Welcome to AikiWeb Aikido Information
AikiWeb: The Source for Aikido Information
AikiWeb's principal purpose is to serve the Internet community as a repository and dissemination point for aikido information.

Sections
home
aikido articles
columns

Discussions
forums
aikiblogs

Databases
dojo search
seminars
image gallery
supplies
links directory

Reviews
book reviews
video reviews
dvd reviews
equip. reviews

News
submit
archive

Miscellaneous
newsletter
rss feeds
polls
about

Follow us on



Home > AikiWeb Aikido Forums
Go Back   AikiWeb Aikido Forums > Training

Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history, humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced features available, you will need to register first. Registration is absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-26-2012, 07:15 PM   #26
Basia Halliop
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 711
Canada
Offline
Re: talking and listening

"I think there is a clear distinction between tools and approaches used to resolve conflicts prior to it actual coming to blows...becoming a physical altercation...and those used once it has become physical."

For me I'm not sure if the distinction I'm thinking of is between physical vs non-physical, exactly. I can think of both non-physical and physical kinds of conflicts where either model applies (both being able to get what they want or need vs one getting what they want or need and the other losing).
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2012, 08:48 PM   #27
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Janet Rosen wrote:

Quote:
I n short I try to in a low key way identify any and all barriers to him taking the insulin as directed. Then I can get him to want to take it as directed and help him do so.
So I'm "imposing my will" by getting him to move towards the outcome I desire.
I think that when I've nailed something in the dojo it's essentially the same: I'm not muscling through or imposing a technique that I decide I want to do, I'm listening to uke enough that we can get to the same place, one that I want.
Great example. This thought comes to mind....

So do we accept the role of benevolent parent? That is, based on our skills, maturity, insights etc. Do we assess that the "other" might have less skill, knowledge, maturity, ability, responsibility...that in some cases they my be like a small child and we need to mentor and guide them to do the right things? In the case that they might cause harm to themselves or others do we step in and intervene with blunt and direct action, albeit with compassion to stop harm?

I think in many cases yes. I think that in many cases we may be in that role and need to consider that we might know what is best.

In other cases we could be dealing with an equal. That is we have a real need to try and reach common ground and find a way out that is mutual. I think these instances are probably rarer than most.

I think in some cases compromise that is completely equal is not possible and we must make a decision about what actions we are going to take.

I think that budo is about gaining the wisdom necessary to make tough choices in these situations and realize that sometimes there is no one right answer.

  Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2012, 09:01 PM   #28
Fred Little
Dojo: NJIT Budokai
Location: State Line NJ/NY
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 612
United_States
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Janet Rosen wrote: View Post
This to me has nothing to do with the thread.
One could say that it has nothing to do with the original post.

It has something to do with Mark's habitual thread jacking, his exceedingly narrow, mechanistic, and reductionist approach that, however overtly civil, consistently takes an aggressive and hostile line toward any analogy or metaphor which isn't congruent with said approach, and his perpetual refusal to allow any conversation to develop along any lines that would seem troublesome to any one of several types of 'thinkers' referenced in my post, which distinguishes itself from his initial reply by the honesty of its aggressive tone and content, as distinct from the meretricious, disingenuous and destructively argumentative logorrhea which he inflicts on any original poster who begins from a set of premises distinct from his idee fixe.

In this sense it has to do with the original post -- on which I take no position -- precisely so as to allow for the discussion of others on that topic without the habitual interference of someone who always talks but rarely listens, and whose qualifications to do so are (Gary Welborn's post above notwithstanding) dubious.

Power moves objects. Metaphor moves history. This is not a matter which should be relegated to the sidebar because of a few individuals with a monomania, no matter how fruitful that monomania may be in some respects.

On which note I will say goodnight and STFU.

FL

Last edited by Fred Little : 08-26-2012 at 09:02 PM. Reason: prepositions

  Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2012, 09:04 PM   #29
Mary Eastland
 
Mary Eastland's Avatar
Dojo: Berkshire Hills Aikido
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,196
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Maybe we let uke find their own way through suggestion and encouragement. Does imposing our will on another resolve anything? Going past compromise to something better would be my choice.

  Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2012, 09:16 PM   #30
Basia Halliop
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 711
Canada
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Mary Eastland wrote: View Post
Maybe we let uke find their own way through suggestion and encouragement.
Yes

Quote:
Does imposing our will on another resolve anything?
I would have to say -- yes. I really think there are situations were it does resolve something. Those situations are very very rare and sometimes the resolution is of the 'least bad solution' type, but sometimes imposing our will on another keeps people from getting hurt.

Quote:
Going past compromise to something better would be my choice.
Yes, when at all possible that is the preferred option. And it's also true, I'm sure, that some of the time when we think it isn't possible, it's because we haven't looked at the problem from the right angle yet, or understood the situation clearly enough.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-26-2012, 09:23 PM   #31
Mary Eastland
 
Mary Eastland's Avatar
Dojo: Berkshire Hills Aikido
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,196
Offline
Re: talking and listening

I agree. It is an ideal. I don't mean to imply it can always be achieved. It does make aikido so interesting and challenging.

  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 01:24 AM   #32
Carsten Möllering
 
Carsten Möllering's Avatar
Dojo: Hildesheimer Aikido Verein
Location: Hildesheim
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 814
Germany
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Mary Eastland wrote: View Post
Does imposing our will on another resolve anything?
This is what I tried to say:
Sometimes yes. Sometimes no. We have to learn to distinguish.
And we have to learn about our criteria and maybe change them.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 02:32 AM   #33
Kevin Leavitt
 
Kevin Leavitt's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido of Northern Virginia
Location: Stuttgart, Baden Wurttemberg
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 4,376
Germany
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Carsten Möllering wrote: View Post
This is what I tried to say:
Sometimes yes. Sometimes no. We have to learn to distinguish.
And we have to learn about our criteria and maybe change them.
Agree, it may be short term and not sustainable, but sometimes it is necessary. Do no harm, Stop Harm comes to mind.

  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 05:32 AM   #34
amoeba
Dojo: Aikido Netzwerk
Location: Düsseldorf, NRW
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 80
Germany
Offline
Re: talking and listening

First of all, I am really, really confused about the whole discussion in this thread - Marks post sounded completely on topic, civil and reasonable to me and in my view had nothing at all to do with "thread hijacking". He postet his opinion (actually backed by O-Sensei's quote) on the OP and didn't even really contradict it, just brought a different angle into the discussion. I don't really see the point of a discussion if only people who agree with everything are allowed to post in a thread and the rest are supposed to "open their own thread"...

@topic: For me, there are two different ways of interpreting the analogy.

If I just look at the technique, I wouldn't agree. When I'm uke, my goal is to attack with all I have(and hit tori, if possible), then take my balance back, maybe attack again. Tori's goal is to unbalance me and do his technique.

But obviously I also enjoy being unbalanced, I enjoy being thrown, I enjoy being able to give everything I have and the technique still works on me. So in a more general way - yes, of course everyone can have what they want. I enjoy being uke at least as much as being nage, probably more. I guess in part *because* I don't get what I want in the technique. But that doesn't mean I don't get what I want from the training...

Understandable? I don't know, it's hard to put that stuff into words...
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 09:40 AM   #35
Janet Rosen
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Janet Rosen's Avatar
Location: Left Coast
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 3,933
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Kevin Leavitt wrote: View Post
So do we accept the role of benevolent parent? That is, based on our skills, maturity, insights etc. Do we assess that the "other" might have less skill, knowledge, maturity, ability, responsibility...
In other cases we could be dealing with an equal. That is we have a real need to try and reach common ground and find a way out that is mutual. I think these instances are probably rarer than most...
I think in some cases compromise that is completely equal is not possible and we must make a decision about what actions we are going to take.
I think that budo is about gaining the wisdom necessary to make tough choices in these situations and realize that sometimes there is no one right answer.
That's where quick assessment is so important - and I would say this holds in ANY situation, in the dojo, in a patient's home, on the street: adversary or not? (if so, risk level?) (clearly in most dojo or patient situations it is unusual but it's not unheard of!) - level of competence/equal or not? - dealing in "good faith" or not? etc.

