is where this pattern developed
| (most likely childhood). Once I can internalize why my
| emotions develop I experience a distance from the current
| situation. The distance removes the emotional reaction
| leaving me with an intellectual understanding.
| nicbou wrote:
| I have the same problem and I made a _lot_ of progress this
| year and the last. A few things that help in no particular
| order:
|
| - Write things down. Over time you start noticing patterns
| that help you diagnose and fix the issue. I particularly love
| the post-mortem when returning from a house party, and how
| batshit itsane it reads 5 days later. I also have a play-by-
| play diary of me thinking I was misreading a person's
| intentions and agonising over every interaction. We've been
| together for a few years. It's fun to rewind the tape and
| laugh at your own irrationality.
|
| - Treat your overreaction to social cues as irrational, and
| deal with it accordingly. Every Spring, my body tells me that
| grass pollen will kill me (hay fever), but I just ignore that
| signal as irrational. I now handle my hasty conclusions the
| same way.
|
| - Indifference is the default. Most people won't be excited
| about you, but they're a very long way from disliking you. A
| lack of enthusiasm does not mean anything about you.
|
| - Talk to others about it. When I started talking about my
| insecurities to close friends, they told me just how wrong I
| was, with lots of backing evidence. They were genuinely
| surprised that I thought any of those things. It's a bit like
| how a friend of mine was super self-conscious about something
| on his face, and a year in, I had never even noticed it.
| grvdrm wrote:
| > Treat your overreaction to social cues as irrational, and
| deal with it accordingly.
|
| This is so smart.
|
| Even broader, take your overreactions to most things as
| irrational. I am using this recently to rewire myself on
| all sorts of things and it's quite transformative.
| nicbou wrote:
| Journaling helps a lot with that because you catch
| yourself writing about the same emotions in the same
| contexts. The predictability of it makes it easier to
| process rationally.
| watwut wrote:
| > You are not responsible for other's emotions (though you are
| responsible for your actions)
|
| I know you do not mean it this way, but I really dislike this
| saying. It is not even true, actually.
|
| The most frequent use of this is people who are being, well,
| jerks, trying to argue that when people feel bad after being
| put down, insulted or treated with passive aggression, it is
| their own fault.
|
| If people feel bad after your actions, yes in many
| circumstances you are responsible.
| Loughla wrote:
| So much of today's self-help (and a lot of therapy styles)
| seems to be focused on selfish, self-centered behavior.
| bgilroy26 wrote:
| I think different senses of responsibility are under
| discussion
|
| The parent comment I believe was saying that we _do not_
| orchestrate other people 's emotions and you are saying that
| we _do_ impact other people 's emotions and both can be true
| watwut wrote:
| The whole article this discussion is under is all about
| intentionally orchestrating other peoples emotions.
| sethammons wrote:
| If you are acting like a jerk, that is an action, and I
| expressly put that you are responsible for your actions.
|
| You punch someone and they are angry: your action is related.
| You arrive at work and say hi to your boss as they barely
| acknowledge you and are in a mood: you should not default to
| "what did I do wrong and how do I fix it oh god I am gonna
| get fired" - while it may also still be appropriate to try to
| cheer them up.
| maroonblazer wrote:
| A pithy little saying I learned when just starting out in my
| career:
|
| "What you say, and what you do, says nothing about me, and
| everything about you."
| ddmf wrote:
| Rejection Sensitive Dysphoria is so hard to combat at times -
| even if medication helps.
| osigurdson wrote:
| I just hate this kind of stuff. Good for you if you can create a
| consulting business out of stating the obvious I suppose. It is a
| drain on the economy however.
| kettleballroll wrote:
| > Good for you if you can create a consulting business out of
| stating the obvious I suppose.
|
| In my experience, tech problems are a lot easier to solve than
| people problems, and a lot of things that don't go well in a
| project turn out to be people problems. E.g. here are a few
| issues I encountered in my current project at work in the last
| month: "their framework makes assumptions that don't apply to
| our code, so we reimplemented the metrics instead of trying to
| integrate their version" or "the data was labelled wrongly, so
| we had to work around that", or "this coding convention is
| slowing us down". Once I tried digging down, it turns out they
| were all people problems in disguise, and they could all be
| solved by "stating the obvious". Do you never encounter issues
| on team / across teams, where in the end it turns out a lot of
| issues are just people not talking to each other or
| misunderstanding each other? If things are too hairy, I can
| definitely see the value in an external consultant helping
| disentangle these sort of problems.
