Tag: negative criticism

Categories
conflict resolution constructive criticism feedback Listening skills negative criticism

Before Providing Criticism, First Ask For Permission?

Welcome to From Insults to Respect.

Recently, as I was eating dinner with a married couple the subject of how they deal with criticism arose. For the sake of privacy, I’ve changed their names to Sarah and Bob.

In an earlier post, I addressed the question, “Unsolicited Criticism: Good or Bad.” Sarah and Bob agree with my conclusions in that post which in summary suggested that:

Negative criticism is coming our way whether we like it or not. And within a relationship, providing it can be essential. If one of the parties is doing something that is bugging the other, keeping silent could unnecessarily lead to the relationship coming to a premature end when a constructive discussion might have easily settled the matter.

Rather then seeking to squelch criticism, we are better off learning to provide it in a wise and thoughtful manner (see post titled PROVIDING NEGATIVE CRITICISM: FIVE LEVELS OF MATURITY), and to respond to it in a wise and thoughtful manner as well (see post titled RESPONDING TO CRITICISM: FOUR LEVELS OF MATURITY).

That said, there are times when someone is providing one criticism after another and it becomes too much to process all at once.  At other times, someone might provide criticism that is in a style that uses a tone of voice that is hard to bear.  Sometimes we have been recently bombarded by some type of stress, and as a result, we may not be in any mood to hear any criticism for a while. Under these sets of circumstances, it makes perfectly good sense to briefly let the person who is seeking to provide criticism know that usually we are very open to hearing criticism, but for right now, we need a little break (see blog posts SUMMARIZE AND DELAY and ANGER, STRESS, AND THE SIGNALING TO BACK-OFF TECHNIQUE). Then we can, over a period of time, regain our sense of balance and figure out how best to move forward.  Moreover, it is important to learn to effectively advocate that when individuals do provide negative criticism they at least try to do so in a respectful manner.

So, Sarah and Bob in the past had agreed with me about all of this. And then at dinner one evening they revealed to me that within their relationship they have come to an agreement that when either one of them wants to provide some constructive criticism to the other they first ask for permission. They also prefer others who want to provide criticism to them do likewise. Let’s take a close look at this approach.

Negative Criticism and the “Asking for Permission Technique”

When Sarah finds that Bob has done something that she would like him to consider changing, rather than hoping Bob will at some point invite her to provide some criticism to him about that issue, she could, herself, bring the issue up to him uninvited when she thinks he might be in a receptive mood. More specifically, Sarah, before providing feedback, first checks in with herself to see if she has sufficiently calmed herself from any anger or annoyance that she has been experiencing. This is important because if she seeks to provide feedback to Bob when she is angry or annoyed, either at him, or at someone else, her tone of voice might inadvertently provoke a level of defensiveness within Bob that would be counterproductive.

Next, Sarah observes how Bob is doing. If he looks like he is in a fairly calm mood and is not in the midst of something stressful, she then makes sure they both have sufficient time to discuss the matter.

Only when all of this has been considered, will she say to Bob, “Are you open to my giving you some feedback about something?”

Bob also uses the same approach as Sarah when he wants to provide her some feedback. Both agree that this approach has been very helpful to them. Sarah explained that upon hearing the phrase, “Are you open to my giving you some feedback about something?” it gives her a few moments to check in with herself. “Am I up to having a criticism type discussion right now, or would it be better to wait for a more apt time? If I am up for hearing it, I can take a moment to prepare myself.” Bob agreed.

At this point in the conversation, I recalled that just prior to this conversation I had mentioned to Bob that his eye glass lenses looked like they had some smudges on them. He seemed to find some value in what I had said, as he looked the lenses over and cleaned them. So, I asked him if he would have preferred, when I mentioned the smudges, that I first had asked him if he was open for some feedback. He smiled, and said that in that type of situation there was no need for asking for permission.

I then asked them, “As soon as you are asked permission, aren’t you so curious about what the issue is all about that you would just want to know?”

“This happens,” Sarah replied, “but not always. And besides, it’s nice to be given the choice, and, as I already mentioned, it does provide that moment or two to prepare myself.”

The conversation about this topic ended at this point, but a day or two later, we got back into it. In attempting to clarify in my own mind how the Sarah and Bob approach would work in a variety of situations, I asked Bob, “If you accidentally left your fly open, would it be okay if I just whispered to you in private that you needed to zipper up, or would you prefer that in that kind of situation I first ask if you were open to hearing some feedback?” He said that with that type of situation coming right to the issue would be fine, though it would be helpful if I said it in a non-putdown manner, perhaps pointing out that we all goof up like that from time to time.

I then asked Sarah, “Let’s say we’re in a restaurant together. You go to the bathroom, and when you come out I notice you are dragging some toilet paper behind you that is stuck to the bottom of your heel. Would you want me to come straight out and tell you, or would it be better to first ask for permission to give you feedback?” She didn’t hesitate, indicating that in that type of situation there would be no need to first request permission.

So, my next question was, “How do you two distinguish between those types of situations in which you ask for permission to give feedback from when you come right out and tell the person what’s on your mind?” Their main criteria was basically asking yourself, “For the kind of criticism I want to give, if someone was to provide a similar type of criticism to me, would I want to be asked for permission prior to receiving it?” If yes, then you ask for permission. For Sarah and Bob, the types of criticism that they would want to be asked permission before hearing it typically involve particularly sensitive issues for them, something you noticed was particularly sensitive in the past for the other person, or when it involves a person’s creative work.

My Thoughts

Dr. Jeffrey Rubin

That said, for me, personally, I’d rather make it clear to those whom I know that I always want to hear any negative criticism they want to share with me, and there is no need to first ask for permission. If I happen to be in a somewhat fragile state, for whatever reason, it is up to me, after hearing what the general issue is about, to quickly summarize what I heard, and then assert in a friendly way that I’ll need some time to consider the matter when I am in a better frame of mind.

It seems to me that if I were to inform people I know that before they provide me with any feedback they first use the “Asking For Permission Technique” it might discourage people from being as open about the concerns they would like to share with me. Said another way, if I were to request to people I know that before they provide me any negative criticism they first ask me for permission, it might signal to them that I am sensitive about such criticism. With that in mind, how much would they keep secret from me to avoid hurting my feelings?

Yes, there are times when I do feel within me some sensitive feelings upon hearing some negative feedback. Nevertheless, I’d rather deal with that than discourage anyone from letting me know, straight out, what they think I can do to improve. Moreover, I am confident that I have the skills to use those sensitive feelings in a constructive, creative manner. I also wonder if people might respect me more for being the type of person they can be straight and honest with, who gracefully welcomes criticism, and really takes the time to seriously consider what someone has to say.

At this point, I think it’s crucial that I make it clear that I’m not trying to imply that my personal preference is the “right” choice for everyone. Moreover, I very much doubt that people who prefer to be asked for permission before receiving criticism, are likely to lose any friends because they informed them of this preference. And, really, how much respect someone has for another is unlikely to significantly turn on this one issue since there are so many other aspects of anyone’s character.

Interestingly, although I try to make it clear to people I know that I’m pretty much always open to hear their criticism, there are times when I want to provide others with some feedback and I, myself, ask for permission. I’m most likely to do this when they have been working on something creative. At such time, I typically find myself asking, “Are you open to hearing my impressions?”

Finally, as Sarah, Bob and I moved toward finishing up our conversation, Sarah made one other point. She told us about a friend of hers who, when requesting feedback about something particularly close to her heart, asks that it be worded something like, “What if (or I wonder if) you changed…?” rather than, “I think something you did would be better if you did….” I think there are situations in which we would be wise to heed this suggestion.

So, there are some thoughts for all us to consider as we continue our journey from insults to respect.

——————————-

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.

Categories
child discipline conflict management conflict resolution criticism interpersonal conflicts social and emotional skills learning student discipline student insubordination

On Slamming Insubordinate Student Down

slam 3By now, most of you have repeatedly seen the shaky video that shows a police officer grabbing an insubordinate sixteen-year-old female student, Shakara, who is sitting at her desk (see HERE). When the officer’s hand is very close to the student’s throat, she hits at his arm. The officer then flips her over and flings her to the front of the classroom.

slam 4The student reportedly refused to put away her cell phone and then refused to leave the class after repeatedly being ordered to do so. Subsequently, the police officer was fired for using inappropriate force and because his maneuver violated department policy and training.

