More on this book
Community
Kindle Notes & Highlights
While we may choose at times to sympathize with others by feeling their feelings, it’s helpful to be aware that during the moment we are offering sympathy, we are not empathizing.
Intellectual understanding blocks empathy.
In NVC, no matter what words people use to express themselves, we listen for their observations, feelings, needs, and requests.
No matter what others say, we only hear what they are (1) observing, (2) feeling, (3) needing, and (4) requesting.
Listen to what people are needing rather than what they are thinking.
After we focus our attention and hear what others are observing, feeling, and needing and what they are requesting to enrich their lives, we may wish to reflect back by paraphrasing what we have understood.
If, on the other hand, our paraphrase is incorrect, we give the speaker an opportunity to correct us. Another advantage of choosing to reflect a message back to the other party is that it offers them time to reflect on what they’ve said and an opportunity to delve deeper into themselves.
When asking for information, first express our own feelings and needs.
Reflect back messages that are emotionally charged.
Paraphrase only when it contributes to greater compassion and understanding.
When we paraphrase, the tone of voice we use is highly important. When hearing themselves reflected back, people are likely to be sensitive to the slightest hint of criticism or sarcasm. They are likewise negatively affected by a declarative tone that implies that we are telling them what is going on inside of them.
If we are consciously listening for other people’s feelings and needs, however, our tone communicates that we’re asking whether we have understood—not claiming that we have understood.
Behind intimidating messages are merely people appealing to us to meet their needs.
A difficult message becomes an opportunity to enrich someone’s life.
If it happens regularly that people distrust our motives and sincerity when we paraphrase their words, we may need to examine our own intentions more closely. Perhaps we are paraphrasing and engaging the components of NVC in a mechanistic way without maintaining clear consciousness of purpose.
Paraphrasing tends to save, rather than waste, time. Studies in labor-management negotiations demonstrate that the time required to reach conflict resolution is cut in half when each negotiator agrees, before responding, to accurately repeat what the previous speaker had said.
When we stay with empathy, we allow speakers to touch deeper levels of themselves.
We know a speaker has received adequate empathy when (1) we sense a release of tension, or (2) the flow of words comes to a halt.
It is impossible for us to give something to another if we don’t have it ourselves. Likewise, if we find ourselves unable or unwilling to empathize despite our efforts, it is usually a sign that we are too starved for empathy to be able to offer it to others. Sometimes, if we openly acknowledge that our own distress is preventing us from responding empathically, the other person may come through with the empathy we need.
We often have a strong urge to give advice or reassurance and to explain our own position or feeling. Empathy, however, calls upon us to empty our mind and listen to others with our whole being.
Empathy allows us “to reperceive [our] world in a new way and to go on.”
When we work in a hierarchically structured institution, there is a tendency to hear commands and judgments from those higher up in the hierarchy.
While we may easily empathize with our peers and with those in less powerful positions, we may find ourselves being defensive or apologetic, instead of empathic, in the presence of those we identify as our “superiors.”
It’s harder to empathize with those who appear to possess more power, status, or resources.
Because we are called to reveal our deepest feelings and needs, we may sometimes find it challenging to express ourselves in NVC. Self-expression becomes easier, however, after we empathize with others, because we will then have touched their humanness and realized the common qualities we share.
The more we empathize with the other party, the safer we feel.
We “say a lot” by listening for other people’s feelings and needs.
Rather than put your “but” in the face of an angry person, empathize.
When I concentrated on listening for his feelings and needs, I stopped seeing him as a monster. I could see, just as you’d said, how people who seem like monsters are simply human beings whose language and behavior sometimes keep us from seeing their humanness.
When we listen for feelings and needs, we no longer see people as monsters.
It may be difficult to empathize with those who are closest to us.
When we shine the light of consciousness on the feelings and needs behind someone else’s “no,” however, we become cognizant of what they are wanting that prevents them from responding as we would like.
Empathizing with someone’s “no” protects us from taking it personally.
How and when do we interrupt a dead conversation to bring it back to life? I’d suggest the best time to interrupt is when we’ve heard one word more than we want to hear.
People are not aware that empathy is often what they are needing. Neither do they realize that they are more likely to receive that empathy by expressing the feelings and needs that are alive in them than by recounting tales of past injustice and hardship.
To bring a conversation back to life: interrupt with empathy.
Another way to bring a conversation to life is to openly express our desire to be more connected, and to request information that would help us establish that connection.
What bores the listener bores the speaker too.
Of the scores of people I approached, all but one expressed a preference to be stopped. Their answers gave me courage by convincing me that it is more considerate to interrupt people than to pretend to listen.
Speakers prefer that listeners interrupt rather than pretend to listen.
One of the hardest messages for many of us to empathize with is silence. This is especially true when we’ve expressed ourselves vulnerably and need to know how others are reacting to our words.
Empathize with silence by listening for the feelings and needs behind it.
Empathy lies in our ability to be present.
Our ability to offer empathy can allow us to stay vulnerable, defuse potential violence, hear the word no without taking it as a rejection, revive a lifeless conversation, and even hear the feelings and needs expressed through silence. Time and again, people transcend the paralyzing effects of psychological pain when they have sufficient contact with someone who can hear them empathically.
When we are internally violent toward ourselves, it is difficult to be genuinely compassionate toward others.
When critical self-concepts prevent us from seeing the beauty in ourselves, we lose connection with the divine energy that is our source. Conditioned to view ourselves as objects-objects full of shortcomings—is it any wonder that many of us end up relating violently to ourselves?
Unfortunately, the way we’ve been trained to evaluate ourselves often promotes more self-hatred than learning.
We use NVC to evaluate ourselves in ways that engender growth rather than self-hatred.
Typical statements were: “That was dumb!” “How could you do such a stupid thing?” “What’s wrong with you?” “You’re always messing up!” “That’s selfish!” These speakers had been taught to judge themselves in ways that imply that what they did was wrong or bad; their self-admonishment implicitly assumes that they deserve to suffer for what they’ve done.
It is tragic that so many of us get enmeshed in self-hatred rather than benefit from our mistakes, which show us our limitations and guide us towards growth.