| hackit2 wrote:
| > where in the end it turns out a lot of issues are just
| people not talking to each other or misunderstanding each
| other?
|
| What makes a huge difference is how you frame your
| interactions. If you extrinsic your interactions you're all-
| ways going to come away with a lack of agency, stress and/or
| frustration. if you intrinsic your interactions, you're going
| to be more in control, accountable, and over-all indifferent
| to other people.
|
| For example well at work, I'm being compensated to
| participate in the organization to work towards its goals,
| wants, needs and/or desires. Those have nothing to do with
| me, nor do i really care about it. I will engage with people
| at work, colleagues and managers, how-ever if later they
| don't volunteer engage back - such as being cordial, I don't
| re-engage because I consider it to be intrusive.
|
| Now let say you have co-workers who have a glaring
| communication problem. It it pretty obviously that you can do
| anything about it. So you engage their manager of lack of
| communication, and lack of professionalism. If their manager
| doesn't want to rectify the problem then you communicate it
| with your manager but at the same time be professional about
| it that you do not have the capacity to deliver on the
| deliverables within your current roles. This opens the door
| to opening a dialog to reviewing your remuneration or
| compensation package that includes the new responsibilities.
| osigurdson wrote:
| I bet these things would have worked themselves out on
| their own. The main thing is to have an ultra crisp vision.
| watwut wrote:
| In my experience, these dont help to solve people problems.
| They are motivational feel good advice. In practice, they
| will exhaust you and dont work in the long term.
|
| And what they actually make is to create situation in which
| your needs and things you want to achieve are less and less
| met. Or just make you look unauthentic to others - they will
| cease to believe your projected emotions.
| awelxtr wrote:
| Most self-help is easy to write and difficult to apply,
| specially if it's written in a generic matter like in a
| book or in a blog post.
|
| This doesn't mean it can't be helpful. I know because some
| self help knowledge in the past has helped me.
| watwut wrote:
| It is not just difficult to apply. If you actually try to
| apply it and do, it setups you for fail. Because it is
| feel good instead of real and omits real world
| constraints.
|
| Take this article - sometimes, fairly often, the "bad
| vibes" are a correct observation of the other persons
| attitude, opinions and intentions. Sometimes people are
| in fact hostile or cold, whether for personal,
| professional, fair or unfair reasons.
|
| This part of the advice, if you apply it, is making you
| helpless and powerless. And conversely, it over time make
| you come across as manipulative person, because that is
| what you do majority of the time.
| marmaduke wrote:
| > stating the obvious
|
| What is obvious is wildly different among people. For instance,
| it was obvious to me that the article was sharing some ideas
| freely, and those ideas are ones which are not obvious to
| everyone in the workplace.
|
| "It's obvious" is a rhetoric which puts the person who's not
| getting it on defense. Usually it's pretty counterproductive
| too.
| awelxtr wrote:
| > stating the obvious
|
| If interpersonal relationships were obvious we would not need
| abuse laws nor CPS.
| lynx23 wrote:
| They are usually obvious, except for psychopaths and people
| struggling with autism. The latter is rather prominent in
| tech, so we see more of these issues then outside of tech.
| awelxtr wrote:
| I had selfsteem problems growing up derived from my
| narcissistic mother.
|
| What am I then? Autistic or psycopath?
| rocqua wrote:
| I loved the article, but something about it felt off.
|
| The content (good) didn't match what I would expect from the
| style. The writing style reminde me of a mix off business advice
| and aggrandizing self-help. My expectation with that is sweeping
| generalizations, just-so annecdotes, and not saying very much,
| whilst not backing up what you are saying with sound reasoning
| either.
|
| Somehow this article had that writing style, without those
| problems. It made it a rather dissonant experience, because I was
| looking for the catch, what I was being sold, the anecdote that
| is almost certainly a lie, and the overly strong conclusion. But
| that never came, and instead I find myself believing.
|
| And yet, the dissonance remains. I have a little worry that the
| swindle was just better this time. It's a weird feeling, and not
| one I had before.
| trabant00 wrote:
| There's an unspoken premise here and I'm going to question it.
| Avoiding tension, conflict, hard words and other things of the
| sort is not always the right choice. Sometimes letting conflicts
| play out gets you the best outcome with the least amount of
| suffering. Just like ripping off a band-aid.
|
| There's plenty of times when wining a conflict is far better than
| avoiding it. And I see articles like this, books like Nonviolent
| Communication, ideas like "emotional intelligence" (check it out,
| no such thing exists) - as misguided as it always puts you in the
| defensive/de-escalating role even when you might be better served
| by letting things play out or even attacking, baiting your
| opponent into attacking, etc.