 

The Media’s Criticism

Numerous media commentators expressed outrage at what had occurred, but none that I’m aware of provided a detailed description of what would have been a better way to handle such events. For example, a Washington Post story, penned by its editorial board, states:

slam 5There is no question the young girl involved in the incident was wrong in allegedly refusing the teacher’s request to stop using her phone, and in not leaving the classroom when asked. But there are methods short of slapping on handcuffs available to schools for dealing with disrespectful children. Not only does this girl now face criminal charges that could dog her for the rest of her life, but a classmate who recorded the incident on her cellphone was arrested as well. 

principal's officeThe principal’s office — not a police station — is where both should have ended up, and it is hard not to suspect that that would have been the outcome had the offending students been white. That underscores the need for school officials everywhere to take a hard look at their disciplinary systems for bias and put in place practices that make schools safe, and also inclusive, for all students.

Notice that the editorial advocates that this issue is best handled in the principal’s office. But what if the student is refusing to go there, as is apparently alleged in this case?

male-criticismIn an earlier post on this blog, I advocated that an essential feature of mature criticism is that it is provided with enough details so that the criticized person, if he or she wills, can improve the behavior, idea, or appearance. I have not found, even after an hour of scanning the various media reports and editorials about this disturbing incident that, in my opinion, adequately provides a description of what would be a better response than what actually occurred. So, in this post, I’ll try to model a more mature form of criticism.

An Example of Being Specific and Practical When Providing Criticism

The first step, in my opinion, is to clarify what happened because there are some conflicting reports. According to Shakara’s attorney, Todd Rutherford, she had obeyed orders to put her cellphone away, and the dispute arose because she did not put it away fast enough. He went on to say, “She wasn’t yelling. She wasn’t disrupting the class. She wasn’t a threat to anyone.”

Another female student in the class reported that her classmate had her cellphone in math class. “She just had it out. She wasn’t talking or anything.”

In contrast to these two reports, the Washington Post reported school officials alleged that Shakara refused to stop using her phone which can be viewed as disturbing the class. Other media outlets specifically used the word disturbing the class as a reason for the occurrence. For example, according to a report by WISTV.COM,

sheriff“The student was told she was under arrest for disturbing school and given instructions which she again refused,” Lott [Richland County Sheriff] said.

Just what was meant, specifically, by the phrase “disturbing the class” was not made clear. So, given these somewhat contrasting descriptions, I’ll first provide criticism that specifically lays out an alternative way to handle a situation in which the student is violating a specific school rule but is not disrupting the ongoing classroom lesson. Then we’ll turn to an alternative way to handle a situation in which the student is violating a specific school rule and is disturbing the ongoing classroom lesson.

cell phoneExample 1: In the event that the school had a policy that all cell phones are to be off and out of sight whenever a class is in session, as is true in my local school district, and a student is violating this rule without disturbing the class lesson, here is my suggestion for a response that would be, in my opinion, a distinct improvement over what apparently took place:

Teacher to Shakara: “There is a school rule that all phones are to be off and out of sight, Shakara. Please make sure your phone is shut off and place it out of sight.

Shakara, not complying, says, “The rule is unfair.”

Class Rules_thumbTeacher to Shakara: In a pleasant, authoritative (in contrast to an authoritarian) tone of voice, “If you believe a school rule is unfair, there are some things that you can do that won’t land you in trouble for being insubordinate. You can make an appointment with me and the principal, and if you would like, you can also bring to the meeting your parents and some other advocates with you, to make your case. There are groups of lawyers from the Legal Aid Society and perhaps the American Civil Liberties Union that might want to help you to change something you feel is unfair. If you are dissatisfied with what occurs at that meeting, you can work your way up the chain of command, setting up a meeting next with the district superintendent, and then, after that, to the Board of Education, and then into the civil court system. You have a perfect right to try to change rules like this, and I think it would be educational for you to consider doing this. However, if you want to try to change the rule by being insubordinate in class, as long as you are not disruptive, we’ll get on with the class. Afterwards, you will not be able to return to class until your parents are called, and you and they attend a meeting.  At that meeting, you will have an opportunity to explain your position. Then the school principal will decide what other consequences you will have to face for being insubordinate. Now, do you, or any other students in the class have any questions about this?”

After answering any questions, the teacher would then ask politely, “Shakara, I am now giving you your choice, either shut off your phone and put it out of sight, or face the insubordinate charge.”

If the student doesn’t comply, the teacher would then continue with the class lesson as long as the student does not disturb the rest of the curriculum’s lesson, and then, after the class has ended, she would report the insubordination to the principal.

I have timed how long this would take–approximately two minutes if the student or students don’t have any questions, and maybe another two or three minutes to answer a few questions. Compare that to the time that is now being spent by local officials because of this event.

Example 2: In the event that the student is acting in a way that is disturbing the curriculum lesson, the teacher would first use the above approach. Teacher-and-StudentIf the student decides to continue to disturb the class lesson, the teacher would sit by the student and say in a caring, concerned manner, “You are taking learning time away from your fellow students, Shakara. You now have an insubordination charge to deal with. You are making choices that are not fair to the other students in the class who want to be prepared to pass tests at the end of the year. Is everything ok? Why are you acting like this?”  The teacher would listen to the student. If she continues to remain uncooperative, the teacher would then say in a calm tone of voice, “I am now going to call an administrator to come to the class to help us out with this.”

When the administrator comes, he or she would say, “Let’s not take any more learning time away from your classmates, Shakara. I want you to come with me to the office, and we’ll try to work this out.”

If the student refuses to go with the administrator, the administrator would then call the school’s resource officer, and when he or she arrives, the administrator would tell the teacher to take the rest of the class to the library and to continue the lesson there. Shakara would be told to stay in the class until the rest of the class is gone.

If she was to try to leave with her class, the administrator and officer would gently block her from leaving, without putting any hands on her, just moving their bodies in between her and the door. Hopefully both would have had some training to do this. While doing this, Shakara would be informed that if she attempts to lay any hands on either the administrator or the officer while trying to leave, she will be risking an assault charge that can lead to her being arrested.

sheriff carsIf she does indeed choose to physically attack either school official, another set of officers would be called, and she would then be arrested. From my experience as someone who worked for thirty years in schools, at a juvenile correctional facility, and a child psychiatric center, in the presence of an administrator, the school officer, and two other police back-up officers, it is extremely unlikely that Shakara would have resisted arrest under this set of circumstances. If she does resist, she would be subjected to a physical arrest that follows standard police practice.

In the event that Shakara does not begin to physically attack those who are blocking her path to leave, once the other students have left the class, the administrator would sit beside her and ask softly, and in a  concerned, caring manner, “Are you ok?” He or she would listen, using reflective listening skills aimed at de-escalating the conflict. When the student has calmed down and shared her side of what happened, the administrator would say, “The rules of the school now require that we go to my office, and I’m to call your parents. Take your time. When you are ready to go with me to my office, we’ll do so.”

I have found that once the student’s peers are no longer present, face saving variables are dramatically reduced. The student quickly settles down and readily agrees to go to the office.

Conclusion

female-criticsmI am not trying to take the position that the approaches that I described as helpful alternatives are the only reasonable courses of action, or the best alternative. I encourage readers of this blog to make other suggestions. My larger point is that the details of my proposals well match the higher levels of mature criticism, in that they provide enough details so that those who are criticized can, in a practical manner, utilize the criticism if they choose to do so.

With that, I invite you to join us again real soon here at From Insults to Respect. 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.

Categories
anger Bullied bullying conflict resolution emotional maturity insults interpersonal conflicts Name calling providing negative criticism social skills sports coaching

Abusive Criticism In Big Time Sports

bryce1It’s the bottom of the eighth inning. The talented star, Bryce Harper, front runner for the National League Most Valuable Player Award, hits a pop fly to left field that a professional outfielder is very likely to catch. However, there are times when such fielders do lose the ball in the sun or the stadium lights, and the ball ends up being dropped, allowing the batter to safely reach base if he had bothered to run. It is for this reason that Mr. Harper is supposed to hustle down to first base even if he has a pretty good reason to think that the ball he hit is, in all likelihood, going to be caught. Instead of sprinting down to first, Mr. Harper slowly steps out of the batter’s box and then heads to the dugout where he runs into a very angry teammate, Jonathan Papelbon.

Papelbon-chokeAccording to several sports reporters, Mr. Papelbon, an incredibly talented pitcher, began to criticize Mr. Harper about his lack of hustle, and after a very brief exchange, he charged into Mr. Harper, putting his hands on his throat and shoving him into the back wall of the Washington dugout. Fortunately, Mr. Harper was still wearing his batting helmet because his head smacked hard into the wall, and his helmet came flying off. Several Nationals players and coaches responded immediately and physically separated the two.

