Hint: It often takes more than just 2 people! It's incredibly, structurally difficult to do this (or most kinds of sense-making) in a 2-person system in isolation. It's like saying, "Well, this pH meter says 7.1, and this one says 6.8... which one's right?"
-
-
Prikaži ovu nit
-
If all you've got is those 2, ain't much you can do. You definitely, definitely need to get some more pH meters involved, along with some kind of procedures, to navigate that calibration in a useful way.https://twitter.com/Meaningness/status/1141539586448822272 …
Prikaži ovu nit -
The human sense-making equivalent would be more like coherent parallax. Say you've got 2 different perspectives on an issue, 2 different ways of telling the story & meaning of what happened. You can either fight about it, or try & get the 3D view:https://twitter.com/SarahAMcManus/status/1174007584820531203 …
Prikaži ovu nit -
So 2 people *can* attempt that move, if they're already working from a culture / mindset of seeking a collaborative 3D view of the situation. Sometimes it's necessary to have more trusted folks involved, though, because of blind spots.
Prikaži ovu nit -
Under coercive / authoritarian culture, people often develop unconscious strategies of: - Undermining their own self-trust to preserve relationships
to stay safe
- Or undermining other people's self-trust to maintain control & power
to stay safePrikaži ovu nit -
Both of those strategies completely undermine and interfere with collaborative sense-making & calibration & navigation! Nearly impossible to escape self-reinforcing confusion tangles in an isolated 2-person system, if those patterns are present.
Prikaži ovu nit -
In the example dialogue I linked to at the top of this thread, I described Bob & Alice getting into this 2-person trap (accusation / defensiveness) I described them escaping the trap through talking with other trusted friends, feeling heard, and then coming back into dialogue
Prikaži ovu nit
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Does ‘totally express what’s coming up for you’ include ad hominem attacks, blaming, and describing a narrative rather than an event? If so, then, at the least, it requires a listener who assumes the best, seeks out needs behind charged language, and doesn’t take it personally.
-
Mhm! That's exactly what we're looking at in the linked thread... What kinds of practices avoid provoking listener defensiveness - And what practices help the speaker get in touch with what they're deeply feeling, which may involve wading through a blame swamp?
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.