In a situation where someone is at risk, one takes immediate necessary appropriate action, whether it is de-escalating the situation, leaving, calling Adult Protective Services or hitting somebody upside the head with a 2x4.

To return to the OP, which was talking more about dojo stuff, normally there is not an adversarial relationship, attack notwithstanding. There is a shared mutual goal of good training, a lack of desire to actually hurt one's partner, and hopefully also dealing with the other person in good faith.

Janet Rosen
http://www.zanshinart.com
"peace will enter when hate is gone"--percy mayfield
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 09:41 AM   #36
Janet Rosen
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Janet Rosen's Avatar
Location: Left Coast
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 3,933
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Alissa Götzinger wrote: View Post
@topic: For me, there are two different ways of interpreting the analogy.
If I just look at the technique, I wouldn't agree. When I'm uke, my goal is to attack with all I have(and hit tori, if possible), then take my balance back, maybe attack again. Tori's goal is to unbalance me and do his technique.
Could you envision the shared goal being that each is doing her best to connect with the other person's center?

Janet Rosen
http://www.zanshinart.com
"peace will enter when hate is gone"--percy mayfield
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 10:17 AM   #37
Keith Larman
Location: California
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,549
United_States
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Mary Eastland wrote: View Post
Maybe we let uke find their own way through suggestion and encouragement. Does imposing our will on another resolve anything? ...
Of course one always hopes to find ways to resolve things peacefully. And to kindly guide. But in terms of imposing will and resolution, it all depends on what the other person is intent upon doing. If it is something truly bad then I may in fact have to impose my will to stop them from doing that.

My wife and I have trained dogs (and competed in obedience competitions at a very high level) for, well, decades now. We train trainers. I am a firm believer in positive reinforcement and finding ways to guide the animal towards the behavior you desire. Corrections are a thing that should be rare and only given in context of an animal doing something *they* already know they shouldn't be doing. But I'd like to point out something else as well -- if you convince someone to come over to "your side" even through gentle persuasion, are you not still "imposing" your will? Of course it is not forceful nor through intimidation, but you are still imposing your will if you succeed.

I think the basic misunderstanding here is that in a conflict one is trying to impose their will from the start. The question is how they go about it. I sincerely believe that you always start from a point of gentle persuasion and guidance. But sometimes that's not good enough. And if the situation is such that harm may come to you or someone else, well, maybe you need to do enough to prevent that harm. And that can include very serious things assuming you're capable of doing them. And I worry that focusing too much on either extreme (only warm fuzzies vs. kill them all and let god sort out the rest) blinds one to the options.

Last edited by Keith Larman : 08-27-2012 at 10:22 AM. Reason: removed a few words that had an inadvertent possible interpretation

  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 10:28 AM   #38
Basia Halliop
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 711
Canada
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Keith said "I think the basic misunderstanding here is that in a conflict one is trying to impose their will from the start."

I think sometimes that's true, yes. But there are so many kinds of conflicts. Some kinds just need 'a' resolution, i.e., there may be many different ways of resolving that particular conflict, and some solutions may not be what you originally thought was necessary, or they may not require you to unilaterally decide what the solution needs to be and then make that solution happen.

E.g., sometimes (e.g. when someone is going to get hurt or sometimes when one is dealing with children or dogs) it's appropriate and necessary for one person to 'take charge' and make what needs to happen, happen (whether by force, guidance, persuasion, etc).

Other times it's far more appropriate and helpful to extend some respect to your opponent and for both people in a conflict to reach a mutual solution together.

