Readers of this blog know that I have put forth a model of how to respond maturely to criticism. To help readers to rate their own skill level, and that of others, I have, in earlier posts, outlined five levels of maturity. Level 1 is viewed as the most immature level, level 2 is viewed as a little more mature, and so on. Let’s take a quick look at the first four levels:
Four Levels of Responding to Criticism
1. This level requires displaying one or more of the following:
Weeps or sobs with tears or pouts
Physically attacks the criticizer
Damages property
2. This level requires displaying one or more of the following:
Insults the criticizer (either with words, hand gestures, the sticking out of a tongue, the rolling of the eyes, or smirks)
Glares at the criticizer
Threatens the criticizer
Punches, kicks, or throws an object without physically hurting someone or damaging anything
Criticizes the criticizer without first fully addressing the original criticism.
3. This level requires displaying one or both of the following:
Displays defensiveness without directly insulting the criticizer (raising voice’s volume or pitch)
Displays a lack of interest either by verbally indicating this, or with nonverbal cues, or complete silence.
4. Level 4 individuals listen to the criticizer in a supportive, warm, friendly style, and then make it clear that they fully understand what was said. Moreover, they put the criticizer at ease by making statements that indicate that the wise learn from criticism. Some time is spent on showing that they are thinking about the criticism. If, after thinking about the criticism the criticism is deemed to be correct, they make a statement frankly indicating, “I can see your ideas have merit and I intend to use them in the future.” If they are not sure if they agree, they make a statement indicating that they are very interested in what was said, plan to think a little more about this over the next few days and then they will be ready to discuss this further. If, after thinking about the criticism, the criticism is deemed to be incorrect, a statement is made designed to disagree without being disagreeable. More specifically, a sense of humor, some listening in a caring way and a few smiles help to traverse rough terrain. As the episode winds down, the criticizer is encouraged to feel comfortable communicating suggestions in the future.
The Most Immature Level
As you can see from the description of level 1, if you respond to criticism with weeping or sobbing with tears, this is viewed as among the responses viewed as very immature. I have placed this type of response at level 1 for three reasons.
First, I recalled that when I was very young, at times when I was criticized I would start to cry. As I became older, I didn’t cry as much to such provocations. And now, even when facing the most harsh levels of criticism, I’m pretty cool with it. From these recollections, it seemed to me that I had gone through some developmental levels as I became at least physically more mature, and part of this involved a reduction in crying when criticized.
Second, as I spoke to others, I found that this developmental change of crying less and less in the face of criticism as they became older is rather typical.
Finally, when I observed people crying in response to criticism, often people said things like the person was a cry baby or acting like a baby. Since I have argued that one reason to respond to criticism in a manner that matches the more mature levels is because it increases the respect people have for us, it didn’t make sense to put crying into one of the higher level descriptions when it appeared to decrease the respect that people had for the criers.
But, since I came up with the five levels of maturity, I have met some individuals who seem rather remarkably mature to me in many ways, and yet they have revealed to me that they find themselves crying quite often when they are criticized. They say that they are very sensitive individuals, that they don’t hurt anyone or anything when they go through this experience, and that I should consider removing crying from the description of the lowest level.
Well, therefore, let me propose a change to you, my readers, and see what you think.
Proposed Change
Weeping, sobbing and crying will only be viewed as the lowest level of maturity if the person responding to criticism does nothing else but that, or if he or she does that along with the other lowest level responses such as physically attacking the criticizer or damaging property. If, after crying, he or she then begins to display responses consistent with level 4 or 5, crying will no longer be viewed as a sign of immaturity.
Although I could make this change after I get some feedback, I hasten to point out that it won’t change the fact that many people will still consider crying in the face of criticism as a sign of immaturity. Some will lose respect for those who cry.
Perhaps these sensitive individuals can help to reduce the lack of respect that they might encounter. They can explain that their sensitivity helps them to more deeply consider the criticism. Moreover, they might suggest that for people who feel uncomfortable around someone crying, they can provide the criticism at first by email, snail mail or voice mail. This will allow the sensitive person time to process the criticism. Then, a follow-up meeting to further process the criticism can be arranged.
I hope to hear from readers on this.
My Best
Jeff
——————–
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
“Left turn!” hollers the drill sergeant to his new recruits.
Private Smith begins to turn right, but catches his mistake as he notices the other recruits turning in the correct manner. He manages, although a bit clumsily, to end up turning left.
“Boy, don’t you know your left from your right?” the drill sergeant shouts in Private Smith’s face.
“Yes, Drill Sergeant.”
“I’m so glad to hear that, boy!” shouts the drill sergeant. “Now listen-up you stupid maggot! If I order you to turn left, you turn left! Do you got that, boy?!”
Yes, Drill Sergeant.”
“If I catch you turning right again when I order you to turn left I’m going to have you scrubbing the latrine with a toothbrush for a week. Do you got that, boy?!”
“Yes, Drill Sergeant!”
In the above scenario, we see an example of a sergeant providing criticism, and as he does so, he shouts, insults and threatens Private Smith. The army leadership believes that for this type of situation this style of providing negative criticism is helpful.
How does the army’s views on providing negative criticism compare to mine?
Providing Negative Criticism: Comparing My Approach with that of the Army’s
Regular readers of this blog know that I have presented a post titled, “Providing Negative Criticism: Five Levels of Maturity.” If you check that post out, you will see that the sergeant’s style appears to most closely match the level 3 description, which is as follows:
3. The criticizer clearly states the criticism with enough detail so the criticized person, if he or she wills, can improve the behavior, idea, or appearance, but couples it with glares, insults, shouts, or threats that are not about bodily harm.
Here’s an example of a style of providing negative criticism that matches level 3:
A level 4 style of providing criticism, that is, one level more mature than level 3, is described as:
4. The criticizer states the criticism without bodily attacks, damaging property, glares, insults, threats, or shouts, and with enough details so that the criticized person, if he or she wills, can improve the behavior, idea, or appearance. If the person receiving the criticism becomes defensive or angry, the criticizer empathizes without returning glares, insults, threats, or shouts.
Here’s an example of a level 4 style of providing negative criticism:
You are not likely to see anything that looks like a level 4 style of providing negative criticism coming out of a drill sergeant’s mouth during a training situation if he or she is speaking to a private.
And so, it looks like my level 5 model for providing negative criticism runs counter to the army’s view, at least in some situations. But before we conclude this, let’s first take a quick look at how a level 5 style is described:
5. When the criticizer provides criticism, he or she does so in a manner very similar to a level four response, but beforehand, the criticizer considers the person who is the target of the criticism, and the situation that he or she is in. As a result of such considerations, the criticizer may decide to alter the criticism.
As we can see, people who provide criticism in a manner consistent with level 5 are apt to do so in a manner that is very similar to the level 4 description. However, before they actually provide the criticism, they consider the person who is the target of the criticism, and the situation that he or she is in.
In this regard, I think it’s worthwhile to point out that as tough as sergeants may be on privates, they act very differently when speaking to someone who has a higher military rank, such as a lieutenant or general.
That is, sergeants first consider who they are speaking to before deciding on how they will provide negative criticism. This is one of the hallmarks of a person who tends to provide negative criticism in a manner that is consistent with level 5.
The Army’s Reasons for Supporting the Drill Sergeant’s Style of Providing Negative Criticism
The army’s leadership believes that those who hold a higher military rank are better qualified to make tough military decisions than those who hold a lower rank. They based this belief on their process for selecting who is invited to get training for a higher rank, the quality of the training that is provided, and the fact that only those who successfully complete the training are promoted. Those who do not perform well after they are promoted are demoted.