How Mature was Mr. Papelbon’s Style of Providing Negative Criticism in this Situation?

Regular readers of this blog know that when it comes to providing negative criticism, we are encouraged to consider a tentative model that describes five levels of maturity. Level one is viewed as the most immature, and each higher level is viewed as a little more mature. Let’s take a quick look at these levels, and as we do so, let’s see if we can figure out which of the five levels best describes Mr. Papelbon’s approach.

PROVIDING NEGATIVE CRITICISM:  FIVE LEVELS OF MATURITY

1. The criticizer displays one or more of the following behaviors:

  • Cries without stating what the crying is about
  • Physically attacks the person being criticized
  • Damages property

 

 

 

 

 

    2.  Those who are at this level display one or both of the following behaviors:

  • The criticizer does not explain what the offending behavior is, but instead expresses displeasure with glares, insults, shouting, silence, or threats that do not involve bodily harm. (For example, someone might be making too much noise and the criticizer might turn to the noise maker and glare, or cry out, “Jerk!”)
  • Threatens bodily harm regardless of what else is said.

      

 

3. Those who are at this level clearly state the criticism with enough detail so the criticized person, if he or she wills, can improve the behavior, idea, or appearance, but couple it with glares, insults, shouts, or threats that are not about bodily harm.

         

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.  Those who are at this level state 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, these criticizers empathize without returning glares, insults, threats, or shouts.

         

       

 

 

5.  Those who are at this level provide criticism in a manner very similar to a level four style of criticism but beforehand, they consider the person who is the target of the criticism, and the situation that he or she is in.  As a result of such considerations, they may decide to alter the criticism. 

 

 

 

 

According to the Above Model, What Level of Maturity Best Describes Mr. Papelbon’s Form of Negative Criticism?

While criticizing Mr. Harper’s lack of hustle to first base, Mr. Papelbon physically attacked him. Of the five levels described in the above model, level one, the most immature level, best describes what he had done.

Why is such a style considered immature? Well, one reason is that when people respond at the more mature levels, it demonstrates that they can consider the consequences of their actions before they choose what actions to take. In this case, the consequences for Mr. Papelbon has been a suspension for the rest of the season, a fine of thousands of dollars, and he has been displayed on national news in a negative light, thus tarnishing his reputation. A little forethought would have led to avoiding these clearly negative consequences.

sprintNow, it is important to note that the specific negative criticism that Mr. Papelbon wanted to deliver to Mr. Hudson, was, according to my own value system, correct. Mr. Hudson does owe it to his teammates to hustle down to first base in these situations. However, I disagree with how Mr. Papelbon provided the criticism.

Mr. Papelbon, center, after lunging at Mr. Harper.
Mr. Papelbon, center, after lunging at Mr. Harper.

What would have been a more mature response? A little forethought would have led to realizing that Mr. Harper was very frustrated with his own pop out in the game. Thus, to wait until the next day would give both parties time to calm down.

Moreover, providing negative criticism to someone in front of lots of other people is often a huge mistake. Face-saving actions tend to increase defensiveness for both parties. Asking to discuss such matters in private is often a kinder, wiser approach.

Finally, Mr. Papelbon would have been wise to first consider if he was the best person to present the criticism. Usually managers of a team are the ones who are considered to have the legitimate authority to bring these types of issues up to a player. If Mr. Papelbon felt he had a particularly close relationship with Mr. Harper, or an established mentor relationship, there could be some exceptions to this general rule. Otherwise, Mr. Papelbon might have been wise to privately discuss his displeasure about his teammate’s lack of hustle with his manager and urge him to take firm action.

Sports Illustrated Article on “Abusive Coaches”

In big time sports, Mr. Papelbon is in no way the only one who provides negative criticism in a manner that matches the most immature levels of our model. In a special report of the September 28, 2015 issue of Sports Illustrated, Alexander Wolff (with reporting by Lauren Shute) writes:,

Coaches yelling“Why do college coaches continue to yell, demean and demoralize? That’s yesterday’s tactic. Today’s athletes can’t-and won’t-take it. What’s more, it doesn’t work: Study after study shows the benefits of a more positive approach.” (p. 51)

What are the negative consequences of providing negative criticism in these low maturity level styles? The Sports Illustrated writer tells us about excellent players leaving their teams, and in rare cases, committing suicide.

Many coaches have lost their jobs after an athletic director’s investigation. Over the past 28 months at least seven Division I schools have had an investigation, and then parted ways with coaches following player complaints of mistreatment.

Moreover, some colleges end up getting sued. In one case, seven former players have filed a $10 million civil suit that charges the school and coaches were fostering a racially hostile environment.

There is some relatively good news in the Sports Illustrated article. Apparently, most players are not being treated in a demeaning manner judging from one recent NCAA survey. Of Division I players, 31% of men’s basketball players and 22% of football players reported that a coach “puts me down in front of others.” Although this indicates that there is still plenty of room for improvement, it can nevertheless be viewed as a hopeful sign that most coaches are finding more positive ways to bring out quality performances in their players.

Why Do Many Coaches Continue to Use Abusive Tactics?

As reported in the Sports Illustrated article, according to Ramogi Huma, executive director to the National College Players Association, which often hears from abused athletes:

“I believe this is a cultural problem. A lot of coaches, they were hollered at and abused when they were players.” (p. 52)

coach yelling 2There is also undoubtedly a great deal of pressure on the coaches. If they don’t win, they are very likely to be replaced.

But perhaps the major reason is that coaches are not provided enough inspiring stories about how successful coaches find ways to win by fostering bonding, loyalty, and commitment to a team in a positive manner. Dramatic enthusiasm when explaining to players what specifically they can do to improve, rather than belittling them about what they did wrong, is one such positive approach. Celebrating each step toward improvement is another.

Conclusion

Thinking about what happens when immature styles of criticism occur in the world of big time sports can provide us an important lesson with regards to how we provide criticism to others in non-athletic situations. The five levels of maturity provides guidance not only to big time athletic teammates and their coaches, but also to the rest of us.

Real change from lower levels of maturity to higher levels rarely occurs from reading a single article. More typically, it requires bringing examples of people utilizing the higher level skills before one’s consciousness at least weekly for several months, and, on each of these occasions, an effort must be put forth to consider how these skills can be specifically applied to one’s own life. Following this blog is a no cost way to help make this happen.

I hope you join us again real soon.

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.

Categories
conflict management conflict resolution criticism guilt interpersonal conflicts likability The DIG Conflict Model

Comics, Conflicts and the Desire to be Liked

Habitual ways of acting often can’t be overcome by a single discussion. Thus, it helps to bring before our conscience some ideas a few times over the course of several months.  With that in mind, let’s review some of the ideas we have discussed earlier on this blog about conflict and the desire to be liked.  By utilizing a fresh new batch of comics I hope to demonstrate that we can have some fun as we go about this.

Letting Someone You Like Know You Like Them is a Key to Resolving Many a Conflict

peanuts being liked

As good old Charlie Brown makes clear, it is hugely important for him to be liked. This happens to be true for most of us.

As we discussed in an earlier post, this desire to be liked often becomes threatened when we find that we are embroiled in a conflict. To settle things down to a level at which reasonableness has a chance to prevail, if you happen to like the other party, you might find it helpful to mention this.

I remember one time long ago when I was a mere eighteen years old, I had planned to go to see a movie with a friend.  He arrived so late that we missed the show and I became angry.

Did I have a conflict with my friend? On this blog, when we look to see if there is a conflict in a situation, we use the phrase “DIG for the conflict” to help us to answer this question. The word DIG helps us to remember to look for a desire, something that interferes with the desire, and if someone feels someone is guilty of doing something wrong. In the situation I described, I desired to go see this movie and my friend interfered with this desire by arriving late. I felt he was guilty of being inconsiderate.  And so I did end up having a conflict with my friend for coming late.

When we use the DIG Conflict Model, we also use the word DIG to remind us to dig a little deeper when thinking about a conflict.  A tool that we use to dig deeper is to remember that people typically desire to be liked. With that in mind, can I describe a different type of conflict that occurred within me when my friend came late? Here’s one. I desired to be liked and when my friend came late I felt he interfered with this desire because it seemed to me that if he really liked me, he would have shown up on time.  I felt he was guilty of treating me disrespectfully.