Last edited by Basia Halliop : 08-27-2012 at 10:31 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 10:54 AM   #39
Gary David
 
Gary David's Avatar
Location: Long Beach, CA
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 329
United_States
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Keith Larman wrote: View Post

I think the basic misunderstanding here is that in a conflict one is trying to impose their will from the start. The question is how they go about it. I sincerely believe that you always start from a point of gentle persuasion and guidance. But sometimes that's not good enough. And if the situation is such that harm may come to you or someone else, well, maybe you need to do enough to prevent that harm. And that can include very serious things assuming you're capable of doing them. And I worry that focusing too much on either extreme (only warm fuzzies vs. kill them all and let god sort out the rest) blinds one to the options.
All in all there are a number of concepts, precepts, approaches that cross mingle in all of these threads these days........

Anyways...trying to keep on task here. Years back several of us were down near UCI after class on campus and it was decided to stop by a local campus pub for a beer. As we walked into the place, I was like third in the group, I felt a really heavy dark intent coming from a guy sitting at the bar as I started to pass. My immediate thought was and it was very clear that he was going to ambush me as I passed......I looked him in the eye and said something like "hey how is it going?" His intent disappeared and I passed without issue. My comment to him made him aware that I was aware and that an ambush was not possible...he dropped it. I am sure he got back from me my willingness and intent to address the situation at whatever level he wanted to take it. This is a situation where I may have imposed my will on him, but without a physical altercation. If he had stepped off his stool and took a step toward me I would have dropped him on the spot.

The point I have always tried to make here is that you need all the tools to be effective in whatever approach you take. You seek our and train in areas of weakness and you explore to find what is out there that can be useful. Where you can you test your skills in a training environment set up specifically to help.

Gary
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 02:49 PM   #40
mathewjgano
 
mathewjgano's Avatar
Dojo: Tsubaki Kannagara Jinja Aikidojo; Himeji Shodokan Dojo
Location: Renton
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,108
United_States
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Mark Murray wrote: View Post
How do you explain some of what Morihei Ueshiba is supposed to have said? For example, according to Admiral Takeshita's diary, Ueshiba supposedly said, "Aiki is a means of achieving harmony with another person so that you can make them do what you want." To me, if I apply that to your example, if one man used aiki, he would have the orange while the other man did not. How do you see Ueshiba's words in your example?
Mary's analogy has to do with making sure people understand each other better before proceeding into an immutable situation where both sides lose out on something. I see this relating to what you described in that, if the people had been able to find common understanding of exactly what they wanted (found better terms for their semantics), they both could have caused the other to do what they wanted (i.e. give the aspect of the orange they actually wanted).
So O Sensei may have said, "I want that orange." The Admiral might have said, "I want that orange." O Sensei might then have said, "what are your plans for the orange?" The good Admiral might then have replied, "I want to use the rind." O Sensei perhaps would have said, "cool dude! Give me the meat of the fruit when you're done, please." And they would have both got what they wanted through the act of blending their actions to suit their respective goals.
The problem of course comes when people want the same thing but are unwilling to share, or when only one of those people is unwilling to share and exerts their will. Unless the one exerting their will can convince the other to go along with it, there will be conflict, even if only in terms of intent alone...which has a funny habit of lasting, even through multiple generations.
In my personal experience, which mostly smells of roses I must admit, acts of selfless magnamity tend to inspire a similar response. Acts which appear to serve some ulterior purpose do not, and tend to in turn cause behavior which is somewhat more self-serving. The "trick" is how to display authenticity when trying to be magnanimous. Because of this, to get the other person to do what I want, I usually try to do what they want first. I rarely ask anything of anyone because I find it makes people more likely to help me in the long run. This kind of behavior has its own pit-falls, but it is a kind of non-verbal communication which people tend to listen to better than any argument I might be able to present.
...So it seems to me, at any rate.
We can probably extrapolate this analogy to any number of other circumstances to suit any number of ethical dilemmas (or responses), but that's the problem/beauty with hypotheticals: they're a veritable playground for the "what-if" part of the mind.
Ultimately it takes a great effort on the part of the "talker" and the "listener" and I think suspending our beliefs, which arise quite naturally throughout any conversation, is usually key to arriving at an understanding and then moving on to reconcilliation of what might appear to be opposing intentions.

Last edited by mathewjgano : 08-27-2012 at 02:52 PM.