In a number of military situations, quick decisions are necessary to achieve military objectives while minimizing the number of casualties. If platoon leaders see enemy troops rapidly advancing, with their guns blasting and bombs going off, there simply is not a lot of time to discuss how to respond. Those with the most training for dealing with this situation rapidly cry out orders and those with a lower rank rapidly obey.
Now, with all of the gun firing and bombs going off, military leaders are probably going to shout out their orders to be heard. If some of the privates suddenly feel offended because their leader has yelled at them in a tone of voice that strikes them as unfair criticism, without proper training perhaps they might start yelling back, “How dare you talk that way to me!” Perhaps they might even physically attack the leader for the perceived insult. Such actions would seriously delay the carrying out of orders and thereby risk the military objectives and the lives of the soldiers.
During battles, there are times when even the best trained personnel may become irritable. Perhaps a captain might have lost a soldier she was very close to. If the captain, in her irritable state, was to slip up and accidentally speak to someone who is at a lower rank with a tone of voice that seems a bit disrespectful, would valuable time be lost because of an argument over the perceived insult? To avoid wasting time on these types of arguments, the army leaders have come to support training soldiers to respond immediately to orders even if it comes with criticism that might not be viewed as ideal in more typical situations. I think their position is reasonable.
Applying a Drill Sergeant’s Style of Negative Criticism to Situations Beyond the Military
Many people who have been in the army, having experienced basic training, come to believe that what worked well in the army should work just as well in all other situations. And so they begin to provide negative criticism in a style that matches that of a drill sergeant.
Some parents try this with their kids, and when the kids are young it often seems to work. But too often the drill sergeant approach leads to a building up of bitter resentment. Some teenagers end up running away from home, while others essentially end their relationships with their parents as soon as they are old enough to live on their own.
I know someone who was given the job to coach a women’s college basketball team. He had in the past, coached a boys college team and found the drill sergeant approach had worked, in his estimation, fairly well. Occasionally a good player would quit the team, but he felt that this was just the cost of maintaining good discipline. But when he tried the same technique with the women’s team, more than half quit. In order to field any team at all, he had to go to the women who had quit and apologize. In the end, he found that there were alternative ways to provide negative criticism in his new situation that worked much better for him. The incident reminds me of a great scene in the movie, “A League of Their Own.”
In the army, if someone thinks about quitting, there are very serious consequences. The army can put the quitter in prison for a time, give him or her a dishonorable discharge, etc. Moreover, there are a number of positives for hanging in there even under the most trying of circumstances. There is the honor that comes from helping your country, a military salary, VA benefits, etc. When we raise children or coach a team, the consequences for quitting or staying in the relationship are very different.
And so, for those who think it makes a great deal of sense to use a drill sergeant’s approach for providing negative criticism in non-military situations, I urge caution. People have strong desires to be liked and to escape from situations in which someone seeks to interfere with their freedom to make their own decisions. A drill sergeant’s approach runs counter to these desires. It is only in rare situations where rapid action is required, the available leadership is well trained, and other desires are so strong that shouting, insults and threats may make sense.
———————————
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
Last week my blog post asked, “Does Your Fearfulness Make You a Coward?” While attempting to answer this question, I pointed out that viewing yourself as a coward when you experience fear consumes time and energy. Moreover, it is way too simplistic. Fear is actually a highly valuable emotion. It motivates us to take some wise precautions. And the fact that some people can fearlessly perform a task that would make you quake actually indicates, when properly considered, that diversity in what people fear is helpful for the survival of our species. When it comes to fear, we are wiser to seek to learn to skillfully utilize it, rather than to seek to insult ourselves.
Sec. John KerryEdward Snowden
Within three days of my writing that post on fear, NBC Nightly News presented a video of Secretary of State John Kerry calling Edward Snowden, the NSA document leaker, a coward. I found this rather ironic because John Kerry, as a younger man, demonstrated against the Vietnam War. Such demonstrators were repeatedly called cowards by those who supported our military’s war efforts. And so I guess that makes both John Kerry and Edward Snowden cowards, at least in the eyes of some people who choose to use this name calling strategy when they believe it suits them.
John Kerry Protesting Against the Vietnam War
What’s up with this Name Calling?
When we call someone a coward, we are not making a scientifically objective distinction as we do when, for example, we call a snake a reptile rather than an insect. People use the word “coward” as a strategic move to actually increase fear in the hopes of achieving their personal desires. I know that this can seem counterintuitive at first, but with a little thought, this becomes simple to understand.
Many people are afraid to put themselves in a position in which others are publically calling them cowards. Thus, Sec. Kerry, by calling Mr. Snowden a coward on national television, sought to discourage others with access to secret government information from revealing what they know for fear that they, too, would be branded a coward. And those who called Sec. Kerry a coward when he was a younger man protesting against the Vietnam War sought to discourage others from doing likewise lest they, too, would be subjected to such name calling.
When we think of the military we often think about how it honors certain individuals who act fearlessly in the face of danger. Typically this is done in a ceremony during which medals are handed out and an inspiring speech is presented. It stirs our hearts to participate in these events.
Although we may think that courage and bravery is the driving force of the military, far more often utilized are strategies designed to actually increase fear. It is worth taking a good hard look at these strategies because when people become more aware of this, their simplistic kneejerk reaction of construing any fearfulness that they personally experience as a sign of their cowardliness can be dispelled. A more realistic understanding of these experiences can then take its place, thus aiding people to make better informed choices as they seek to achieve their most treasured desires.
The Military’s Use of Fear
When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, it was the fear that our country would be conquered by another country that led men to enlist in the various branches of the military in record numbers. But even when our country is not actually attacked, those who seek military intervention artfully manipulate fear to achieve their ends.
Those of us who lived through the period during which the Vietnam War mounted, recall how our fear was heightened by repeated references to the “Domino Theory.” This theory claimed that if one country in a region came under the influence of communism, then the surrounding countries would follow in a domino effect. Thus, fear was aroused that if South Vietnam was to fall to the communists, other countries in the region would soon follow. And then these countries would enter into a vast policy of conquest. The Philippines, the Hawaiian Islands, and the whole of our coast west of the Sierra Passes would be swamped by the invaders in rapid succession. If we fail to act decisively in Vietnam, the rest of America would, in but a few short years, be enslaved by the conquerors, our women raped, and our children brainwashed.
A dismal forecast indeed! And yet, just plausible enough to rile up enough Americans to wage a terribly costly war.
In the end, the U.S abandoned its effort to keep South Vietnam from falling to the communists. And yet none of the fearful projections about our own country being swamped by foreign invaders came to pass. Among the effects of the fear campaign were approximately 58,000 US combat deaths and a million Vietnam combat deaths. Several million others were seriously wounded and according to Vietnam’s government, the U.S. herbicidal warfare program, Operation Ranch Hand, conducted during the Vietnam War, led to 400,000 people killed or maimed as a result of after effects, and 500,000 children born with birth defects. To this day, our own country continues to provide treatment to thousands of American veterans who were wounded in Vietnam battles or have been suffering from the effects of exposure to Agent Orange.
More recently, as a result of the military’s leadership that drummed up fear of “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq, we fought a war costing billions of dollars, the lives of 4,486 U.S. soldiers, and approximately 100,000 Iraqis. Many more are still suffering from serious injuries.
Once people begin to serve in the military, fear is a dominant driver of carrying out one’s duties. Military personnel quickly become aware that insubordination can lead to prison time and various forms of name calling, including being branded a coward. Fear is further heightened by knowledge of the possibility of being disgraced with a dishonorable discharge, or shot for desertion. If soldiers don’t carry out their duties under fire, this can increase the likelihood of the enemy either killing them along with their fellow service personnel or to being captured and subjected to possible torture. All of these fears are strategically heightened by the military so that these fears, when combined, will be greater than the competing fear that comes from the sounds of bombs going off, bullets flying overhead and knowing that severe injury or death may come at any moment.