Back then when I was eighteen, how did I react to my friend coming late? I started shouting and calling him names. A popular way for people to respond to the way I was acting is to shout louder and to try to return the insults with insults. But rather than throwing insults at me, this friend of mine quietly heard me out, and then he looked sadly down at the ground for a few seconds, then he looked up into my eyes, and said softly, “Jeff, your friendship means a lot to me. I like you a ton and a half. I’m real sorry I was late.”

My anger eased, and within a few minutes we were having our usual good time together.

Responding to Criticism Immaturely Can Leave You All Alone

peanuts and criticism

Here we see that Lucy interprets Charlie Brown’s question as criticism. She responds by shouting and displaying other signs of defensiveness such as wildly waving her fists all around. Charlie Brown soon hurries away.

Using the DIG Conflict Model, we might describe this situation as follows: As we know, Charlie Brown desires to be liked. Lucy’s response to his question perhaps interfered with this desire because he believes that when people like you they don’t speak to you in the tone of voice that Lucy used.  He might have also felt she was guilty of treating him disrespectfully. Perhaps Charlie Brown abruptly left in response to this conflict he had with Lucy.

In an earlier post titled “Responding to Criticism: Four Levels Of Maturity” we see that Lucy’s style of responding to criticism tends to decrease one’s likability. It also increases the chance that it will create unnecessary conflicts.

What would be a more mature response? In my earlier post, I described one of the most mature ways to respond to criticism as follows:

Illustration by Deanna Martinez4.  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.

What response could have Lucy made in response to Charlie Brown’s question that would have earned her a level closer to a 4 rating? It might be worth discussing this with a few friends. One answer might be something like this:

Lucy smiles and says, “That’s a reasonable question, Charlie Brown. Let me think about this for a few seconds.” She then pauses and rubs her chin, thus showing that she is taking his question seriously.  Then she might have said, “I just thought I’d see if I could make more money in the winter by raising my rates.” If Lucy did this without any defensiveness, I think it probably would have come off as more likable than the way she did act in the comic. And perhaps Charlie Brown’s desire to be liked would have become less threatened.

Even Mature People Find It Difficult to Deal With Too Much Criticism In Too Short A Period Of Time

blondie dinner date

Here Dagwood and Blondie Bumstead end up having a conflict with their neighbors.  That is, the Bumsteads had a desire to have a pleasant evening with their new neighbors, but the neighbors constant negative comments interfered with this desire. In the end, the Bumsteads perhaps felt their new neighbors were guilty of being too negative.

Jefferson Writing Declaration of Independence
Jefferson Writing Declaration of Independence

A while back I provided a post titled “PROVIDING NEGATIVE CRITICISM: A LESSON FROM THOMAS JEFFERSON.” There I summarized Jefferson’s views about how to respond to people you are just beginning to get to know:

One of the main desires that people have is to be liked. If we criticize people before we establish that we like them, they are much more likely to feel that we will not like them. This dramatically increases the likelihood of heightened levels of defensiveness.  If, instead, we seek first to establish that we do esteem our new companions, while holding off any negative criticism until a close, friendly relationship has been established, perhaps this would be a wiser course of action. Even after establishing a close friendly relationship, perhaps it still makes sense to avoid giving too much criticism in too short a period of time.

Well, those are some ideas I wanted to review today. In sum, when you are in the midst of a conflict, if you happen to like the other party, it often makes sense to do something to let him or her know it. Even if you don’t particularly like or dislike the other party in a conflict, it is often better if you avoided acting in ways that might be interpreted as disliking him or her. The more mature levels of responding to criticism are less likely to lead others to feel you don’t like them and increases the chances that they will like you. When you are just beginning a new relationship, it is usually better to keep any negative criticism to a minimum until you establish that you genuinely like the other party, and even then, be careful to avoid too much negative criticism in too short a period of time.

I hope you had some fun while we went about reviewing these ideas. May the rest of your week be filled with delightful human interactions.

——————————-

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.

 

 

Categories
Bob Dylan conflict resolution fools insults Listening skills Name calling

Bob Dylan On Fools

Bob Dylan

Bob Dylan2Bob Dylan begins his Theme Time Radio Hour show about fools, with a beautiful instrumental version of “Why Do Fools Fall In Love.” After a few bars of this tune, it continues in the background as Bob begins to speak:

James Thurber
James Thurber

James Thurber once said, “You can fool too many of the people too much of the time,” and for the next hour we’re going to try to do just that. Welcome back to Theme Time Radio Hour. Today we’re going to talk about patsies, stooges, marks, jesters, jokers, buffoons, clowns, tricksters, harlequins, and the village idiots, because in honor of April first, it’s our fools’ program. Everybody plays the fool sometimes, and for the next hour we’re going to play the greatest records about our favorite halfwits, the fools.

Recently, I provided a post on this blog titled, “Bob Dylan on Madness,” as an entertaining way to practice some of the basic principles I regularly discuss. That post was so popular that I thought, Why not do a similar post utilizing Bob’s show on fools? After all, in addition to people at times seeking to insult themselves and others by saying such things as “You’re mad” or “You’re crazy,” they do likewise by saying such things as “You’re a fool” or “You’re a buffoon.” Are there more respectful, helpful ways to deal with situations that give rise to such name calling?  I think so.  Let’s see if we can have some fun thinking about this issue as we review Bob’s show on fools.

Chain of Fools

ArethaAfter Bob’s brief introduction, he dives right into Aretha Franklin’s emotionally charged song, “Chain of Fools.”

For five long years
I thought you were my man
But I found out
I’m just a link in your chain

You got me where you want me
I ain’t nothin’ but your fool
Ya treated me mean
Oh you treated me cruel

Chain, chain, chain
(Chain, chain, chain)
Chain of fools

Every chain, has got a weak link
I might be weak yeah
But I’ll give you strength

Oh, hey
Chain, chain, chain
(Chain, chain, chain)
Chain of fools

Here we find a woman calling herself a fool because she sees herself attached to a man who treats her cruel. I wonder how I would react to a woman telling me a similar story.  I guess I would not rush into giving her any advice, but rather, give her some time to be with her emotional experience while I listened in a caring, empathic manner.

listeningAs we discussed in an earlier post titled “To Listen, Or To Criticize,” we often jump too quickly into providing advice. If you would like your listening skills to be respected, it helps to summarize, every few minutes, what is being said in a caring manner, thus reassuring the person talking to you that you are indeed listening and accurately hearing what is going on.

After perhaps fifteen minutes or so of listening and summarizing, I would continue to listen, but I might begin to start asking, as gently as possible, a few clarifying questions.  digI often use the DIG Conflict Model to come up with my questions. The letters of the word “DIG” would remind me to ask about what she “desires” in this situation, what is “interfering” with her desire, and if she feels she is “guilty” of doing something wrong. I would gently encourage her to be as specific as she could be.  A statement like, I’m guilty of being a fool” is way too vague to be helpful in coming up with any practical plan. “I’m guilty of not going out to social events on Friday evenings so I can find a loving relationship with a man who would treat me with respect,” fits better with my image of being specific.

Aretha Franklin’s song continues with these words:

One of these mornings
The chain is gonna break
But up until the day
I’m gonna take all I can take, oh hey

Chain, chain, chain
(Chain, chain, chain)
Chain of fools

We see a glimmer of hope in these words. That weak link in the chain is not completely unbreakable. I think that at some point in my relationship with a woman dealing with this type of concern, I might ask what she thinks she might do if the chain would indeed break.  My overall goal at this point in the relationship would be to focus not so much on what is wrong with what is happening in her life, but what she could specifically do to improve her situation.

Further On In the Show

A little later in Bob’s show, he introduces another song:

Hank Snow
Hank Snow

Everyone plays the fool sometime. Hank Snow knew that. We talk about Hank an awful lot [on my show], and he was one of the biggest voices in country music from 1951 and 1955. He had a remarkable number of top ten hits. This is from the tail end of that streak, in 1955–“Now And Then There Is A Fool Such As I.”

Here are some of the lyrics:

Pardon me, if I’m sentimental
When we say goodbye.
Don’t be angry with me should I cry.
When you’re gone, yet I’ll dream
A little dream as years go by.

Now and then there’s a fool such as I.

…

And now you say that we are through.
I’m a fool, but I’ll love you dear
Until the day I die.
Now and then there’s a fool such as I.

Like the Aretha Franklin song, this Hank Snow song is about someone in love who is feeling like a fool. As it turns out, almost all of the songs Bob plays over the course of his hour show is about love and someone feeling like a fool. But they differ nevertheless. In the first two songs we find out about two people who are calling themselves fools, but the first one is about a woman who feels she’s a fool for staying connected with a man even though he treats her bad. The second song is about a man who feels foolish for continuing to love a woman even after she said they are through.

