2024 Author: Harry Day | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-17 15:43
Real intimacy begins with dialogue. Not with cute hugs, kisses and Facebook likes. And not even with affectionate words addressed to the interlocutor. It begins when dialogue can occur - that is, where everyone can hear and be heard by others.
Dialogue seems to be very simple. It's just that first someone speaks, and someone answers him. But in fact, in my opinion, dialogue is sometimes very difficult. And that's why.
Do what was not taught
The ability to hear another person is not just hearing words and understanding their meaning, but thoughtfully, empathically, inclusively, as if to take the other's place. At this moment, understand him, understand what he wants to say. And this means that at this moment "slow down yourself", postpone your needs for some time.
And for many people this is extremely difficult to do. After all, how can you do this with others, if, for example, they have never done this to me?
If my parents, for example, did not hear me, they interrupted me in mid-sentence and imposed something of their own, or simply ignored my childhood words as something “nonsense” and stupid. They did not try to penetrate, understand, hear. How can I do the same with other people? No way.
Pseudo-communication and pseudo-dialogue
In the communication of many adults, pseudo-dialogues appear that look like real communication, in form, but due to the inner nature of experiences they do not lead to intimacy. After them, usually, a feeling of loneliness, sadness and wasted time.
What is this pseudo-communication and how to recognize it?
I have identified several types of such dialogue. Perhaps you will find more options by analyzing your own experience. All these options, as I already wrote, in the end should leave a complex unpleasant emotional aftertaste and a feeling of dissatisfaction.
1. "Mine is yours not to understand!" … This type of pseudo-dialogue is based on the fact that the interlocutor initially distorts the meaning of what was said and does not specify details. For example, one says: "I treat these people differently," and the other to him: "I realized that you do not love these people." It is clear that the meaning of what was said has already been significantly distorted, because the internal psychological splitting of the one who listened was triggered. Further more. The interlocutor in the same sentence begins to draw a conclusion from an already distorted phrase. "And since you treat them badly, and I treat them well, then we are no longer friends!" For example, the first participant in the dialogue still makes efforts to explain to the second that “no, I didn't want to say that, I wanted to say this and this,” the chances of being heard increase. But the second interlocutor may not support this signal, and say “yes, I understood everything, I have nothing to explain”, and then the feeling of powerlessness of the first and anger and resentment of the second will remain in the “bottom line”. People did not meet, they were not close, they were not in contact. Although they talked for a while. In this example, it turned out that the first interlocutor was, as it were, more aspiring to be heard and correctly understood. And he took steps towards intimacy and contact with the second. It happens that both the first and the second distort what they hear, and the result is a real mess and in the sediment - mutual resentment, anger and even rage.
2. "Throwing questions" … There is a big difference if the interlocutor clarifies whether he understood correctly (and then this creates contact and dialogue), and if, under the guise of clarification, he tries to show aggression towards another. Of course, any question to a person is already an aggressive action in itself. But the measure and strength of this aggression can be different. After all, a nut can be cracked, for example, gently with a hammer - and eat the core, or you can break it to smithereens.
Here and here: you can accurately clarify the details, or you can obsessively "dig". For example, “I want to eat,” someone says, and the other says to him, “hmm, do you really want to? And how do you want to eat, and why do you want it now? "After a tirade of questions, the first one can really doubt whether he wants to continue eating or not. And then he remains unheard and, of course, not understood. This is a simple example. In life, this often happens on more abstract issues - when someone expresses, for example, their opinion, attitude to something. The notorious "psychological" question "why do you need this?"
3. "Counter-arguments" … Whenever something else is said, the other is used to form one's own anti-view of things. It doesn't matter what is said here. "I love apples" or "I would like to read this book." The interlocutor immediately finds a lot of arguments why apples are not the right thing and this book is not worth attention. “Scientists recently proved that apples are not at all healthy, but pears are. Read it! " Or "there is much smarter literature, and this is not fashionable / not smart / complete nonsense / superficial, etc." The interlocutor's goal is not a dialogue, but a game of self-affirmation. Usually, from inner fear and insecurity.