Now, of course the military doesn’t just rely on fear to achieve its ends. It provides training, initially under relatively easy conditions, and then under more and more arduous ones, eventually requiring trainees to perform with live bullets flying overhead. This increases the military personnel’s confidence that they can indeed perform under highly stressful conditions. Stories are told of simple soldiers who achieved great acts of bravery. Military personnel are provided with leaders who have distinguished themselves as individuals of great intelligence and character. And there are rewards for carrying out one’s duties—a salary, cheers from one’s comrades, an honorable discharge, veteran’s benefits, etc. Nevertheless, the idea that there is no place for fear in the military is a bunch of hogwash.
Conclusion
Bob, experiencing fear as he prepares to perform with his band in front of a large audience, initially observes his thoughts going off into a chain of insults. “I’m such a coward. Why can’t I be like a brave soldier, never experiencing any fear even in the face of bullets raining down from the enemy?”
But then it dawns on Bob that soldiers actually do experience fear. With this knowledge, he decides to let his thoughts continue for a few more minutes, but he simply nonjudgmentally observes them passing by without attaching any belief in them. Soon, they pass. He gets on with the work before him. He spends some time practicing his performance. He recalls some stories he heard about other performers who experienced fear before shows and yet managed to thrill their audiences. And, from time to time, he reminds himself that if it turns out that the life of a musician ends up not suiting him, there are other paths he can take to create a worthwhile life.
———————————
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
A few nights ago, Andrea and I went to see a show billed as “The Free of Fear NYC Debut and Album Release Concert.” Our two sons, Lennon and Jack, had written the album’s music, played most of the instruments, and were the front men for the show, so naturally we went.
My expectation for the evening was to see a set of musicians walk on stage and play all of the pieces that appear on the album. There was indeed that, but far, far more. I and the rest of the audience were treated to a fascinating mixture of visual and auditory art created and performed by a variety of colorful individuals all seeking to explore this idea of being free of fear.
Off in one of the corners of the venue was a collection of thematic paintings and drawings.
Along a side wall, a video screen displayed moving visuals that appeared to be in sync with the band’s stirring musical performance.
Dramatically performed poetry readings, a thoughtful short story, and an intriguing dance number were all interwoven into the overall evening experience. Most unexpected of all was an aerial acrobatics act that could have easily been something out of Cirque du Soleil. Here, as the musicians played a kind of eerie celestial number that mounted in intensity, a lovely woman became entangled in two black curtains that symbolized fear. As she appeared to mightily struggle with these curtains—yanking herself high above the audience, twisting, twirling, suddenly falling upside down to within an inch of her skull, clawing back up once again and finally freeing herself–audience members were left with their jaws hanging from their mouths.
What Is Free Of Fear?
As the musicians in the band describe it:
Free of Fear is the music we always wanted to make but, up until now, never knew how to. It is the intention of creating from a neutral ground of infinite possibility, a place of total spontaneity, completely in the moment, unfettered by fears and self-doubt.
However, during the process of creating this music we experienced countless moments of uncertainty, lack of confidence in our abilities, insecurity about if people would like our sound, and a host of vague, strange, unnameable fears that arose while writing, recording, practicing, and performing our creation. During those moments the concept of Free of Fear has been a rallying cry inspiring us to overcome those trepidations and bring us back to the moment of this point in the journey, reopening ourselves to a deepening gratitude for the vibrations of the universe.
And now we wish to extend that rallying cry to you. We invite you to join the Free of Fear Movement. Its purpose is to foster an environment of encouragement that instills confidence and inspiration in each individual to create the art that only they can make. We invite you to explore the reality of the fears and insecurities in your own life, to stand up to them, and to step foot onto a path of creating and living the life that you truly wish to lead.
My Reaction
After the last notes were played and Andrea and I drifted into the cool night air, thoughts drifted through my mind. Enjoying being with a group of people, sharing a musical experience, dancing to lively rhythms and meeting interesting new people were beautifully achieved. A band seeking to inspire people to overcome their fears that have been preventing them from doing the things they really would like to be doing–I guess I kinda like that idea. Inspiring narratives have begun to stir a process within, deepening my understanding of the nature of an intriguing emotion.
Nelson Mandela
A few months earlier, I had written a post on Nelson Mandela, and I have now begun to think more deeply about how he inspired so many throughout the world. Certainly one reason is his gripping narrative that involves resisting injustice despite the fear of a violent repressive regime, then his 27 years of suffering in prison, and then his phenomenal rise, against all odds, to become president of his country. But there is something else. Once he got out of prison, Mr. Mandela put forth a vision of why his struggle was important, a vision that allowed millions of people to enter into a connection with him and with one another. “Great anger and violence can never build a nation,” Mr. Mandela declared. “We are striving to proceed in a manner and towards a result, which will ensure that all our people, both black and white, emerge as victors.” With such words, Mr. Mandela invited all of humanity to work toward a more just world.
The Free of Fear movement has a narrative that, in a sense, is like Mr. Mandela, in that it describes a process of achieving something of value despite moments of fear, and it is a cause that most of us feel a connection to. The Free of Fear movement, to be sure, is a less dramatic story than Mr. Mandela’s, at least at this early point of its existence. The band members’ one year struggle with their own fears while living modestly in NYC doesn’t quite compare with Mr. Mandela’s 27 years in prison. And creating a fresh new set of music and presenting it on the modest NYC’s Shangri-la Studios’ stage with other artists’ creations is a much smaller scale event than what Mr. Mandela achieved on a national and international stage. But in a deeper sense, human beings can profoundly benefit from both types of narratives. The Free of Fear movement, currently, focuses on basic fears of your typical person on the street attempting to find the courage to ask someone out on a date, or creating something despite the fear that others might not like it. These types of struggles are more of what we may call your typical garden variety struggles, but to each of us who are struggling with them, they are of vital importance.
Consider, for a moment, the many people who have come to realize that their drinking has become a serious hindrance to their daily life and fear that they won’t be able to overcome this problem. Here is a problem that occurs everyday in pretty much every community. Over the years when I asked people who succeeded in overcoming this problem what was most helpful, the most common answer has been that they went to some self-help group meeting and became inspired by the many personal narratives of people who had struggled as they were, and despite serious set-backs along the way, they managed to beat their alcohol-related difficulties.
Interestingly, of all of these types of alcohol dependency recovery stories that I heard over the years, the one that stands out most to me concerns a man whom I will here call Bob. In addition to hearing these recovery types of narratives, Bob had an additional source of inspiration. Throughout the lowest period of his struggles, although most of his neighbors treated him with great disgust, there was one fellow who offered him a bit of kindness. Bob wanted to recover not only for himself, but because he wanted that bit of kindness to mean something. This kernel of kindness had grown in his breast and he desired to live in a way that honored all that it meant to him. For some reason I entered into a profound connection with Bob when I heard him tell his story in a choked-up voice.
And so, upon thinking about what it takes to inspire, these are two of the ideas that came to me–a narrative of a struggle that was eventually overcome, coupled with a vision of why the particular form of success was of value not only to the struggling individual but to others as well.
In my next post I’ll try to convey other insights I have achieved as a result of that delightful night in NYC. In the meantime, I hope you’ll take a little time to get acquainted with the fresh set of inspiring musical numbers now available on Free of Fear’s brand new album, See You On The Otherside. It is available for free at https://freeoffear.com/album_download.