Gambarimashyo!
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 02:57 PM   #41
Chris Li
 
Chris Li's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido Sangenkai
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,075
United_States
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Matthew Gano wrote: View Post
In my personal experience, which mostly smells of roses I must admit, acts of selfless magnamity tend to inspire a similar response. Acts which appear to serve some ulterior purpose do not, and tend to in turn cause behavior which is somewhat more self-serving. The "trick" is how to display authenticity when trying to be magnanimous. Because of this, to get the other person to do what I want, I usually try to do what they want first. I rarely ask anything of anyone because I find it makes people more likely to help me in the long run. This kind of behavior has its own pit-falls, but it is a kind of non-verbal communication which people tend to listen to better than any argument I might be able to present.
Since we're talking about martial arts, a reasonable expectation of a situation is one in which one party wants everything - your money, for example. I wonder if a selfless act would be effective in this situation?

Best,

Chris

  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 03:46 PM   #42
Basia Halliop
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 711
Canada
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Christopher Li wrote: View Post
Since we're talking about martial arts, a reasonable expectation of a situation is one in which one party wants everything - your money, for example. I wonder if a selfless act would be effective in this situation?
No, probably not. Unless maybe they would be likely to escalate the conflict much further and by giving them the money you avoid escalation and get away with no money but unharmed -- but clearly that would not be a best-case ending! Not really a success per se, more like harm mitigation. This is a relatively predatory kind of conflict.

However there are many other kinds of physical conflicts, e.g., involving loss of temper, loss of 'face', perceived threat, and so on. Hotter, more irrational kinds of conflicts, I guess you could say, rather than cold ones. I think there are definitely some conflicts, even very dangerous physical ones, that can sometimes be resolved by better communication such that each party can get what they want.

Last edited by Basia Halliop : 08-27-2012 at 03:52 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 04:01 PM   #43
Chris Li
 
Chris Li's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido Sangenkai
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,075
United_States
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Basia Halliop wrote: View Post
No, probably not. Unless maybe they would be likely to escalate the conflict much further and by giving them the money you avoid escalation and get away with no money but unharmed -- but clearly that would not be a best-case ending! Not really a success per se, more like harm mitigation. This is a relatively predatory kind of conflict.

However there are many other kinds of physical conflicts, e.g., involving loss of temper, loss of 'face', perceived threat, and so on. Hotter, more irrational kinds of conflicts, I guess you could say, rather than cold ones. I think there are definitely some conflicts, even very dangerous physical ones, that can sometimes be resolved by better communication such that each party can get what they want.
Aboslutely - but I think that it would be dangerous to assume that better communication is always the best option.

Best,

Chris

  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 05:14 PM   #44
mathewjgano
 
mathewjgano's Avatar
Dojo: Tsubaki Kannagara Jinja Aikidojo; Himeji Shodokan Dojo
Location: Renton
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,108
United_States
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Christopher Li wrote: View Post
Since we're talking about martial arts, a reasonable expectation of a situation is one in which one party wants everything - your money, for example. I wonder if a selfless act would be effective in this situation?

Best,

Chris
Well, the original analogy was much less martial than that, but in such a case, I would agree even the best communication has its limits, particularly when the other person is effectively deaf, willfully so or otherwise. Perhaps in a more martial setting, O Sensei would be the one making the Admiral shave the rind before then making the admiral plop orange wedges into his mouth... while smiling devilishly of course!

Gambarimashyo!
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 05:28 PM   #45
gregstec
Dojo: Aiki Kurabu
Location: Elizabethtown, PA
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,110
United_States
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Mary Eastland wrote: View Post

Then the first man peeled his orange and ate the fruit and the other man zested the skin and threw out the fruit.
With just a little more communication they both could have all of what they wanted.