4. "There is an elder in the garden, and an uncle in Kiev" … This is a kind of "parallel communication". One said something about himself, then the other told him something about himself, not related to the message of the interlocutor. You listened to me, now I am you. The goal is simply to "tell" something. React emotion. And what exactly is there … is not so important. I kind of will listen to you, but then I will have a "moral right" for you to listen to me. It seems like we talked. But, in fact, no one cares about the life of another, maybe there is nothing to do …
Who is capable of dialogue
Confident people are usually capable of dialogue. Indeed, for such a statement of another person, even if it is not combined with their own opinion, is not a threat and does not destroy the picture of the world or the "image of I". It is some alternative to which you can show interest. And - choose to approach further or find other areas of interest.
When the other is a lab rat
It is important to say about such an interesting process as attempts to get into the head of another person, bypassing his free will. "What does he really think?" - the girl asks the psychologist / tarologist / psychic. But not your boyfriend! He won't tell the truth, he will deceive! And what kind of relationship is this, that you need to look for everything through some kind of interpretation of behavior, and not trusting and learning from its author? He wears a green jersey, which means he is an introvert. And in red - an extrovert. And people are looking for a million explanations, never meeting in a dialogue, lively and genuine, with another person.
“I see that you have crossed your arms, you are probably defending yourself against something,” say “advanced” users of psychological sites. And they do not really understand that they are trying to actively penetrate into the territory where it is not clear whether they were invited. For example, it brought you a lot of joy when all and sundry - teachers, parents, classmates - tried to determine what kind of person you are ?! A good boy - a bad boy. Wearing glasses - bespectacled, hunched over - insecure, smiling - well done. All the time under the microscope, all the time they dissect you like a rat.
It would be nice to use the information that you get about a person indirectly, correctly and accurately.
When consulting a psychotherapist, this type of intervention, questions, assumptions or interpretations on his part are appropriate. There, the client's consent has already been given for some "dissection" of his psyche. For this, safe conditions of the client-therapeutic relationship have been created, the psychotherapist has been learning for many years to carefully handle these tools.
In ordinary communication, without asking, becoming a psychologist for another is an attempt to violate his boundaries, aggressively "break into" his territory. And this qualitatively removes from dialogue, from close and trusting relationships.
How to be in dialogue
To build a genuine dialogue, you need to look for a resource in yourself. hearings … Listening and containing (collecting, holding) those emotions and thoughts that arise in response to the interlocutor's statement. They will also take place, but later. And now it is important to "be impressed", to understand what the other wants to say. And only then decide what my attitude to this is. And what is important is to say in response. Authentic dialogue leaves in the soul a sense of fulfillment and satisfaction, joy, gratitude. Even if opinions or needs do not coincide. To be in contact and dialogue can be well learned in psychotherapy groups, where participants gather precisely in order to explore all the failures in communication with each other. In individual therapy, one can analyze how the habit of ignoring another person and, accordingly, oneself was formed. And how to choose to change that.
Recommended:
Bert Hellinger: Purchased At Someone Else's Expense Is Paid By Its Own Losses
Family and clan transmit moral principles, behavioral patterns, coping strategies, career choices, as well as debts, unresolved conflicts, secrets, diseases, irrational fears and premature deaths to a person. First, each person during his life must deal with the "
Someone Else's Opinion What Is The Danger?
And it exists for a person when he "receives" identity from others. And the danger lies in the fact that he will be manipulated, precisely based on the identity that was taken over by him from the external environment. An identity received from the outside is a "
Accept Someone Else's Opinion That Does Not Coincide With Yours
Each person is unique in nature. The thoughts, feelings and actions of different people in response to the same situation will be different. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Why then does it happen that the opposite opinion of yours is difficult to accept?
A Deck In Someone Else's Eye To Understand Yourself
We have heard the saying that a speck in someone else's eye is more visible than a log in oneself. So why do we look at other people's specks of dust, and sometimes turn them into whole decks, discuss from different angles and cannot leave alone?
The Fear Of Being Completely Alone Makes Us Friends With Those Who Do Not Suit Us At All
The fear of being completely alone makes us friends with those who do not suit us at all. With whom you need to constantly bounce to reach his level or to his large-scale self-image. In these relationships, you feel like a "pale moth"