———————————
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
Leonard Pitts, Jr.is a columnist, author of three novels and winner of numerous awards including the 2004 Pulitzer Prize for commentary. When I heard that he was speaking at Flagler College, having enjoyed reading his insightful column for many years,I eagerly went to see him.
Mr. Pitts’s formal presentation was well received. Then, he began to take questions from the audience. His responses to each were like a laser in that his answers were precisely on point–that is, until I asked my question.
My Question
When I first stepped up to the mike, I explained that I had worked with teenagers for many years, and sometimes a white student would seek to insult a black student by calling him the N-word.
Often the response was a physical fight that would lead to a school suspension.
Before returning to school, in some cases both students were asked to meet with me. I saw each separately at first and usually I’d discuss Martin Luther King, Jr. For the black students, at some point in our discussion I would ask, “Do you understand that Martin Luther King, Jr. was all about non-violence when dealing with injustice?”
“Sure, I know that, man!” was a common reply.
Then I would say something like, “When you were called the N-word, you started to physically attack the guy who called you that. That’s a violent approach to the injustice you had faced. If it happens again, can you think of some other way to deal with this, some way that would respect Martin Luther King, Jr.’s memory?”
I would then typically get the following type reply: “If Martin Luther King, Jr. lived in my neighborhood, he’d have realized that if anyone called him that, the only way to respond is to bloody the guy up good!”
Having had experiences like this, I asked Mr. Pitts, “As a respected black man, how would you respond to someone who called you the N-word, and how would you advise black people to respond in the event that someone called them the N-word?”
Mr. Pitts’s Response
As I had said before, prior to my question, Mr. Pitts’s answers to questions that were being presented to him were right on point. Now, his reply wandered off to related issues, never directly answering my question.
He spoke, for example, of how he objected to hip-hop’s embrace of the word. He related it to how many women in the women’s movement have now embraced the phrase, “She’s my bitch,” as a form of flattery, despite the fact that historically it was used in an unkind manner by sexist men seeking to put down women. And he spoke eloquently about why he personally found the N-word so offensive. I didn’t write down his exact words, but it seemed to closely match the words he used in some of his earlier newspaper columns. For example, in a column published on November 30th, 2013, he wrote:
The N-word is unique. It was present at the act of mass kidnap that created “black America,” it drove the ship to get here, signed the contracts at flesh auctions on Southern ports as mother was torn from child, love from love and self from self. It had a front row center seat for the acts of blood, rape, castration, exclusion and psychological destruction by which the created people was kept down and in its place. The whole weight of our history dictates that word cannot be used except as an expression of contempt for African Americans.
Now, I do want to avoid a too simplistic presentation of Mr. Pitts’s position on the N-word. He does believe that the word can be rightly used in certain situations. For example, in a column titled, “Don’t Censor Mark Twain’s N word” he defended how it is used in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn:
It is, perhaps, the seminal moment in American literature.
Young Huck Finn, trying to get right with God and save his soul from a forever of fire, sits there with the freshly written note in hand. “Miss Watson,” it says, “your runaway nigger Jim is down here two mile below Pikesville and Mr. Phelps has got him and he will give him up for the reward if you send.”
Huck knows it is a sin to steal and he is whipped by guilt for the role he has played in helping the slave Jim steal himself from a poor old woman who never did Huck any harm. But see, Jim has become Huck’s friend, has sacrificed for him, worried about him, laughed and sung with him, depended upon him. So what, really, is the right thing to do?
“I was a-trembling,” says Huck, “because I’d got to decide, forever, betwixt two things and I knowed it. I studied a minute, sort of holding my breath, and then says to myself:
‘All right, then, I’ll go to hell’ — and tore it up.”
Mr. Pitts wrote this column in response to a publisher who had decided to put out a new edition of this classic story that replaced all 219 occurrences of the N-word with words such as “runaway slave.” Although Mr. Pitts acknowledges the publisher means well, he states that, “…it is troubling to think the state of reading comprehension in this country has become this wretched, that we have tweeted, PlayStationed and Fox Newsed so much of our intellectual capacity away that not only can our children not divine the nuances of a masterpiece, but that we will now protect them from having to even try.”
I liked what Mr. Pitts had said in reply to my question but as I left the auditorium, I wondered why he appeared to avoid answering my question more directly. And I wondered what he would say about the approach that I have been recommending for responding to insults (see for example, “Insulting Criticism: What Can We Do About It?”).
My Alternative to Violence When Responding to the N-word
Although I have given a number of different types of examples of people responding maturely to insults in past posts, I have never described specifically what my approach would look like in the type of a situation we have been discussing today. I, of course, recognize that since I am not an African-American, I lack much legitimacy in offering my opinion on this topic. Nevertheless, just to spur a deeper discussion, very tentatively I am tossing out one alternative to violence.
In the scenario presented below, this is the first time Fred is calling Leroy the N-word. In my view, Leroy’s response would be very different if Fred has begun to repeatedly taunt him. Concerns about how to handle taunting are addressed in my post titled “The Art of Playful Teasing”.
Leroy, an African-American teenager is called the N-word by Fred, a white teenager. Leroy replies by looking firmly into the eyes of Fred and says,”You just called me a nigger. I want to make certain you clearly understand that that word was used in the past by people who believed in slavery and that African-Americans are less than human. Is that what you are trying to say to me, that you believe in slavery, and I’m less than a human being?”
“Yeah, you nigger!” Fred replies.
Leroy pauses to think about this for a moment, looking down in a sad manner. Then, looking squarely into Fred’s eyes, he says firmly, “Why are you trying to insult me, Fred?”
“Because I hate niggers!”
“Fred, I’ve met some black guys who strike me as pretty hateful characters. But from my experience, there are a lot of great black guys out there. I hope in time you’ll change your mind. Anything else you want to say to me?
“Yeah, go to hell!”
“I understand that you’re trying to insult me, Fred. I’m always interested to hear you out. I’m sorry to hear how you feel about black people.”
Well, those are some thoughts I have for you this week. I encourage readers to continue the discussion by posting comments. I know these issues bring up for many of us some very strong emotions.
——————————-
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
When I first started to teach a graduate course at the University of Minnesota on conflict resolution, from time to time a student would ask me to compare what I was teaching to assertiveness training.
“From what I know about assertiveness training,” I explained, “it teaches a very narrow skill that can be helpful at times, particularly for very shy people. But it doesn’t adequately explain that for different situations alternatives to assertiveness may be the wiser course of action. The DIG Conflict Model that I am teaching provides students a toolbox with several tools that they can choose from. Depending on the situation, one tool can be better than another to increase personal power and wisely resolve conflicts.
“For example, when I was twelve years old, I was playing some basketball in a Brooklyn playground during summer vacation. After the first game, I was very thirsty and I thought about getting a drink at the fountain on the far end of the playground. But while I was playing, I had noticed a couple of bullies over by the fountain giving a hard time to kids smaller than they were. The bullies were clearly bigger than I was.
“Assertiveness trainers, it seems to me, would have me go over to the fountain. If the bullies got in my way, I should just stand up to them, asserting that I want to get a drink.
“Although that is certainly one option that I could have chosen, it risked having the cookies pounded out of me or they might just block my way from getting a drink pushing and shoving me away, I first considered other options. Perhaps I could come up with an approach that would achieve my goal of getting a drink in a less risky manner (see post titled The ABCs OF Power: The Letter B). It quickly occurred to me that my apartment is just a block and a half away. In those days I could run like the wind. So, in two minutes I was back home safely drinking all the water that I wanted. I then filled up a 36-ounce bottle with water and took it with me to the playground so I ended up having plenty of water after the next few games.