In other songs that Dylan plays during his show, a singer is trying to convince her parents that she’s no fool for loving a man that they think is less than ideal. Then there’s one about a man who is trying to convince a woman that she’s a fool for not loving him despite all that he has to offer.

One of the highlights of Bob’s show is a little audio clip of Humphrey Bogart, as Sam Spade, confronting Mary Astor as the femme fatale, Brigid, in the classic film noir, The Maltese Falcon.

Maltese FalconBrigid, desperately: You’ve been playing with me, just pretending to trap me like this. You didn’t care at all. You don’t love me.

Spade: I won’t play the sap for you.

Brigid: You know it’s not like that! You can’t say that!

Spade: You haven’t played straight with me for half hour at a stretch since I’ve known you.

Brigid: You know down deep in your heart that in spite of everything I’ve done, I love you.

Spade: I don’t care who loves who, I won’t play the sap for you. You killed Miles and you’re going over for it.

As you can see, even when used in the context of love difficulties, the word, “fool,” or its related terms, are used to refer to quite a variety of different circumstances.  

Frankie LymonAs we leave the love arena, we see that the term is used in even a wider set of circumstances. Thus, Bob tells us about the enormously talented singer, Frankie Lymon, who died way too early with a heroin syringe by his side. As another example, he tells us about a couple of football games:

Every field has its fools, and the biggest mistakes are made on the football field. For example, Roy Unsway Regales played for the University of California, and in the 1929 Rose Bowl Game, he got turned around and ran 65 yards in the wrong direction.

Jim, upon realizing his mistake.
Jim, upon realizing his mistake.

That’s nothing compared to Jim Marshal who played for the Minnesota Vikings. On October 25, 1964 the Vikings were playing against the San Francisco 49ers. Marshal recovered a fumble and ran 66 yards in the wrong direction into his own end zone. He was so excited he threw down the ball in celebration. The ball landed out of bounds, resulting in a safety for the 49ers. Fortunately for him, the Vikings won the game anyway, 27 to 22, and I was there that day. Strange but true.

We All Sometimes Play the Fool

Throughout the show, Bob reminds us repeatedly that everyone plays the fool sometime.  He does it in a variety of ways. Thus, before playing the song, “Three Times a Fool,” Bob tells us “It wouldn’t be bad if you were just a fool once a year, but all of us are fools on more than one occasion.”

A  little later, he says:

We’re talking about fools of all stripes here on Theme Time Radio Hour. As Jean Brown once said, “Foolproof systems don’t take into account the ingenuity of fools.”

And still a little later, Bob gives us some quotes from Shakespeare and Twain on the subject of fools.

Shakespeare looking a little foolish in his outfit.
Shakespeare looking a little foolish in his outfit.

Shakespeare spoke quite often about fools. For example, in A Midsummers Night Dream he said, Lord, what fools these mortals be? Twelfth Night gave us the following line, Foolery, Sir, does walk about the orb like the sun. It shines everywhere. And From As You Like it, The more pity that fools may not speak wisely what wise men do foolishly.

Shakespeare, hell of a cat.

…

TwainAs Mark Twain says,”The first of April is the day we remember who we are the other 364 days of the year.

And so when people call us a fool, perhaps we may find that the sting of the comment is lessened if we keep in mind that no doubt these name callers have had their share of playing the fool on plenty of occasions.  And when, out of old habits, we find ourselves calling either ourselves, or someone else a fool, perhaps a little sympathy with the human condition is in order.

———————
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.

 

 

 

 

Categories
conflict resolution DSM Name calling psychiatrists psychiatry psychopathology The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

Psychiatric Name Calling: Is There An Alternative?

monopolyThe publishers of The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) currently hold a monopoly for classifying the concerns that lead people to seek mental health services. Recently on this blog, in a series of articles, I have been pointing out numerous faults of the DSM.  To check out some examples of these, see my posts titled Name Calling by Psychiatrists: Is it Time to Put a Stop to it? and Are “Mental Illnesses” Really Potentially Helpful Tools?

alternativeIn these critical posts, I have touched upon what I believe would be a distinctly better alternative to the DSM and argued that its creation, in breaking up this monopoly, would stimulate through creative competition, improved mental health services. Today, let’s take a closer look at this.

The Classification and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Concerns (CSM)

concerns 1I called this proposed alternative manual, the CSM, and you can find a much fuller description of it in a peer reviewed journal HERE.  In brief, its first chapter would begin by stating that the developed of the CSM fully recognize that individuality outruns any classification system. It is for this reason that the CSM does not seek to classify anyone. Instead, it classifies the expressed concerns of individuals seeking to have their concerns addressed by a mental health service provider.

concerns 3The CSM begins from the perspective of the person seeking services. Because the expression of a mental health concern is a clearly observable event, by making it the event being classified in the CSM it solves the reliability problems that have been plaguing the DSM’s far more abstract concept of “mental disorders.”

After this statement, the CSM would clearly define its main construct:

A mental health concern occurs when a person seeking mental health services expresses to a mental health service provider a concern about any of these topics: behavior, emotion, mood, meaning of life, managing chronic pain, work, relationships, education, eating, cognition, sleep and challenging life situations.

MentalHealth 2Each of these topics would have separate major sections in the second chapter, and under each section would be a list of more specific concerns.

mental healthThis second chapter would be devoted to listing all of the concerns that professionals tend to hear from those seeking their services.  Each concern would be given a code that would be used for various administrative purposes such as insurance forms and computer filing systems. And then there would be, for each concern, a list of related search terms that can be used to assist people who want to utilize a search engine to find all the relevant literature regarding that particular concern.

Survey 2The list of concerns would be identified by two types of surveys.  First, a large sample of mental health service providers would be asked to list the various concerns that they are asked to address in their practice without couching them in pathological language and to stick as closely as possible to the language used by those seeking their services. So, a concern about feeling blue might simply be classified “feeling blue,” rather than the DSM’s “Major Depressive Disorder;” a concern about a child’s above average activity level might simply be classified as “above average activity level” rather than the DSM’s “Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.”   The second type of survey that would be used to generate the list of concerns that would appear in the CSM,  would ask the membership of mental health service user organizations to list the various concerns that led them to seek mental health services.  They, too, would be asked to avoid pathological terminology. For a number of practical reasons, a maximum of four words would be used for classifying each expressed concern in this chapter.

FormulationThe final chapter of the CSM would be devoted to describing good practice guidelines for the use of psychological formulation, which is an assessment approach that is consistent with the CSM’s philosophy of not pathologizing individuals.  Psychological formulation provides an approach that expands on the brief expressed concerns of individuals by developing a narrative of several paragraphs. It can be defined as the process involving a mental health service user and a mental health service provider co-constructing a hypothesis or ‘best guess’ about the origins of the mental health service user’s concerns in the context of his or her relationships, social circumstances, life events, and the sense that he or she has made of them. Once it has been established what the concerns are, the immediate next question is, ‘How do we jointly understand these experiences, why they arose, and how we might be able to address them?’

Unlike diagnosis, this type of psychological formulation is not about making an expert judgement, but about working closely with the individual to develop a shared understanding which will evolve over time. And, unlike diagnosis, it draws attention to the service user’s resources and strengths in surviving what are nearly always very challenging life situations.

Defending the CSM Approach

classifyNow, some believe that the psychological formulation is all that is needed as an alternative to the DSM and that there is no need to join it with any classification manual such as the CSM.  But keep in mind that currently the DSM is used by insurance companies and other third party payers such as Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security. Insurance companies and these other third party payers have a form that must be filled out whenever someone seeks mental health services under their plan. This form has a little box that currently says, “Diagnosis.” In that box, mental health professionals must fill in the DSM code that corresponds to their so-called diagnosis of the person seeking services.

insurance formWith the CSM proposal, all that we would be asking insurance companies to do differently in order to add value for their customers, is to slightly change that little box. Instead of just saying “Diagnosis” as it currently says, that box would add two little words, so it would end up saying “Diagnosis or Concern.” Then, when mental health professionals fill in the box, they would be given the choice to either write in the letters “DSM” and its code number that corresponds to its so-called diagnosis, or they would write the letters CSM and its code number that corresponds to the expressed concern. Mental health consumers would be given the choice to go to pathologizing mental health service providers or those using the CSM approach.