.
I have heard the orange story before, and I agree with its point. "Talking and Listening" are the yin and yang of a verbal communications system; they cannot exist without each other and they both have responsibilities within the relationship - The Talker is responsible to ensure the Listener understands the message and the Listener is responsible to ensure the Talker knows they understand the message - this is accomplished via an 'echo' where the Listener repeats back the message to the Talker and the Talker responds with an acknowledgment - in military communications, this is crucial,

Unfortunately, language (verbal and written) is an extremely poor communications system due to the vast potential for misunderstanding from filtering, assumption, and culture influences; this entire Forum is full of examples of this. IMO, I think too many people are talking when they should be listening, and there is way not enough 'echoing' going on Some say mathematics is the universal communications language because it is what it is and there is no room for misunderstanding - so with that in mind, here is my best binary verse: 11100011101110110011001110111111100000111000111110001100000011111100101010011000

Greg
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 09:27 PM   #46
Basia Halliop
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 711
Canada
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Christopher Li wrote: View Post
Aboslutely - but I think that it would be dangerous to assume that better communication is always the best option.

Best,

Chris
Well, I can see that it may sometimes be entirely insufficient, but I'm having trouble thinking of why it would be actually harmful or any reason for not using it? Understanding the conflict better doesn't, as far as I can see, preclude further action.

Or do you just mean that sometimes it's beneficial to trick someone or not let them know what you want? Or that communication sometimes takes time that's better spent?
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 09:32 PM   #47
Chris Li
 
Chris Li's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido Sangenkai
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,075
United_States
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Basia Halliop wrote: View Post
Well, I can see that it may sometimes be entirely insufficient, but I'm having trouble thinking of why it would be actually harmful or any reason for not using it? Understanding the conflict better doesn't, as far as I can see, preclude further action.

Or do you just mean that sometimes it's beneficial to trick someone or not let them know what you want? Or that communication sometimes takes time that's better spent?
Well, there are always going to be times when a particular strategy works better then others. In terms of martial arts - I can think of any number of situations where communicate first wouldn't be the best option.

Best,

Chris

  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 09:58 PM   #48
Janet Rosen
  AikiWeb Forums Contributing Member
 
Janet Rosen's Avatar
Location: Left Coast
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 3,933
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Christopher Li wrote: View Post
Well, there are always going to be times when a particular strategy works better then others. In terms of martial arts - I can think of any number of situations where communicate first wouldn't be the best option.

Best,

Chris
Chris, it depends on how you define communication. To me it does include either hissing or screaming, whichever is appropriate, "get the f*** away from me" - as well as an entire spectrum of non verbal communication from glares to postural changes to - as they say - smacking a donkey over the head with a 2x4 to get its attention. I do believe in de-escalating whenever possible but to me the essence of effective communication of ANY kind is clarity to minimize as much as possible the risk of misunderstanding.

Janet Rosen
http://www.zanshinart.com
"peace will enter when hate is gone"--percy mayfield
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2012, 10:03 PM   #49
Basia Halliop
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 711
Canada
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Yeah, what Janet just said.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 12:22 AM   #50
Chris Li
 
Chris Li's Avatar
Dojo: Aikido Sangenkai
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,075
United_States
Offline
Re: talking and listening

Quote:
Janet Rosen wrote: View Post
Chris, it depends on how you define communication. To me it does include either hissing or screaming, whichever is appropriate, "get the f*** away from me" - as well as an entire spectrum of non verbal communication from glares to postural changes to - as they say - smacking a donkey over the head with a 2x4 to get its attention. I do believe in de-escalating whenever possible but to me the essence of effective communication of ANY kind is clarity to minimize as much as possible the risk of misunderstanding.
True, but I think we're getting away from the kind of communication that was being discussed in the OP.

Best,

Chris

  Reply With Quote

Please visit our sponsor:

Budo Bear Patterns - Sewing pattern for Women's (and Men's) dogi.



Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Internal Style of The Wooden Staff Tenyu Non-Aikido Martial Traditions 395 05-25-2011 02:47 PM
Talking too much anonymouse Anonymous 41 12-10-2004 09:04 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:20 AM.



vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2014 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited
----------
Copyright 1997-2014 AikiWeb and its Authors, All Rights Reserved.
----------
For questions and comments about this website:
Send E-mail
plainlaid-picaresque outchasing-protistan explicantia-altarage seaford-stellionate