“The next day that I played at the playground, I noticed that the bullies were gone. When I went to get a drink at the fountain, I asked some of the kids who were playing there what happened to the bullies. A couple of them told me how they had gotten their big brothers to tell the bullies to cut their crap out. In terms of the DIG Conflict Model, they used the power of creating a coalition (see post titled “The ABCs of Power: The Letter C“) with their big brothers to achieve their goal and it worked. For the rest of the summer we all got our drinks at the fountain without any more conflicts. And so, here is an example in which I believe I teach some skills beyond assertiveness. A conflict was resolved in a satisfactory manner with less danger or hassle than assertiveness.
“Let’s look at another example of how the DIG Conflict Model’s approach differs from assertiveness training. If you are at a movie theater and you want to buy some candy, as long as you manage to go up to the candy counter and purchase what you want, you have pretty much fulfilled all the requirements of being assertive. But when I was a teenager, I worked at a candy counter. I found that some of my customers treated me in a way that was distinctly more pleasant than others who used a cold, impersonal style. As I thought about this, I noticed that the pleasant customers, when it was their turn on line, took a brief moment to look me in the eye and give me a respectful nod of the head. Rather than using a demanding voice that ordered me to get what they wanted, they said in a pleasant voice, ‘Can I have some…’ or ‘I would like some…’ After I got them what they wanted, they again looked me in the eye while thanking me.
“Both styles—the cold impersonal demanding style and the more pleasant respectful style—took the same amount of time and both approaches led to customers always getting the items that they wanted. Nevertheless, the DIG Conflict Model advocates that when we choose an approach to achieve what we want, we consider the golden rule—‘Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.’ Since I preferred the more pleasant respectful style when I was serving others behind a candy counter, I began to use a similar approach whenever I went up to a candy counter as a customer. I don’t think assertiveness training encourages people to think in this way.”
The first few times that I responded to the question that asked me to compare what I was teaching to assertiveness training, the questioners seemed satisfied with my answer, and I then went on with the rest of my lesson. But one day, a woman replied to my answer by voicing an objection. “I have taken an assertiveness training class,” she said, “and your description of assertiveness training doesn’t match my experience at all. For example, my instructor advocated being respectful while being assertive.”
Now, I could have asserted over and over again that I was right and she was wrong until she either stopped disagreeing with me or sat down and remained quiet, but I responded quite differently. First, I summarized what I heard her say. After she indicated that she was satisfied that I understood her position, I paused to think about it for a few moments. I then replied, as follows:
“My views about assertiveness training are based, admittedly, on very little experience. I have never actually taken an assertiveness class and learned about it from a couple of professors who both discussed the approach very briefly, maybe in five or ten minutes. One of the professors, for an assignment, had the class read a chapter in a book about the topic and when we met for class afterwards, we discussed what we had read for a few minutes. Therefore, I think it does makes sense that I learn some more about assertiveness so I can give a fairer reply to these types of questions. Thanks for raising this concern.”
The questioner seemed satisfied with my reply, and afterwards, I did take the time to look more carefully at the assertiveness approach. Here’s some of what I found out.
“Assertiveness is the quality of being self-assured and confident without being aggressive…. Dorland’s Medical Dictionary defines assertiveness as: “a form of behavior characterized by a confident declaration or affirmation of a statement without need of proof; this affirms the person’s rights or point of view without either aggressively threatening the rights of another (assuming a position of dominance) or submissively permitting another to ignore or deny one’s rights or point of view”.[1]”
Wikipedia’s section on assertiveness training states:
learning both verbal and non-verbal assertiveness skills.
As a communication style and strategy, assertiveness is thus distinguished from both aggression and passivity. How people deal with personal boundaries, their own and those of other people, helps to distinguish between these three concepts. Passive communicators do not defend their own personal boundaries and thus allow aggressive people to abuse or manipulate them through fear. Passive communicators are also typically not likely to risk trying to influence anyone else. Aggressive people do not respect the personal boundaries of others and thus are liable to harm others while trying to influence them. A person communicates assertively by overcoming fear of speaking his or her mind or trying to influence others, but doing so in a way that respects the personal boundaries of others. Assertive people are also willing to defend themselves against aggressive people.”
This article also has a section titled “Communication.” Among the descriptions that are provided is, “Assertive communication involves respect for the boundaries of oneself and others. It also presumes an interest in the fulfillment of needs and wants through cooperation.[5]”
And so, in the end, I came to realize that my original description that contrasted my approach with assertiveness was far too simplistic. And when answering the question, Is it wise to be assertive? my answer is, “Often there are some helpful ideas that fall under that umbrella. It is hard to be clear about this because there are simply way too many approaches that are referred to as assertiveness training to give a more definitive answer.
On this blog you will learn many ways to resolve a conflict. None violate principles taught in assertiveness training. Beyond the skills typically taught under the assertiveness banner there are discussions of skills that don’t violate assertiveness ideas, but can powerfully achieve your goals.
———————————-
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
When you first learned to ride a bicycle, it probably helped that someone told you some basic ideas. Perhaps your big brother explained to you that when you want to go forward on a bike, you must push down with your foot on the pedal that is highest. When you do that you will see the other pedal start to rise up. When the other pedal comes all the way up, you have to push that one down with your other foot.
This type of verbal description can be very helpful, but no amount of it will get anyone to be a smooth bicycle rider. For that, people have to get up on the bike and try to coordinate all that they have heard, fall down, get back up on the bike, and try again and again, until they learn by doing.
Learning skills that lead to emotional maturity is similar in many ways. To learn them, you have to apply what you have heard or read by doing it, make mistakes, and try again and again until you get smooth at coordinating the skills. In today’s post, I offer a suggestion for practicing the skills taught on this blog that won’t cost you a red cent.
A Suggestion for Skill Practice
Go to your calendar and for each week over the next month, draw a circle on a day that you can spare five minutes. Next to the circle, write “CONFLICT?” This message is designed to remind you that on each of the circled dates you are to take five minutes to write down on a sheet of paper the most difficult conflict that you had or are currently having during the week. Keep this paper on your refrigerator door. You will see it there each time you reach for some food. This will help to remind you to check your calendar and to follow through with this plan.
When you write out your description of the conflict, use two sentences to describe the conflict from your perspective and two sentences from how you think the other party views or viewed the conflict. Remember to use the DIG Conflict Model for doing this.
In addition to these weekly calendar reminders, also draw a double circle on your calendar on a day that falls close to a month after you start this plan. Pick a day for the double circle day that you can spare a half hour to do the following: Take down from your refrigerator your list of the different conflicts that you described each week. Go to the first post of this blog and then begin to flip through the next 5 blog posts one by one by pressing the link below each post that takes you to the next post in the series. You’ll find these next post links toward the bottom right of each post just before the comments section. They appear as arrows pointing toward the right. As you skim through each of these posts, think about how they might apply to any of your recent experiences and take note of some ideas that have begun to fade from your memory.
Read over a few of the comics. This will refresh your memory of some of the ideas that are connected to how the comic was used in the post. It will also help you to keep your sense of humor as you wrestle with your conflict problems.
When you come upon posts that are specifically related to the various conflicts you described over the course of the month, thoroughly reread them. If you have resolved any of the conflicts, write out the resolution and comment how well the resolution worked out.
As you do this, from time to time you will come up with some ideas about how you can better handle a similar conflict if it should come up in the future. Write these ideas out. Then, close your eyes and imagine you are carrying out these ideas. Rehearse what you would say in your mind, how you would say it, and how you would reply depending on three or four possible reactions from the other party in the conflict.