|
| Violence is sometimes the right answer. When to apply it and when
| to avoid it is the hard question. But we didn't evolve an
| amygdala for nothing, and especially not for a "coach for
| leaders" (what the hell is that?) to tell us to always ignore it
| as an unquestioned premise for a promotional blog post. Because
| leaders should not always shy away from conflict, that much
| should be pretty crystal clear.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| Yes, agree. This is all a continuation of the Positivity Cult.
| Anger is a method of communication that is greater than words,
| and it puts the explanation point at the end of some of the
| most important statements.
|
| Just read this:
|
| I need help.
|
| I need help!
| b3lvedere wrote:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vivEzQUGHOQ
| wruza wrote:
| _What I learned is that that last email didn't do a good job
| explaining the changes, so what I plan to do is start a forum for
| folks to post their questions and our CEO will answer them every
| Tuesday._
|
| I know it's only an example, but hahahahahahahaha, ha. Start with
| something realistic if you do that. The worst thing you can do is
| to teach them you're a bag of funny promises.
| xnorswap wrote:
| At a former company we once had an away day workshop where they
| allowed anonymous questions for the company director which
| would show up on a screen for everyone (it was a ~40-50 person
| company).
|
| We were a management consultancy and trialling what they
| thought was cool new tech to use with other companies. ( This
| was a while ago, smart phones were newer and apps were still
| "cool" )
|
| Well, they very quickly learned to never do that again. Even in
| a small company there were a lot of tensions unresolved between
| the lowest and highest rungs. It was a fairly formal
| hierarchical structure where the common worker didn't tend to
| ever interact with the big boss.
|
| "Where's the pay rise we were promised last year?" was perhaps
| the mildest of the embarrassment, and it quickly devolved from
| there.
| b3lvedere wrote:
| Ooh, some lifetimes ago at a company we had a CEO that did a
| company wide presentation where he kept mentioning that the
| shareholders are the most important thing of the entire
| company and we all should do everything to please the
| shareholders. The instant hate towards him could almost be
| touched and tasted.
| pistoleer wrote:
| It is both inspiring and depressing that intelligence is
| not a prerequisite for high up roles.
| b3lvedere wrote:
| Yup
|
| https://www.savagechickens.com/2024/09/decisive.html
| antognini wrote:
| "I don't think you understand what the product is. The
| product isn't the platform, and the product isn't your
| algorithm, either. And it's not even the software. Do you
| know what Pied Piper's product is, Richard?"
|
| "Is... Is it me?"
|
| "Oh God! No! No. How could it possibly be you? You got
| fired. Pied Piper's product is its stock."
| watwut wrote:
| >Where's the pay rise we were promised last year
|
| Sounds like an extremely valid complain if such promiss was
| made last year.
| tgtweak wrote:
| Uncomfortable truths are no less a truth when spoken.
| lynx23 wrote:
| I am going to be downvoted to hell for this, but... After reading
| halfway through the article, I had to check the gender of the
| author. Because, I feel, this is a rather female POV. A lot of
| what she says feels touchy-feely to me and doesnt resonate with
| me at all. Maybe because I am way more inerested in the topic of
| the meeting then the personal feelings and emotions of the
| participants. To the point where I might noticed them, but I they
| mostly dont concern me at all.
| jdthedisciple wrote:
| Nope, you are spot on.
|
| I too noticed pretty quickly that this must be female POV.
|
| You can generally tell even just by the word choices ("spidey
| senses" American women seem to love that phrase for some
| reason, "super <adjective>", "awry", "weird vibes", ...)
|
| Another instant give-away was "now we've got a compounding
| situation" - quite a feminine phrasing. Not judging, I mean it
| sounds almost cute even.
|
| Finally, her idea of "facing each other squarely": a total no-
| no for men (way too much potenial energy, like two massive
| electron beams opposing each other), but OK for women.
| detourdog wrote:
| Your comment makes me question my masculinity. I would say
| the desire to communicate and the feelings expressed were
| feminine. Noee of the phrases you mentioned did I see as
| clues to gender.
| jdthedisciple wrote:
| To be clear I didn't say men _never_ use any of these words
| individually (except for "spidey senses" I suppose).
|
| Just that their frequent and combined usage in this
| particular article made me almost hear _her_ voice in my
| head, including the female cadence and intonation...
| lynx23 wrote:
| "Weird vibes" is what finally made me check the author name
| ... I don't even know what "spidey sense" should mean.
