Very thought provoking post....
On 25 Nov 96 at 13:56, Julie Beedon wrote:
> One of the learnings I have taken in relation to this dialogue is around
> this area, and it is probably more of an issue because of the medium we
> are using (mail). My take on it is that it would be helpful to be able to
> declare the stereo-typing we are doing 'out loud' without causing offence.
I think, regardless of medium, this is a great process. In my work, I
sometimes come up against stereotyping of ethnic groups with respect to
hostility, conflict, etc. My goal in those situations is not to "force"
the individual to get rid of the stereotype, but to put it on the table as
such, and to reflect, for themselves on it's usefulness to them. I will
sometimes use my own "war stories" where I made stereotyping mistakes, and
invite them to discuss theirs.
> >2 What I try and
> >do is to keep people focused on what is factually verified, NOT what is
> >inferred about another person based on a set of feelings.
>
> This makes sense and is more or less what happened in the story above -
> the only difficulty I have with it is that as time seperates me from the
> experience I forget the facts and remember the 'emotion' - in many ways my
> perception of what happened is the 'facts' from my perspective.
Very good point...I suppose I do the same. On a personal level, I try to
further my own learning by asking myself whether my recollection actually
matches up with my recall, and whether I have forgotten....sometimes I
need to ask someone else.
> >My proposition is that when we spend time trying to categorize or "guess'
> >someone's intent, we spend less time learning (are there exceptions?)
>
> Any thoughts on how we become more successful at inquiring about their
> intent without evoking a defensive response??
Yes, but it would be a very long post, and would require a specific
context (eg. a dialogue) to work with. But, some methods pretty much don't
work. Using Why questions often evoke defensiveness. Direct approaches
that emphasize the work YOU are usually problematic.
> How do you decide what is unreasonable? I am intrigued about this process
> - I am making a few assumptions as well about *why* you might want to
> categorise some responses as unreasonable so I would really like to hear
> more about the thinking behind this.
Well, that's the tricky part.Clearly there is no way to be objective about
this. The thinking behind it is that I am responsible for my behaviour,
and for anticipating any reasonable interpretations (damn word again) that
others may take. But I will NOT take responsibility for people, who for
example, don't listen, pay attention, misinterpret due to mental illness,
or other reasons.
For example, if I say "How are you today", and you answer...it's none of
your business, you busy-body", I would classify this as an unreasonable
response (taking into account tone of voice,e tc).
I evaluate my behaviour according to a set of ill-defined (but better
defined as I age) principles. So the question is, did I act consistent
with those principles. If the answer is yes, but someone still perceived
"evil", then I don't really anguish over it, though I may still be hurt.
If I didn't act according to my principles, I have an obligation to "fix'
the problem in the present and the future.
> > Often, one finds that our conclusions are based on our
> >projections, "mental models" or things absolutely unconnected with the
> >words in the communication. I choose to play a role in these contexts.
>
> I would be ready to say always rather than often!! I find it helps to
> reflect with someone else and sometimes I find I have to vent etc.. before
> I am ready to really hear what the person is saying and why!!
Chuckle...you're probably right. I like to think that my reactions have
something to do with what is outside of myself, rather than being only a
product of an internal mental model. I was speaking of ABSOLUTELY
unconnected.
Robert Bacal, Bacal & Associates, rbacal@escape.ca
Join us at our Resource Centre at
http://www.winnipeg.freenet.mb.ca/~dbt359
Phone: (204) 888-9290
--Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>