That’s all the change that would be required in order to increase value for insurance customers as well as other third party payers. And a major goal that all third party payers have is to increase value for their customers. The cost and effort for these payers would be minimum and we would have numerous testimonials from customers that documents that this change would be viewed as a significant improvement.

bureaucracy 2A psychological formulation approach, which requires several paragraphs to be completed, would be far too cumbersome for these payers to incorporate into their bureaucratic system.  Moreover, a short word or phrase that could replace terms like “Major Depressive Disorder” or “Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder” is necessary for other practical forms of communication. For example, if I want to write a title for a research article, it would not be practical to insert into it several paragraphs.  The psychological formulation approach would become far more widely used if it has some practical way of providing some short terms that are consistent with its non-pathologizing approach to conceptualizing an individual’s mental health concerns.

bureaucracySome may argue that if everyone could go to a mental health professional merely to have their concerns addressed, then the system would soon be overloaded with clients and insurance policy costs would soar.  Since insurance companies only cover people with more serious conditions known as “mental disorders,” so the argument goes, this limits the amount of people who can get to see a mental health professional.

Insurance and other third party payer executives are not stupid. They would readily understand, with a little explaining, that mental health service providers now using the current DSM do not turn anyone with a mental health insurance policy away who comes to their office expressing what I refer to as a mental health concern.  Professionals are in the business of increasing their clients.  Let’s be honest here; there are “close enough” matches throughout the DSM for anyone with mental health insurance coverage who currently wants mental health services to get it.

scienceHere’s another reason why the CSM would improve the psychological formulation approach. In pretty much any of the advanced countries in the world, there is a rather large segment of the population that believes science has been an enormous help advancing our knowledge. The CSM, as already mentioned, is even more consistent with principles of science than the DSM because it solves the problem of reliability that has been a mess with the DSM. And for science minded people, each branch of science must have a system of classification that helps to organize concepts, to retrieve relevant research, and to be useful in formulating programs of research. In my view, the pairing of psychological formulation with the CSM’s list of brief descriptors of mental health concerns will fit well with this worldview.

concerns 2And so, these are some of my arguments for uniting in the CSM proposal a classification system and the psychological formulation proposal. Together, both can clearly improve value for consumers of mental health services by providing a new choice, but only if consumers of mental health services role up their sleeves, organize, and effectively advocate for this type of change.

In summary then, the CSM is more consistent with principles of science. It is close enough to the worldview and administrative requirements of all of the stakeholders in the mental health field, thus reducing resistance that often comes with proposed changes. And the creation of the CSM would break up the DSM monopoly, thereby spurring creative approaches for understanding the nature of anguish, sadness and tears.

——————————-

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.

 

Categories
conflict resolution Listening skills silent treatment

To Listen, Or To Criticize?

Sally Forth a
Sally Forth 1In the above Sally Forth comic strip, we learn from Ted that Sally had a fight with her sister.  By the third panel, Ted begins to criticize Sally, saying she is coming off like a robot, and then he expresses his view that she had been kind of dismissive of her sister’s news about becoming engaged. In the last panel, I get the feeling that Sally really isn’t in a state to listen to Ted’s criticism.  And yet, Ted tries to push Sally to address his criticism.

The next day’s comic strip moves the story further along.

Sally Forth 2Here we see that Ted has come to understand that he would have been better off skipping the criticism that he had provided to Sally. Listening, he believes, would have been a better thing to do.

Sally Forth 4Now we see Sally confiding to a friend about how she feels about Ted’s criticism.  We also learn that since Ted criticized her, she has not been talking to him.

Using this series of Sally Forth comics, today we will work on three key tasks:

1. Consider when it makes more sense for Ted to listen, rather than to criticize.

2. Examine what Sally could have done that might have been better than giving Ted the silent treatment.

3. Examine some essential listening skills for those times when we believe it is better to listen, rather than to criticize.

Before we move on to these key tasks, let’s move the Sally Forth story a few days further along.

Sally Forth 9Here we learn that Ted had begun to criticize Sally immediately after Sally’s fight with her sister. That’s a crucial point that will soon be woven into our various discussions.

Three Assessment Strategies to Decide Whether to Critique or to Listen

Here, I’d like to suggest three assessment strategies to help with the decision to critique or to listen.

Sally Forth 91. Assess when the quarrel occurred. If the quarrel has occurred very recently, it’s usually best to go with listening.  Trying to present a reasoned critique shortly after a heated quarrel makes little sense because it is extra hard for people to reason carefully when they are very frustrated and angry.  By listening in a caring way you can play a huge part in helping the person to return to a state in which reasoning abilities are at their peek.

2. Assess whether it is crucial to share your critique immediately.  I think you will find that in most situations your critique can wait a day, two days, or even a week.  However, in some cases a conflict may require some immediate action and you may believe your critique is so crucial for making a wise choice, that pushing your critique to the fore makes sense.

3. Even if Ted had waited a reasonable period of time and had been making himself available to listen to Sally, before diving into his critique, it would still be a good idea for him to ask the following types of questions.  “Sally, I have some time now, do you want to talk more about what’s been happening between you and your sister?”  If Sally says yes, Ted would say something like, “So far, Sally, I’ve been mainly listening as you talked about what happened.  I’m wondering if you think you’re ready to hear some ideas that I’ve been thinking about that might be helpful, or would you prefer me to stay in a listening mode?”  After asking this question, Ted would assess how Sally replies.  Even if she says she wants to hear his ideas, if her voice appears tense, or there is a tense expression on her face, he might be wise to tread lightly on anything that Sally might find too sensitive.  Additionally, he might reasonably switch back into a listening mode if she appears to turn angry at something that he says.

Now, so far, I have been discussing what Ted could have done better to address Sally’s concerns.  Now let’s take a couple of minutes to discuss what Sally could have done better.

The Silent Treatment Versus Assertiveness

Sally Forth bIn the Sally Forth story, Sally, turning angry at Ted, decides to give him the silent treatment.  I’m wondering if there might be a better way for her to have handled this type of situation.

My wife, Andrea, is very assertive when it comes to these types of situations.  If I begin to express my views before she is ready to hear them, she just gives me a clear signal to back off, and I respect her wishes.  Maybe Sally could have said to Ted when he began to provide his critique immediately after her argument with her sister, “I see you want to critique what happened, Ted, but I prefer that you just go into a listening mode for now.”

If Sally, when she has returned to a calmer state, agrees that this assertive approach makes more sense than ending up giving Ted the silent treatment, she can practice doing this in her mind at least three times.  These practice sessions are simple and involve closing her eyes and imagining how she felt right after her fight with her sister, then recalling how Ted began to criticize her action, and then imagining herself being assertive to Ted.  By practicing this a few times, especially if she does this over the course of a few days, there is an excellent chance she will have no difficulty using the assertive approach the next time a similar situation arises.

Now, let’s once again turn our attention to what Ted could do in this situation.  Both he and Sally agree that it would have been better for him to have gone into the listening mode, rather than the critiquing mode.  But doing good listening doesn’t mean simply keeping your mouth shut while the other party talks.  There is a real art to listening.  In the next section, I’m going to present the three most helpful things to do while listening.

Three Helpful Things to Do While Listening

Sally Forth 8When Ted goes into his listening mode, there are a few things that he can do to make his listening more effective.  First, every minute or two, he could briefly summarize what she had just said. This would assure Sally that Ted is paying attention. You can learn more about how this is done by looking up the topic, reflective listening. Second, if Sally turns sad about something she is discussing, Ted could express sadness on his face as well, look into Sally’s eyes, and softly touch Sally’s shoulder.  This is called empathic listening.  Finally, Ted could learn how to validate Sally’s feelings.  For example, Sally says to Ted, “Every time I hear my sister has made some awful mistake, I feel awful inside.” Ted can validate Sally’s feeling by saying something like, “I know what you mean, I feel like that when my brother makes an awful mistake.”  When someone validates a person’s experience in this way, it helps to communicate a connection between the speaker and the listener.

Okay, so there are some ideas to think about when considering whether to listen or to criticize.  I hope you find within this post some food for thought.  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.

Categories
anger conflict management conflict resolution criticism insults Islam Muslims respect Responding to Criticism

Killing People Because They Criticized Your Muslim Faith: Is It A Sign of Immaturity?

paris-rally-large-169Anyone who follows the news, has heard about the most recent terrorist act in France. This post, however looks at what occurred earlier this year against those who worked for the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.  The magazine had published articles and cartoons that criticize those who believe that the proper response to people making fun of a group’s religious beliefs is to kill them.  Although the magazine writers had poked fun at all of the major religions, it was individuals who viewed themselves as followers of the Muslim faith that actually carried out these murders.

