A Failure to Communicate

 

 

 The New York Times on October 4, 2020 published an article by Deepak Chopra that was timely in regards to our political and public health divisions. This spiritual advisor presented 9 strategies about how to have a disagreement during a time of heated tensions.  In these past months we witnessed rioting, lying, Republican impeachment craziness and hypocrisy. This disquisition addresses Chopra’s 9 communication strategies.

According to Chopra, Step1.  “Choose if you even want to engage.” Chopra’s point was to make the determination if the confrontation was worth it. He suggested that it was okay to walk away and not to engage. Disagreements pertaining to religion, politics or some other ideology are very difficult to navigate and likely to result in argument. For instance, Joe Biden wants to unite the country. If he says to one of these rioting  disruptors “There was no widespread voting irregularities in the 2020 election and your leader lied to you about voter fraud,” what is the likelihood of that that MAGA individual wanting to peacefully engage?  Yes, for communication, it takes the desire for both individuals to be in synchronicity. With a mistrustful, limited knowledgeable and lying conditioned individual, good luck with meaningful dialogue.

Knowing something about oneself would be one key component in choosing whether to engage or not. If your motivation is to control or dominate; to put down and belittle; to educate; to prove how smart you, then you are likely to fail. In other words, one’s self-importance can get in the way with communication. I agree that certain interactions are not productive and waste of time and energy. For instance, engaging someone who has a racist attitude; with a nonscientific, conspiracy thinking illogical belief point of view does not make any sense at all. Just stay away from all the mistrustful, suspicious and limited educated nut cakes and you’ll be happier.

To illustrate further, religion and politics are subjects in which the attitude and belief is typically based on emotional needs. This means that those beliefs are related to an individual’s need structure. This suggests, that any contradictory information results in a psychological threat to orientation, frame of reference and sense of self. Contradictory information raises tension and thus the individual becomes defensive and dismisses the opposing idea or ideas. With that being said, the need prevails. For some there is a dumbing down intellectually with a reliance on superstition, beliefs, irrationality and ignorance. For others like McConnell, there’s sophisticated use of ego defenses like denial and intellectualization. Nowhere in the constitution does it say that a sitting president, who commits a “crime,” cannot be held accountable once he leaves office.  Yet, that was his stance .However, after the trial, he said that the x should face legal consequences for the “crime.” How’s that for logic? Therefore, using facts, logic and expert interpretations when encountering an opposite viewpoint on religion or politics, is like spitting in the wind .There is little probability of their ability of taking in the information, employing wisdom, critical thinking with facts and making an attitude change.

One commonly hears about conspiracy theory. This everyday use of the word “theory” is a misrepresentation. Untested hunches, guesses or assumptions are just beliefs based on personal experience. We know that subjective experience can be very limited at best. When I use the word “theory,” it’s based on a scientifically-acknowledged principal and/or related to research findings. The belief that Democrats devour children is crazy.  It is true that human sacrifice existed at one time and it is true and that there are Democrats in the political world. If one believes that Democrats eat children that suggests they are liars, hateful and prejudiced. Why believe or engage in someone who is a liar, paranoid, hateful and prejudiced?

One also has to take into account if the other person. Is credible; knowledgeable; and educationally proficient? How can the authoritarian challenge Dr. Anthony Fauci regarding infectious diseases? Are you going to believe, a pathological lying x or a respected, knowledgeable expert? If the individual is getting his information from the x, social media and Fox news, why bother?

Step 2.  “If you decide to engage, listen first.” Listening first is a good communication skill compared to talking first. Many do not know how or care to listen to another. Listening first means to pay attention by looking at that individual with empathy and authenticity. That takes an altruistic character type. That skill is very difficult to attain because of the potential emotions that can be activated. Some emotions might be positive and some might be negative. With positive emotions, one moves toward another but with negative emotions one tends to move against another.

Listening to a liar about voter fraud suggests that the individual has a limited sense of basic trust, is suspicious and has a tendency for paranoia. With those mental health issues in play, it becomes very difficult, if not impossible, to have interaction based on objectivity and facts. Without a sense of trust the other person is likely to be seen as the enemy. Listening first, would be a waste.

Step 3. “Learn about the other person’s values.” Chopra suggested going out to dinner and converse about family, mother, father or teenage years etc. He stated that strategy would show the other person a vulnerability which is a sign of strength. Knowing another person’s values is a good strategy in understanding another. It might not be practical to have dinner however. Chopra’s message is that it’s going to take time, energy and commitment to resolve issues. It may also not be a one time, short-term interaction.

Believing in voter fraud in the past presidential election as a result of misrepresentation by the leader and his followers, suggests the following attitude and values: 1. Being a racist that wants to retain power 2. Impetus to disenfranchise black voters 3. Detroit has a primarily a black Wayne County population. There were significant attempts by Trump and his Republican cronies to disfranchise by claiming voter fraud for those black voters.

Step 4. “Try awareness and a pause.” Chopra hypothesized that in listening and engaging with another, one likely reaction is anger. With anger, one initially engages in “flight, fight or freeze.” Another common reaction is likely to be “nice and manipulative, nasty and manipulative, stubborn and manipulative, and playing the victim and manipulative.” In dealing with these potential angry responses, Chopra suggests employing meditation in order to be able to use one’s insight, intuition , inspiration, creativity, vision, higher purpose or authentic integrity strategy. Do not try. Either be aware, pause or not. Eliminate the idea of the unsuccessful act of trying.

 One cannot engage productively and have the availability of cognitive strength with anger present. Being centered, being able to breathe, to be relaxed is not only helpful during times of stress, it’s important almost all the time. Learning to deal with negative emotions effectively during interpersonal interactions is a key to well-being and productive living.