| Manfred wrote:
| I support the goals of the article and I understand that social
| interaction doesn't come natural to all people, but if someone
| would lean in an nod to me like described in the second part I
| would freak out because that feels like sociopathic behavior.
| roshankhan28 wrote:
| i prefer to be a cat. if that makes sense.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| HA! Makes sense to me!
| Night_Thastus wrote:
| Find a warm sunny spot or cozy nook and go there. If the
| location gets uncomfortable, leave. Not terrible advice, all
| considered. Of course you can't always do that in say, a work
| setting.
| patch_collector wrote:
| If the author reads this, I'd like to suggest a change in font.
| At certain scales, the website's font puts emphasis on the cross-
| bar in the letter 'e', and the letter 'g'. It's incredibly
| distracting, and only seems to happen at certain scales, as I
| could 'fix' it by increasing/decreasing the font size.
|
| I'd message this directly, but she doesn't provide a method of
| contact on the site (reasonable).
| tgtweak wrote:
| Generally speaking terrible advice for anyone in such a situation
| in a professional group setting.
|
| If you can sense that someone is tense or "off vibe" in a group
| meeting, you should be able to reasonably determine why. If it's
| not immediately evident and they are not alluding to it in the
| meeting - then you should table the discussion until you are able
| to chat 1:1 with the person.
|
| Not downplaying any of the strategies for being chipper and
| staying positive and being a good vibe... which seems obvious...
| but to push it back on the "bad viber" and dice roll on whether
| you'll be charismatic enough to do it without causing even more
| bad/awkward vibes, I think is unnecessarily risky.
|
| I've been in many meetings where someone seemed "off" but after
| conferring with others more familiar with the situation found it
| it's quite usual and not a sign of anything wrong. Had someone
| intervened there and tried to "discover" the case of the bad
| vibes, it would have amounted to "why are you like this" which is
| not the kind of thermometer input required.
|
| Likewise if someone is being openly confrontational in the
| meeting because they feel strongly about something, the right
| course is for someone else to step up and discuss it without any
| ambiguity or levity - ruling out irrelevant emotions not related
| to the discussion - if the stakes were high enough to merit
| losing face in a meeting, they should generally be high enough to
| discuss and resolve.
|
| My experience has been, in many board meetings and conference
| rooms with C-levels, that the norm for these discussions is
| someone "off vibe" and it's rarely koombayah when there is
| something at stake being discussed. Bringing unnecessary levity
| to a serious and often uncomfortable meeting is taken as a bit of
| an insult to the topic or the opinions being tabled. You can read
| accounts of an Jeff Besoz or Steve Jobs executive meeting and
| glare into this first hand.
| red_admiral wrote:
| Back in the days of slatestarcodex, the comment policy [1] was
| you can comment if your post is at least two of these three
| things: true, necessary, or kind.
|
| This post is all three: what they're describing is true (these
| dynamics in meetings do exist, very often), it is kind (in the
| sense they're giving you a skill to help both yourself and
| others), and I'll give it necessary in the sense it's used in the
| original definition (if you want to get ahead in an organization
| with a nontrivial amount of internal politics - which is most
| places - you need to have at least some of this skill).
|
| And yet, something about this post gives me "weird vibes".
|
| Basically, with a bit of sarcasm you could sum it up as "DON'T BE
| AUTISTIC", and if you are then at least get therapy until you can
| act normal.
|
| When the author says "We [humans] are wired to spidey sense this
| [vibes] stuff", it turns out some humans are above and some below
| the mean in this skill distribution. [2]
|
| And sometimes, in a meeting to decide about how you're going to
| set up your database sharding, it helps the business' bottom line
| if you pay more attention to the database specialist than the
| soft-eye-contact specialist.
|
| (Don't you want to hire people who are good at both? Yes, but
| unless you're really, really lucky, you're going to hit Berkson's
| paradox [3]. And then if you want your databases to run smoothly,
| you're going to have to compromise.)
|
| [1] https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/03/02/the-comment-policy-
| is-... [2] However, the latest research suggest that autistic
| people are perfectly wired to read the room and sense vibes if
| the room is full of other autistic people. It's just one autist
| in a room of neurotypicals, or vice versa, that doesn't go too
| well. [3] https://www.allendowney.com/blog/2021/04/07/berkson-
| goes-to-...
| eimrine wrote:
| Actually the article tells be an air conditioner/heater. Because
| being a thermostat means just leave the awkward meeting.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-09-12 23:01 UTC)