Once you can smoothly carry out your imaginary rehearsal, do it three more times. It helps to practice a little beyond just being smooth because this will help you to carry them out if the situation becomes emotionally charged.
After the first month of carrying out this plan, do it again each month over the course of a full year and you will find that you now can almost instantly describe conflicts using the DIG Conflict Model. Moreover, you will have been practicing for a full year how to apply the conflict resolution skills taught on this blog to the types of conflicts you tend to face in your own life.
To help you to follow through with this skill enhancement strategy, let someone who is particularly reliable know about this plan. Have that person ask you once a week if you have followed through with this plan. During these reminders, spend a few minutes to discuss with this reliable person what you have been learning.
Such help should not go without a reward. Let the person who is to be giving you the reminder know that if you manage to complete a whole year of this exercise, you will treat him or her to dinner at a fine restaurant. If you are too young to take someone out for dinner, then see if your parents will be your reminder. Parents can often be persuaded to help their sons and daughters just out of pure love.
A fun way to supplement this strategy is to read the Cool Steve Trilogy, a coming of age series of three novels that take you on exciting adventures of a boy and his friends seeking to learn the secrets of becoming respected (see HERE). There you will find endearing characters that face many of the challenges that we all do. How they grapple with them will deepen your own understanding of how to handle similar challenges when you come face to face with them.
Conflict resolution training programs have not advanced so far as to eliminate the need for problem solving every now and then. Nor has there been an intervention created that will keep anger from rearing its mischievous head from time to time. In order to prepare for such events, I encourage you to view lapses in your skills not as a sign of helplessness, but as a sign to get yourself as quickly and safely as you can to the region of challenge. Once there, wisely use the relative period of peace and calm.
——————————-
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
My goal in writing this weekly blog is to encourage readers to make some changes that can lead to improvements in the quality of their relationships. But some people have no patience for this line of thought. Below is a slightly edited version of a discussion that illustrates this view. Names have been changed for privacy considerations.
The Discussion
Ed: I do not understand why adults would care about the opinions of others or why they would want to be with someone that does not want to be with them. When people don’t like you for who you are, they can go take a hike.
Sue: I don’t think relationship break-ups should be dismissed out of hand. There is much to be said for not jumping from one relationship to another. It is better to grieve the loss and to spend some time alone trying to figure out what went wrong in order to prevent the same issues from presenting themselves next time.
Ron: Some people don’t mind being alone, so if they lose all of their relationships it doesn’t bother them. But for those who don’t like to be lonely, making some changes can make sense. I’ve seen too many friends rush into a new relationship and repeat history. They end up hurting about being lonely once again but never stop to think about what changes they can make.
Sue: Too many people do not know the difference between being alone and being lonely. They go from one relationship to the next…without thought to the collective damage they do to themselves…and to others.
Ed: I disagree. Nothing goes wrong unless your two personalities do not match. If you broke up, that means you should move on. Trying to change yourself to accommodate the next possible relationship would simply be making yourself dishonest in the relationship and misrepresenting your true self. I have been in relationships in which I had to make a constant effort. It sucked. I am now in a relationship in which I am just myself and so is my wife. We will be celebrating our tenth anniversary this year and we have never had any problems with our relationship. We do not fight as there is no reason for us to fight.
Sue: It’s not about changing who you are.
Ron: In many cases, people who have one relationship after another find themselves dealing with the exact same issues from one relationship to the next. In this case, unless we DO change ourselves, our expectations, or whatever it is that keeps creating the problems that end our relationships, we will not ever know the happiness of a true relationship. There are a lot of damaged people in this world. Nothing wrong with that. Just a lot of people who have to do a lot of work in order to move past that which damaged them, and is preventing them from finding happiness within a relationship.
Sue: I agree with those pointing out the responsibility aspect of relationships. I do think it’s important to get out and spend time around people, get involved in groups and activities. Coop anyone up with nothing to do and they’ll become depressed. But just jumping into a relationship seems kind of selfish, just using the first person who comes along to distract from your own problems.
Ron: I think with any important decision, whether it’s voting, or a relationship, or even researching a given topic, it’s important to be careful and make choices responsibly with care to how they affect others and not just oneself, which is all I think many here are saying.
Some of My Thoughts On This Discussion
There are a few people out there who really don’t care much about having relationships. They enjoy being alone and if a relationship comes along that they value, this is fine, but if not, this is fine as well.
For the rest of us, having a few valued relationships is up there with fine food and drink. And if a boy gets used to having his meal served to him by his mother, if she dies, he will soon learn to get his meals some other way. This new way may not be as pleasant to him, particularly at first. It may not feel like he is acting “like this is his natural self,” but in time, it will come to feel more and more comfortable and “natural.”
When we learn a new skill, at first it may not feel “natural” to us. With practice, the skill soon becomes so smoothly executed that we don’t have to think much about it. At that point, it does feel “natural.”
Now, there are people who, upon entering into a relationship, come to see that they would have to change so much about themselves in order to make the relationship work that they end up deciding to try to find someone else. Some of these people find that very soon after the break-up they meet someone that is just right for them. From these people’s experience, Ed’s comments in the above discussion might make sense. Ed had decided to end his relationship with some woman rather than making any changes in his life, and he soon found a woman he enjoys being with. So Ed’s strategy worked for him. The only thing that Ed is wrong about is that just because this worked out so well for him doesn’t mean it will work out as well for many others. He seems not to be open to this possibility. Nevertheless, I wish him well.
For other people, efforts to find someone whom they can have a rewarding relationship with may meet with one failure after another. And for still others, even after a single relationship break-up, feelings of regret may lead to thoughts of “what if?” These types of experiences can lead them to learn new skills to try out.
Some changes that a person might try out may never come to feel “natural.” When this happens, it makes sense to leave them by the wayside. But some changes, with practice, may not only come to feel “natural,” but may also lead to treasured relationships.
Well, that’s my post for this week. I hope you stop by again soon.
——————————-
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
“How’d things work out between Blondie and you?” you ask in a concerned voice upon running into your friend, Dagwood. “Did you manage to resolve your conflict?”
“Yeah, um…well, I’m kinda not sure,” he replies.
When it comes to whether or not a conflict has been resolved, sometimes people feel confused, or they end up engaging in needless arguments about this. Today we spend some time clarifying this issue.
The DIG Conflict Model removes much of the uncertainty about this issue by:
being precise about the definition of a conflict
introducing the concept of conflict intensity
being precise about the point at which a conflict is resolved
introducing the concept of related conflicts
The Definition of a Conflict
A conflict exists whenever the following three conditions exist:
Party A desires an act will occur.
Party A perceives that another party is likely to act in a manner that interferes with the desire.
Party A perceives that the other party would be guilty of doing something wrong if he or she carries out the interfering act.
When using the DIG Conflict Model, we describe a conflict by using the word “DIG” to remind us to identify the three conflict conditions, the desire, the interference, and the guilt. Sometimes a given situation has more than one conflict but people end up getting confused because they think that all of the conflicts are one big conflict. When using the DIG Conflict Model, we clearly describe each of the conflicts separately and systematically. This process dramatically reduces confusion and simplifies finding resolutions to each of the separate conflicts. Sometimes we have to dig to identify all of the conflicts in a situation but the DIG Conflict Model provides us some tools to make this relatively easy (see posts titled DEALING WITH CRITICISM BY DIGGING DEEPER and RESOLVING RECURRING CONFLICTS).
Conflict Intensity
Toward reaching our goal of reducing confusion about whether or not a conflict has been resolved, we have just clarified what it means to have a conflict. We now move on toward this goal by learning about the intensity of a conflict.
The three conditions of a conflict (desire, interference and guilt) are not just present whenever a conflict exists. Each of these three conditions may be present at a very high degree, a medium degree, or a low degree.