It’s impossible not to feel angry when interacting with someone who does not have factual information but is simply passing on the lie. When there is too much anger present, discontinue the engagement. It might be easier on the second interaction.

Step 5. “Don’t engage in black and white thinking.” Chopra gave an example of George W. Bush’s comment to “you’re either with us or against us” as nonproductive. He also quoted Nelson Mandela” having a grievance or resentment is like drinking poison and hoping it will kill the enemy.”

Do not put yourself in a corner with some stupid remark that can lead to the end of discussion. It’s sometimes difficult to assess what’s right, honorable, logical or moral. Use humility with your own point of view. Just think of all the differences in philosophical thinking about egoism from Aristotle, John Stuart Mill, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Frederick Nietzche, William Frederick Hagel, Karl Marx, Ayn Rand and others in determining truth. They were all were able to give terrific arguments for their position.

On the other hand, either you believe the election was legitimate or you falsely believe that it was not. If you believe that it was not, you are believing a lie pure and simple. Just review the 62 court decisions on the 2020 election for the facts.

Step 6. “When confronted, stop, take a deep breath, smile and then make a choice.” This pertains to knowing yourself while identifying your feelings, if possible. Chopra said “Am I going to be nasty?  Am I going to be reactive?  Or is there a creative solution to this?” Chopra gave some personal examples: “I’d like to hear your point of view. I also acknowledge that you are personally insulting me right now. I don’t give permission to myself to be insulted... But now let’s declare our values and our action plan…… out-of-the-way altogether.”

Once again, one has to deal with one’s emotions before one can respond objectively and appropriately. If one has a tendency to negatively respond with anger or sarcasm, the likelihood of successful communication is poor at best. Just watch Trump during an interview. He will either say some attacking remark or turn his back and walk away. So much for his passive- aggressive style.

If one looks for truth by employing empirical reasoning, it’s very difficult to engage or listen to someone that’s just espousing propaganda. With television commercials, I mute the sound. Selling the product generally has nothing to do with truth. It may be a testimonial by actors or a celebrity; there may be just opinion not based on fact or research; the commercials have nothing to do with the comparison of one product over the other; and the commercials may just have pretty people appealing to emotions and imagination.

Step 7. “Don’t try to prove someone wrong.” Chopra said the point of disagreeing is not to win but to start negotiating, and you might never be forgiven.” He added that it’s important to recognize that your adversary either consciously or unconsciously feels a sense of injustice in the matter of who they are. It’s important to engage the other person by asking them about their feeling and what they needed at this particular moment. Chopra added that individuals “they don’t want to change because you want them to change. So if you apply the same principles of attention, affection, appreciation, and acceptance with adults you might have a shot.”

It’s too easy to prove someone wrong when it’s obvious they don’t have the facts or the information especially with all the lying misinformation on TV, radio, and social media. It’s likely a waste of time to engage with someone cognitively and rationally when that opposition has emotionally based falsehoods. With cognitive dissonance, individuals don’t seek out contrary information. As a result, they are a tribe of ignorance. Walk away, when it’s clear of their stupidity. It’s too easy, to give them factual information that they cannot take in, hear, or synthesize. It’s a waste of energy. Do not spit with the wind blowing in your face.

Reframing make sense in one’s communication. Reframing takes time to think about an appropriate response. Do not criticize because one didn’t put enough water in the washing machine. For example, a response might be like the following: I heard a funny sound coming from the washing machine and I looked inside. There was not enough water in the machine so I added more water. No need to blame, just provide the necessary information. Moreover, it’s difficult to reframe as in some conspiracy falsehood. How do you, and who wants to reframe craziness and non-logical beliefs?

Step 8. “Be prepared to forgive.”   Deepak Chopra made an attempt to differentiate between an individual and their behavior in order not to condemn the individual. He added that forgiveness doesn’t mean “I’m lovey-dovey, I hug you, I forgive you, and you forgive me. It means that you stop judging someone’s past behavior.

Good luck with forgiveness. Ask any alcohol anonymous individual and ask them how long it took them to forgive? To forgive might be appropriate or not. I do not forgive Hitler? He does not deserve my forgiveness. I understand the dynamics of Trump and his followers but I do not forgive their despicable and sadistic rioting behavior. Moreover, the overt threat of racism is in the forefront and continues to divide this country. Why forgive our country or its people when we have had 400 years of hate, discrimination and systemic racism affecting all forms of our government that still continues? Communicate wisdom, objectivity and rational behavior even with all the present craziness when you can.

Step 9. “Make a (gentle) joke.” Chopra went on to say that the world would be a happier place if everyone made a point out laughing more and that it was okay to bring humor into a tense conversation. He added a reference to the current Pres. “I do trust anyone who can laugh. Have you ever seen Trump laugh or crack a joke that was moral?” Look at him now. He’s not laughing.

Laughing, smiling are characteristics of well-being. That’s one thing I miss when I run alone. With Tony, while running, laughter is an important part of the equation. Exercise, being outdoors is good, but laughing makes it better.

In essence, Chopra provides important strategies for an individual to consider when encountering another. However, when we’re talking about another, we are now dealing with different or group conditions. It’s like marital counseling. One individual may realistically want resolution; another individual may want compromise; another individual may want dissolution; another individual might want to dominate; and another individual may want to be passive. With one individual you have one perception and with two individuals you have: 1. Two perceptions 2. Different emotional histories 3. Different need structures 4. Different goals or agenda 5. Different or contradictory personality styles 6. May need a third person umpire. However, Chopra’s point is that it takes productive energy and skills to interact with many. I totally agree.