Before I go any further, I hasten to point out that Muslim statesmen, clerics and intellectuals have condemned these awful acts.  Moreover, the vast majority of those who view themselves as Muslims are not going around murdering anyone, let alone people who voice criticism of their faith. That said, we still have laid before us on the front pages of every media outlet this particular event. I therefore am personally moved to spend some time today throwing around some relevant ideas.  Anything that I do say today in no way is meant to imply that I think Muslims, in general, are more violent-prone or immature than other people.

Violence in Response to Criticism

Regular followers of this blog well know that I have put together a tentative model of different levels of maturity for responding to criticism.  There are 5 levels.  Level one is viewed as the most immature set of responses.  Each higher level is viewed as more mature.

If you will, take a look below at the five levels of maturity and see what level of maturity best describes the actions of those who murdered the Charlie Hebdo magazine workers?

  1. This level requires displaying one or more of the following:
  • Weeps or sobs with tears or pouts unless also displaying responses consistent with either level 4 or 5.
  • Physically attacks the criticizer (regardless of whatever else is said or done)
  • Damages property (regardless of what else is said or done)

cryinglevel 1 fightLevel 1 paint

 

 

 

 

 

  1. 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.

level 2-1 Level 2-2 Level 2-3

 

 

 

 

Level 2-4

 

 

 

 

                             

  1. 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.

level 3-1.jpg level 3-2.jpg.gif

 

 

                        

 

  1. Individuals at this level 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.  Level 4If, 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.

 

  1. In addition to actions consistent with level 4, people acting in a manner consistent with level 5 seek ways to use, whenever they disagree with the criticism, a technique known as steering in the direction the criticizer would prefer to go. Level-5That is, rather than just disagreeing without being disagreeable, the criticized person seeks to find a new choice of action that creatively utilizes something suggested from the criticism. Steering cannot be incorporated into all situations, but it is an additional goal of the most mature individuals.

 

Okay, so now that you looked over the five levels of maturity for responding to criticism, which level do you think best matches those who slaughtered the group of individuals who worked for the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo?

My Response

As I looked over the levels, the task was easy.  As far as I’m concerned, level 1 is clearly the best match.

Now some might say, why bother to put the actions of those who did the killing in a developmental framework?  For many, just calling them vile names more than suffices.

Well, one reason is that calling someone vile names doesn’t automatically point one to a description of what would be a more mature response, as a developmental model does. Additionally, if you want to talk the language of many experts in human behavior, getting away from the vile name calling fits in with their zeitgeist.

Mustafa Akyol
Mustafa Akyol

Consider Mustafa Akyol, author of Islam Without Extremes: A Muslim Case for Liberty and the writer of yesterday’s New York Times Op-Ed titled “Islam’s Problem With Blasphemy.”  First, Mr. Akyol points out that,

The only source in Islamic law that all Muslims accept indisputably is the Quran. And, conspicuously, the Quran decrees no earthly punishment for blasphemy — or for apostasy (abandonment or renunciation of the faith), a related concept. Nor, for that matter, does the Quran command stoning, female circumcision or a ban on fine arts. 

Mr. Akyol explains that religious nationalism is guided by religious law — Shariah — which was developed over 100 of years after the Quran, and it is there that we find clauses about punishing blasphemy as a deadly sin. While Shariah is believed by many Muslims to be rooted in the divine, according to Mr. Akyol, the overwhelming majority of its injunctions are man-made, partly reflecting the values and needs of the seventh to 12th centuries — when no part of the world was liberal, and other religions, such as Christianity, also considered blasphemy a capital crime.

In contrast to Shariah law about blasphemy, the Quran tells its followers: “God has told you in the Book that when you hear God’s revelations disbelieved in and mocked at, do not sit with them until they enter into some other discourse; surely then you would be like them.”

Mr. Akyol concludes his Op-Ed piece with the following:

Just “do not sit with them” — that is the response the Quran suggests for mockery. Not violence. Not even censorship.

Wise Muslim religious leaders from the entire world would do Islam a great favor if they preached and reiterated such a nonviolent and nonoppressive stance in the face of insults against Islam. That sort of instruction could also help their more intolerant coreligionists understand that rage is a sign of nothing but immaturity. The power of any faith comes not from its coercion of critics and dissenters. It comes from the moral integrity and the intellectual strength of its believers.

Notice Mr. Akyol’s last paragraph refers to immaturity, and he lays out what he views as a more mature, wiser path.  That is the type of model that I, myself, am striving to emulate.

———————

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.

 

Categories
Albert Einstein anger conflict resolution criticism Name calling negative criticism providing criticism wisdom

Einstein and Stupidity

“Two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I am not yet completely sure about the universe.”–Albert Einstein

Einstein as a young man
Einstein as a young man

In the spring of 1914, Albert Einstein left his home in Switzerland to take a job at the University of Berlin in Germany’s capital. He was then, 35.

He took the job with much misgivings.  When he was a young boy living in Germany, Einstein had been deeply repelled by the authoritarians, militarism, and bigotry he found all around him. And as a young man, he was appalled by the prejudices, injustices and reactionary ideas found in the heart of many Germans in those days. Nevertheless, working in Berlin provided an opportunity to pursue his research without teaching and administrative obligations and to have ready access to many brilliant fellow scientists and mathematicians.

Einstein’s Name-Calling During World War I

world war 1Months after Einstein moved to Berlin, in August 1914, the first world war broke loose, creating wholesale death, misery, and hunger.  And then, many people with whom he was working signed a manifesto denying that Germany had any responsibility for the war. Instead, the blame fell entirely on Germany’s enemies.  The concluding paragraph states:

We cannot wrest from our enemies’ hand the venomous weapon of the lie [that Germany is responsible for the war].  We can only cry out to the whole world that they bear false witness against us.  To you who know us, who have hitherto stood with us in safeguarding mankind’s most precious heritage–to you we cry out: Have faith in us when we say that we shall wage this fight to the very end as a civilized nation, a nation that holds the legacy of Goethe, Beethoven and Kant no less sacred than hearth and home.

This type of document along with all that was happening in the world was pretty rough on Einstein. In a letter to Paul Ehrenfest, a physicist and one of his closest friends, he wrote:

Paul Ehrenfest
Paul Ehrenfest

The international catastrophe has imposed a heavy burden upon me as an internationalist. In living through this “great epoch,” it is difficult to reconcile oneself to the fact that one belongs to that stupid, rotten species which boasts of its freedom of will.  How I wish that somewhere there existed an island for those who are wise and of good will!  In such a place even I should be an ardent patriot. (From Einstein on Peace, p. 2)

We see in this quote that Einstein, in his anger, chose to refer to the human race as stupid.  And yet, some of the people that were supporting the war were among the smartest people of their day, at least in terms of their academic accomplishments.

Of course, Einstein is not the only one to use the word stupid upon becoming angry:

peanuts and criticism

Apparently, for Einstein, the word stupid was meant to mean something different than an inability to master challenging subject matter. What then did he mean?

Such terms are often used broadly, meaning the same thing as other words and phrases thrown at someone in anger, such as “crazy,” “mentally ill,” “jerk,” “piece of trash,” “rotten,” etc. When used like this, they all mean nothing more than the angry party strongly doesn’t like what the other party did. They serve as a type of exclamation point.

For Einstein, I think stupid might have had an added meaning; something like not being able to see something that seems so plainly reasonable to him.  War is a terrible thing, Einstein believed, and the justification that Germany used to enter into it clashed with his sense of what was so plainly reasonable.

Einstein’s Approach to Providing Negative Criticism After World War I

Einstein in his later years
Einstein in his later years

Soon after the end of the first world war, Germany saw the rise of Hitler and Einstein fled to America, taking a position at Princeton University.  As World War II got underway, Einstein did support military intervention.  As he explained it when declining an invitation to prepare a presentation of the pacifist point of view,

I am not what you might call a religious pacifist. Besides, I consider it preferable for men to fight rather than allow themselves to be butchered without lifting a finger. That was just about the alternative in the case of Hitler’s Germany. (Einstein on Peace, p. 553)

Korean_War_bombing_WonsanBut when America became involved in the Korean War, Einstein again experienced anger about a military intervention. Korea had not attacked any country, let alone the United States. Korea was engaged in an internal fight about what type of government it chose to have. US military intervention, Einstein believed, would serve to dramatically increase the loss of life. How did Einstein express his disagreement in his adopted country where most were fierce supporters of the war?