DESIRE
As an example, let’s say that in the picture on the right, John desires Mary with all of his might. Asked to rate how much he desires Mary on a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the greatest desire he can possibly have, he rates his desire for her a 10.
We asked John a few months later to rate his desire for Mary. Some of Mary’s mannerisms have begun to annoy him, and there are times when he has begun to think of finding a new girlfriend. He still has some desire for her but at a lower degree then when he first met her. This example illustrates how the desire component of a conflict can vary over time.
INTERFERENCE
Now let’s look at an example of how the interference component of a conflict can be present at higher and lower degrees. In the picture on the left, Sue desires to get to a long-eared stuffed animal but Fred is interfering. Sue knows Fred pretty well and she is convinced that once he decides to not let her get something, he usually sticks to it for quite some time. Asked to rate how much Fred is likely to interfere with the achieving of her desire on a 1 to 10 scale, she answers 8.
But let’s say a few months later Fred’s behavior begins to change. He still will interfere with Sue achieving her desire to get something but only for a minute or two. By then he has grown tired of that game. When Sue wants to get her long-eared friend down from the shelf and Fred tries to stop her, she knows that by waiting for a short period of time things will work out fine. Now when asked to rate how much Fred will interfere with her achieving her desire, she answers 2.
GUILT
Finally, let’s look at an example of how the guilt component of a conflict can be present at higher or lower degrees. In this picture on the right, Mike comes home from work and sees his wife and some guy in each other’s arms passionately kissing. Mike’s first reaction is that his wife and this guy are guilty of doing something terribly wrong. If he was asked to rate just how guilty they were, he might say 10. But let’s say that moments after he first sees this kissing scene he notices that there are four other people in the room all holding a script for a play.
His wife quickly withdraws from the embrace of the male stranger and warmly greets her husband. Then she says, “Honey, I got the part I tried out for. We’re all here rehearsing.”
Now Mike recalls that his wife did have plans to go this morning to a play audition. He doesn’t like the fact that his wife usually gets sexy, passionate parts, but he had agreed to marry her anyway.
Once Mike understands that his wife was rehearsing her part in a play when he had walked into the house, he still feels uncomfortable about what he had seen, but he now recognizes that his wife and the male stranger are not as guilty as he originally thought. If asked to rate how guilty they are, he may say 2, or even a zero.
In the DIG Conflict Model, the higher each of the three components are rated, the higher the intensity of the conflict. Sometimes when a conflict’s intensity had been very high, if it is no longer as high, people think the conflict has been resolved, but not according to the DIG Conflict Model.
The Point that a Conflict is Resolved
According to the DIG Conflict Model:
Whenever Party A perceives that a conflict exists, it will be resolved from Party A’s perspective when Party A lowers his or her rating of any of the three conflict conditions to zero.
An example of a resolved conflict will be provided in the next section. But first, let’s take a look at what a related conflict is. Then we will be familiar with four important aspects of conflicts–its precise definition, its degrees of intensity, the point that it is resolved and that some conflicts are related to other conflicts. Then we will see how this will help us to avoid many misunderstandings that lead to needless confusion and arguments.
Related Conflicts
The best way to understand what is meant by a related conflict is by considering the following parable:
The Parable of Jack in the Restaurant
A dad takes his wife and five-year old son, Jack, to a restaurant. Jack’s meal comes first, a nice big plate of spaghetti and meatballs. After Jack quickly shovels into his mouth a couple of forkfuls of his dinner, the dad says, “That looks pretty good, Jack. Do you mind if I have a little taste of the tomato sauce? If I like it, I might want to get something with it next time we come.”
“NO, DAD! I just have enough for me!”
This is frustrating to the dad and he perceives that he has a conflict with his son because he desires a taste of the sauce and perceives that his son is interfering with his desire. Additionally, he believes his son is guilty of being selfish.
As he thinks about what to do about this conflict, his wife and he receive the meals that they ordered.
About fifteen minutes later, the dad still desires a taste of the sauce, but not quite as intensely as before because his hunger has subsided. He then glances over to Jack and notices that there is about half of his original portion of spaghetti left on his plate and the pace of his eating has slowed up quite a bit. His son’s desire to eat his spaghetti has also become less intense.
“Jack,” the dad says softly, “do you still mind if I have just a little taste of your sauce?”
“Sure, you can have some, Dad. I’m starting to get full.” And with that, Jack slides about a third of the remaining spaghetti on his dad’s plate while making sure that there is an ample amount of sauce along with it.
In the fifteen minutes that the dad first desired a taste of the sauce, the situation transformed from a clear conflict situation to a non-conflict situation because the dad has achieved his desire to taste the sauce. But wait! A minute later, the dad, still a bit bugged about something, suddenly realizes he still does have a conflict with his son. He tries to summarize it by using the DIG Conflict Model. “I desire that Jack not be selfish,” he thinks to himself, “but his actions at dinner suggest that he will continue to interfere with this desire if I don’t do something about it, and he’ll continue to be guilty of being selfish.”
This conflict, although related to the earlier one, is different for it has a different desire. The original conflict’s desire was about getting a taste of the tomato sauce. That conflict was resolved when the dad got a taste of the tomato sauce. If asked to rate how much he wants to taste the sauce right now on a 1 to 10 scale, he would say zero. This new conflict’s desire is about Jack not being selfish. Thus it is different enough to be thought of as a new conflict with perhaps a distinctly different set of approaches required to address it.
Now that the dad has clarified in his mind what the new conflict is all about, he begins to reflect upon possible resolutions. “Perhaps I expect too much from a five-year old boy. There is still plenty of time to teach Jack to care about others, and as he matures, he may just naturally become more altruistic. Perhaps it might help if I tell Jack some stories, from time to time, about heroes who act in unselfish ways even when they are hungry or are struggling to meet other needs. And if I model altruistic behavior for Jack with my own behavior, this too can help. As I think on this some more it occurs to me that maybe in the future if I would like to have a taste of Jack’s food, it would be wise for me to wait until he is at least half done with it. This way, if Jack was in a particularly irritable mood because of his hunger, he will have some time to take care of his own hunger desires and to calm down a bit.”
A conflict is related to another conflict when at least one of the three conflict conditions of the original conflict is similar to at least one of the conflict conditions of the other conflict. In the parable about Jack and his dad, initially the dad had the following conflict with his son— I desire a taste of the sauce and perceive that in attempting to get a taste, Jack will create a loud disturbance in the restaurant. Additionally, I believe Jack is acting selfish. A few minutes later, the dad, recognizing he has resolved his first conflict but now has another conflict, says to himself, I want Jack to not be selfish, but his actions at dinner suggest that he will continue to act selfishly if I don’t do something about it. It’s wrong to be selfish.” Both the initial conflict and its related conflict are connected because both of their guilt conflict conditions are similar (Jack is guilty of being selfish).
Discussion
We have now become familiar with four aspects of a conflict–its precise definition, its degrees of intensity, the point that it is resolved and that some conflicts are related to other conflicts. Familiarity of these four aspects of conflicts help to avoid some unnecessary confusion and arguments.
For example, let’s say a young woman named Sally had a very high intensity conflict with her boyfriend. A week later she now finds that it is much less intense. She may think, perhaps it has been resolved. How can she decide?
She can begin by describing her conflict when it originally surfaced using the DIG Conflict Model. Then she can rate what the degree of each of the three components (desire, interference and guilt) had been on a scale of 1 to 10 . Then she can rate each of these three components as they are currently perceived. If none of the three components are at zero, she would recognize that she still has the same conflict with her boyfriend, but it is just at a lower intensity.
