the five secrets of effective communication

(1). Disarming Technique: you find some truth in what the other person is saying, even f it seems totally
unreasonable or unfair. When I have been on some other sites, I have attempted to be non defensive and
non aruguementive. Not all sites have been as nice as this one. I have been name called and yet prescribe to the
above position. It ties in with my non negative energy position.
(2). Empathy: You put yourself in the other person's shoes and try to see the world through his or her eyes.
A. Thought empathy: You paraphrase the other person's words.
B. Feeling empathy: You acknowledge how he or she is probably feeling.
(3). Inquiry: You ask gentle, probing questions to learn more about what the other person is
thinking and feeling.
(4). I feel statements: You use "I feel" statements (such as "I feel upset") rather than "you"
statements (such as "you're wrong!" or "you're making me furious!")
(5). You find something genuinely positive to say to the other person, even in the heat of
battle. You convey an attitude of respect, even though you may feel very angry with the other
person.

The above information is mostly from the Feeling Good Workshop by Dr. David Burns
Copyright c 1991 by David D. Burns, M.D.. Revised, 1992.
I suppose for replies and responses:
What communication style do you have?
What here do you feel will work for you,and what will not work for you?

(1) and (5) are fairly straightforward, but:

(2). Empathy: You put yourself in the other person's shoes and try to see the world through his or her eyes.
This is very difficult.

A. Thought empathy: You paraphrase the other person's words.
When someone does it to me, it seems to bog the conversation down, and can even feel patronizing.

B. Feeling empathy: You acknowledge how he or she is probably feeling.
When someone does this to me, they are often wrong in what they assume I am feeling. Usually a discussion of feelings is off the mark in these cases anyway.

(3). Inquiry: You ask gentle, probing questions to learn more about what the other person is
thinking and feeling.
OK, as long as it does not come across as nosy or intrusive.

(4). I feel statements: You use "I feel" statements (such as "I feel upset") rather than "you"
statements (such as "you're wrong!" or "you're making me furious!")
How about factual statements: what is the speaker upset or angry about, and why? How can it be fixed? What would he/she like to see happen?

No one method will work on everyone.

I agree Romana. We have different styles, I am generalizing, of the 16 sub types.
I don't think it fair or reasonable to expect everybody to master the style of let's
say, NF, NT,SP, SJ. We all have different styles that work to a degree for us.
I am going to use some metaphors that may be imprecise. In the martial art
and physical battle world, there is karate, kung fu, aikido, judo, jijitsu & boxing
to name a few. Well as a communicator, I am more judo, which is more
defensive. It also uses an angry opponents energy against them. Another metaphor I have used
in the past, is that because we may all be human beings and look like the same species, some
of us think that we all do, or should think alike. When in reality, sometimes it seems like we
are a different and many times different types of species. Case in point , the Myers Briggs 16 sub
types. Well the metaphor is that we are like different totem animal spirits. Some of us are lion
hyena, calf, snake and so on. The point is that all are unique, special, & important. No one
animal spirit person is better, even if seemingly more glamorous. Just different. And just like
each animal hunts and fights differently, so do we communicate differently. It would be impractical,
inefficient and unreasonable to expect one animal type spirit to hunt, fight or communicate in
the same manner. Something that is similar and unites us is the wish to both learn and better
ourselves. Well in dealing with people in an argument or disagreements, it is like a battle. I shared what
one style, and one expert says is an effective and good style. I suppose I am going to use two specific
case studies on communication styles. I will use myself and my INFP style of communication in two real
conflicts that I have had on different forums. I will pm you the different sites and scenarios. I can learn
from you and how an INTJ would handle the disagreements or conflicts. In this exercise, pm me as you
would address these two individuals in these conflicts. Later we can go over how we both addressed the
challenge. It's not so much to change, but to understand how another friend would handle a conflict and
to pick up a few pointers from each other to make us both more effective communicators.

Would anyone be interested in doing some written exercises, as Burns recommends in his book, and posting them and critiquing together here? I think it could be a very interesting experience to work with people. Sometimes we can't objectively evaluate our own work, and other times we might have questions or confusions that someone else might have a quick and ready answer for. If you'd rather do it via PM I would be interested as well. I'm pretty eager to experiment and practice, so either way, just let me know!

Written Exercises does not sound very interesting, it reminds me of 'English Comp.' and that is not an experience I wish to relive, however I have posted on a lot on different forums and if you would like to critique them or post something yourself for critique, that sounds OK with me. So if you pick a topic I'll see if I have something, you can post something and we'll have a go.

Mountains and also thedoc, Mountains what you suggested is intriguing however I am not quite sure it might work now on our location. I think it an excellent idea for group dynamics in group counseling. But I will only state having one's work critiqued can be tricky business. I hope you find a partner to do this.

Myself I will use other skills i've learned. I attempt to avoid generalizations. If I must write one done I stipulate it to be generalizing and thus 100% surety. I avoid labels which is attributing a label of such which can be derogatory. We project our realities .

If I say you appear intelligent. A part that is me which values an open mind with intellect recognizes this also in you.
If I say 'your an idiot', really I act like an idiot at this as the words leave my mouth.

I have gotten connected with people who have intelligent discourse. There is how I gain some very good insight of myself and how another perceives this reality.

lightsun wrote:

Mountains and also thedoc, Mountains what you suggested is intriguing however I am not quite sure it might work now on our location. I think it an excellent idea for group dynamics in group counseling. But I will only state having one's work critiqued can be tricky business. I hope you find a partner to do this.

Myself I will use other skills i've learned. I attempt to avoid generalizations. If I must write one done I stipulate it to be generalizing and thus 100% surety. I avoid labels which is attributing a label of such which can be derogatory. We project our realities .

If I say you appear intelligent. A part that is me which values an open mind with intellect recognizes this also in you.
If I say 'your an idiot', really I act like an idiot at this as the words leave my mouth.

I have gotten connected with people who have intelligent discourse. There is how I gain some very good insight of myself and how another perceives this reality.

\!!

may i just say that we project and mirror these projections more than we are able to recognize as our true selves, our being love and in love.
such "partnership", as many have it, and mankind in such dire straights as today?
faking such hasn't had the desired effect, neither in communications and interactions, nor in the happiness necessary to be known in order to work miracles, again.

much love, and peace to all.