When writing to a trusted friend he would allow himself to let out his raw emotions about what was going on in the world. This occasionally included utilizing words like stupid, idiot, and rotten. But at least in the many public statements that I’ve read of his, it was extremely rare to see him utilizing anything that strikes me as name calling. Typical is a 1953 quote taken from Einstein’s review of a book on Gandhi. The author was Gene Sharp, a 25-year old graduate of Ohio State University who had just received a two-year sentence for defying the draft law during the Korean War.  Einstein wrote:

Gene Sharp
Gene Sharp


How is it possible that a young man was able to create such a mature piece of work? The author’s preface tells us how it was possible. He feels the profound obligation to serve, with all his energies and with unlimited readiness for sacrifice, a purpose which is clearly personified in Gandhi’s unique example: to overcome through an awakening of moral strength the danger of self-destruction which confronts mankind as a result of explosive technological developments.  The collapse which threatens mankind is characterized in the volume by the words depersonalization, regimentation, total war, while its salvation is characterized by the words personal responsibility, in conjunction with nonviolence and service to human beings in Gandhi’s sense.

I believe the author is completely right in asserting that every human being is compelled to come to a clear decision with regard to this important matter: there is no middle ground.

In the Nuremberg trials the following principle was laid down: Personal moral responsibility cannot be set aside by national laws. Let us hope that we may soon come to the point where the Nuremberg principle will not only be enforced upon citizens of vanquished nations! (Einstein on Peace, p. 544)

Gandhi
Gandhi

Here, Einstein, rather than calling those who support war insulting names, he instead expresses admiration for two people who had acted to resist participation in military activities–Sharp and Gandhi. He then places their activities in the context of a moral principle that was articulated by the judges at the post World War II Nuremberg trials. These judges convicted Nazi leaders who presented a defense that they were just following orders.

I like this approach of letting people know, by use of a narrative, what actions you do respect. It goes beyond just saying what you don’t like.  It adds specificity, and I think people learn ideas better through narrative rather than principles alone. It is this very approach that I tried to create in my three novels.

Okay, there’s my post for this week.  Until next time, here’s hoping we all find some helpful ways to bring about a more peaceful world.

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.

 

Categories
conflict resolution criticism John F. Kennedy Lyndon B. Johnson Responding to Criticism

Responding Maturely to Criticism: A John F. Kennedy Example

John F. Kennedy
John F. Kennedy

Responding to negative criticism with lower developmental level skills can lead to an escalation of conflicts, violence, and the loss of valued friends. Among the benefits of utilizing higher developmental level skills are increases in how much people like and respect us.

To encourage readers of this blog to think about the most helpful ways to respond to criticism, I presented a post titled “Responding to Criticism: Four Levels of Maturity.” A few weeks later, I presented a post describing the fifth level of maturity, which I believe is the most mature level.

In both of those posts, I give examples of people using each of the different levels. In subsequent posts, I provided some additional examples (see here, here, and here).  Readers seem to enjoy these, so with that in mind, I offer you a John F. Kennedy example.

John F. Kennedy at the 1960 Democratic Convention

In 1960, the Democratic Convention was held in Los Angeles. In addition to Kennedy, other democratic candidates for president that year were Lyndon Johnson, Hubert Humphrey, and Wayne Morse.

Lyndon Johnson
Lyndon Johnson
Hubert Humphey
Hubert Humphey
Wayne Morse
Wayne Morse

On day two of the conference, Johnson and Kennedy had an exchange in front of the entire delegation.  Below, is the transcript of part of that exchange, which I obtained from a YouTube video that you can see and hear for yourself at this link, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gefp6OHLns   

The actual exchange begins 4 minutes into the Youtube video. There, we see Lyndon Johnson criticizing Kennedy in front of several thousand delegates. Thus, he says:

lj 1For six days and nights we had 24-hour sessions, six days and nights I had to deliver a quorum of 51 men on a moment’s notice to keep the Senate in session to get any bill at all.  I’m proud to tell you that on those 51 quorum calls Lyndon Johnson answered every one of them, although some men who would be president on a civil rights platform answered none.

On the roll call on that bill there were 45, Lyndon Johnson answered all 45. Admittedly, I didn’t have the problem that some of my people had of opposing Senators Humphrey and Morse in the primaries.  But some senator missed 34 of the 45.  And I point this out only so those of you who may have been not fully understanding of my entry into the race.  That it is my considered judgment that my people had sent me to the Senate to perform the duty of a United States senator for which I was paid $22,500 a year.  And my colleagues, including Senator Kennedy and Senator Symington, and 62 other beloved Democrats had selected me as their leader.  And I did not think you would reward negligence. I did not think that you would reward me for inattention, nor did I think, as Al Smith put it, that you would penalize me.

Now, if former president, Donald Trump had been criticized in this way, I think we all have a pretty good idea of how he would have responded–probably by throwing nasty insults at Senator Johnson, like crying out that he is a horrible person.

Here’s Kennedy’s reply, which begins about six minutes into the YouTube recording:


jfk 2I’m glad we are not going to put these speeches to a vote, after looking at Massachusetts’s and Texas’s delegates today. Let me just say that I appreciate what Senator Johnson had to say. He made some general reference to perhaps some shortcomings of other presidential candidates, but as he was not specific I assume he was talking about some other candidate and not me.

Kennedy then breaks out in a huge smile because he knows, and everyone present knows that Senator Johnson’s comments had indeed been directed toward criticizing Kennedy’s record. The crowd clearly appreciates Kennedy’s humor, and then, after the laughter subsides, he continues:

 jfk 3I, uh, found it extremely beneficial serving in the Senate with Senator Johnson as leader.  I think if I emerge as successful in this convention it would be as a result of watching Senator Johnson proceed around the Senate for the last eight years.  

Kennedy, now turns to Lyndon Johnson and says:

I have learned the lesson well, Lyndon, and I hope it will benefit me in the next twenty-four hours.

Kennedy has now turned back to the larger audience. 

It is true that Senator Johnson made a wonderful record in answering those quorum calls, and I want to commend him for it. I, uh, was not present on all of those occasions, uh, no one, I was not majority leader.  Lyndon knows I never criticized, in fact on every occasion I said that I thought Senator Johnson should not enter the primary.  That his proper responsibility was as majority leader and that if he would let Hubert, Wayne and I to settle the matter we could come to a clearcut decision.

So, I come to you today full of admiration for Senator Johnson, full of affection for him, strongly in support of him for majority leader, and in that position we’re all going to work together.  Thank you.

Now, after this reply to Johnson’s criticism of him, Kennedy does something else that we don’t actually see in the YouTube video. Kennedy, behind closed doors, informs Johnson that his criticism, in addition to the issue he explicitly stated, involves two others issues: First, Johnson wants to some day be president, and, second, he also wants to get several bills passed that were close to his heart, especially the civil rights bills. Kennedy explained that right now he, Johnson, was well known in Texas and the Senate, but the public in other regions around the country knew nothing about him. Kennedy then informed Johnson that he had decided to select him to be his running mate if he succeeds at obtaining the nomination. As vice president, Johnson would get to be known throughout the country.  This would put him in a better position to seek the presidency in the future.  Moreover, as vice president, he would preside over the Senate, and together with Kennedy as president, he could have a much better chance of getting his favorite bills enacted into law. In this way, Kennedy steered in the direction that he felt Johnson’s criticism suggested.

Okay, so that is how Kennedy responded to Johnson’s negative criticism. I shall now present the outline of all five developmental levels of responding to criticism.  If you will, look them over and see what level best matches Kennedy’s response.

Five 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.

5.  In addition to actions consistent with level 4, people responding to criticism in a manner consistent with level 5 seek ways to use, whenever they disagree with the criticism, a technique known as steering in the direction the criticizer would prefer to go.  That is, rather than just disagreeing without being disagreeable, the criticized person seeks to find a new choice of action that creatively utilizes some aspect suggested from the criticism.  Steering cannot be incorporated into all situations, but it is an additional goal of the most mature individuals.

Now that you have had a chance to look over the descriptions of the 5 levels, which level do you think best matches Kennedy’s response? Moreover, regardless of what level Kennedy’s response matches, I encourage you to think about whether it is better to utilize Kennedy’s approach, or Trump’s approach, to responding to criticism. My guess is that if you want to get more hits on social media platforms and you don’t mind increasing hate in the world, the approach that Trump tends to use will work better for you; however, if you want to be better respected by family members, friends and people at work, Kennedy’s approach is the way to go.

Thanks for visiting today, and I hope you join us back here soon.

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.