This process clarifies in her mind that she still has some work to do if she really wants to fully resolve the conflict. It also draws her attention to each of the three specific components of the conflict.
If you practice using this process, in time you will discover that this simplifies what remains to be done and opens avenues that may lead to problem solutions. For an excellent illustration of this, see the post titled THE ABCs OF POWER AND THE GUILT CONDITION.
Now, let’s change our Sally example a bit. This time she goes through the process of clearly defining her conflict and rating the degree of each of its three conditions. She discovers that she actually did resolve her original conflict, but it has turned into a related conflict. She now has a clear way to understand what has happened. Moreover, as with the Jack in the Restaurant parable, the process of defining precisely what the new conflict is can point her to some solutions she might not have otherwise considered. Recall that Jack’s dad, once he clarified in his mind what his related conflict’s desire is–reducing his son’s selfishness–found it helpful for coming up with ideas about how to teach his son to become more altruistic.
Well, I hope you find in this week’s post some food for thought. May you all have a week with some peace, some excitement and moments of wonder.
——————————-
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
A conflict exists whenever the following three conditions exist:
Party A desires an act will occur.
Party A perceives that another party is likely to act in a manner that interferes with the desire.
Party A perceives that the other party would be guilty of doing something wrong if he or she carries out the interfering act.
On this blog, when we think about describing a conflict we use the word “DIG” to remind us to look into the situation for a desire, something that interferes with the desire, and the perception of guilt. If there is no guilt, there is no conflict, but there still remains a desire-interference problem. All conflicts contain a desire-interference problem, but when guilt is present we have a conflict.
In the above Blondie comic, it is pretty clear that Dagwood has a desire to take a nap and interfering with this is his promise to fix a doorknob. He seems to me to be struggling with whether or not to feel guilty if he doesn’t keep his promise.
Also in the comic, we see that Blondie appears to have a conflict with Dagwood. That is, she desires that the doorknob gets fixed and interfering with her desire is Dagwood’s nap. She seems to think he is guilty for not keeping his promise. Is she seeking to punish him for his guilt by not preparing his sandwich?
Today’s post focuses on the guilt condition of conflicts.
Guilt and Conflicts
On the right we see Mary and Ron. Ron desires Mary and she desires him. They currently are not experiencing a conflict.
Consider a different scenario, one that we all have faced from time to time. You are going to the dentist and you have a desire to experience no pain, but you perceive that the dentist will probably act in a manner that will interfere with this. Do you perceive that under this set of circumstances you are likely to be having a conflict with the dentist? Why?
The DIG Conflict Model, which uses our above definition of “conflict,” indicates that if you do not perceive that your dentist is guilty of doing something wrong, there is no conflict. If you don’t blame the dentist for the pain but accept it as a necessary part of the dental procedure, the interfering condition is experienced in a very different way than when we experience a conflict.
In the dentist situation that I just described, you would still have a desire-interference problem–how can you get through this situation as best that you can given that you desire not to experience pain, and yet you are likely to experience some pain? All conflicts have a desire-interference problem in it, but not all desire-interference problems are conflicts.
Consider, if you will, a slightly different set of circumstances then our original dentist scenario. This time you have had a dental procedure done almost painlessly by Dr. Beam. Now a new dentist, Dr. Vopee, is performing the same procedure and as he does so, you are experiencing a great deal of pain.
According to the DIG Conflict Model, how you perceive this situation is crucial in determining whether or not you are experiencing a conflict. If you are blaming Dr. Vopee for this pain, believing he is doing something wrong, you are very likely to be experiencing a conflict with him. On the other hand, if you perceive the pain as due to the fact that no two procedures are exactly alike and that the pain must be due to the difference in the procedure rather than any incompetence of Dr. Vopee, then you will NOT experience a conflict with him.
What people who are in any given situation perceive is far more important than any act by itself. It is very possible for Sally to perceive that she has a conflict with Bob when Bob has done nothing to interfere with her and has no intention of doing so in the future. This can happen, for example, if Sally’s neighbor lies to her about Bob’s actions.
Let’s explore a little more what it means when we say someone perceives that someone is guilty of doing something wrong.
1: the fact of having committed a breach of conduct especially violating law and involving a penalty; broadly:guilty conduct
2a: the state of one who has committed an offense especially consciously b: feelings of culpability especially for imagined offenses or from a sense of inadequacy :self-reproach
3: a feeling of culpability for offenses
My Definition of Guilty
As far as I’m concerned, you are free to define “guilt” or “guilty” in any way you choose. I have a very specific reason to use the word guilty in the sense that I choose–because I want to distinguish it from a very different experience and this can get muddled if I use the word too loosely. And so, I define “guilty” as follows:
If I perceive that someone has done something wrong and I become frustrated and angry at the person and I begin to seek to punish the person, I view that person as guilty.
For example, if I make a wrong turn to go to my friend’s house and when I discover my error if I have a strong emotion of frustration that springs up in me and I cry out, “What an idiot I am for making that mistake,” I am feeling guilty that I made the mistake and the reason I am calling myself an idiot is because it is my angry effort to punish myself.
I use that specific type of definition for “guilty” to distinguish it from how I define responsibility, which, as I view as a more mature response. When people act responsibly, they recognize that they did something wrong, experience a strong feeling of frustration, recognize at the same time that as long they are a human being they are going to make mistakes. They recognize that the strong feeling of frustration is a good thing because it leads them to focus on what they did wrong, and the emotionality helps spur a process that increases the possibility of fixing the error in the long term, decreasing the chance that they will make the same mistake. Part of this frustration reaction leads me to focus on what I can do next time to prevent the mistake. This is a wonderful process and I welcome the experience as I would a helpful friend. When I see guilt springing up in me, I have been getting more and more skillful at transforming it into my helpful friend.
Some people think guilt occurs whenever they see that someone has done something wrong. It is not wrong to define it this way except when we are using the DIG Conflict Model. But even when we are not using the DIG Conflict Model, it will still be beneficial to keep the idea of angrily desiring punishment when someone does something wrong separate from the idea of learning from the experience of making a mistake by experiencing frustration in a friendly, non-punishing manner.
If you see that your five-year old son has made a mistake when trying to add 7 plus 3 and he came up with 9, you may see that he has done something wrong, but you might experience this as somewhat different than when you feel someone is “guilty” of doing something wrong. You may think that your son almost got the right answer, and he’s trying, and this is part of the learning process. You might not feel angry at him, nor think he deserves to be punished for his efforts. Perhaps you might gently correct him and give him a warm smile.
Another Example
A husband comes home from work. He doesn’t look like he is responding in a friendly, gentle manner as he perceives that his wife is doing something wrong. His face looks angry about it. We can easily imagine that he is likely to make some punishing statements toward the two people who are kissing, and perhaps he might even go further by making some other punishing acts such as hitting or seeking to divorce his wife.
When thinking about conflicts, it is useful to distinguish between guilt that arouses anger and seeks to punish versus viewing someone doing something wrong without it being accompanied by anger.
Now, some of my students ask me, isn’t there a place in this world for righteous anger? Doesn’t the guy who finds his wife cheating on him have a perfect right to be angry and to seek to punish the cheats?
The DIG Conflict Model does not attempt to decide this philosophical issue for all people for all situations and for now through to the end of time. Instead, it seeks to free people who have learned when they were young a rigid pattern of responding to their perceptions that someone did something wrong. If you have learned to react to a perceived wrong in only one way–with frustration, anger and punishment, perhaps you may welcome the freedom to choose between guilt or a friendlier response.
Well, that’s my post for today. I hope you find that it offers some food for thought. Have a great week!
——————————-
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.