Continuing: "Choosing Seeds For Dialogue" by Chef JeM Blog entry

Blog: The Whey, The Truth and The Life!
by Chef JeM

Continuing: "Choosing Seeds For Dialogue"

The need to develop our abilities to dialogue are all the more greater now!

Date: 6/16/2013 6:29:52 AM ( 11 y ) ... viewed 8972 times

I wrote:

"... I believe Dyads can support the learning process whereby people can experience genuine dialogue. I think it's possible that people generally are not versed in dialogue and therefore don't fully know what it is. In any case I think there is a need for 'guides' to help steer monologues into a two-way dialogue.

I realize now that dialogue is a higher form of communication than is possible in a monologue and therefore it deserves our loving support. I think more connection is required for true dialogue than is required for a monologue and that if people became aware of that, they may realize that they want the greater connection, for that greater connection is love!

I had already identified with Scott Peck's insight to community being based on communication, however I did not have dialogue in that picture. Now, ... I realize the truth of dialogue as the higher form of communication that (a healthy) community requires. The 'connections' that are required for community is largely (based on) one-to-one!

...
I have identified the need for dialogue as my primary batch of 'new seeds' that I choose now. ...":

http://curezone.com/Blogs/fm.asp?i=1963536

June 17, 2013 -

I shared the above with a therapist friend and he agreed with the message/Blog.

He said:
"... the inner dynamics need to be made conscious
or the group acts them out unconsciously
in ways lacking benefit and often destructive."

In contemplating this my thoughts returned again to the need for dialogue. This may be the beginning of a possible consensus for allowing, inviting, even encouraging dialogue.

I feel I have the "spirit" of dialogue within me, yet inadequately. I had an encounter recently where the other individual expressed upset about my gardening activity and my immediate response was inviting a conversation on the issue which was declined. My strategy was to have the other individual come closer to me and thereby possibly minimize the apparent need to yell at me from the distance and to better hear this one. Later I decide to give up the garden activity and thereby remove the issue. I had no expectations that a dialogue could be had with this individual. It seemed to me that a true dialogue would require connection and I did not experience a connection with the individual.

I mention "connection" as it arose in my pondering about the above "encounter" from an NVC perspective which talks about importance of connection. I wondered what connection is. Is it affinity? The definition for affinity includes: "... agreement, or connection":
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/affinity

It appears to me that "agreement, or connection" may be difficult to obtain during a conflict if the agreement/connection wasn't already in place before the issue arose! If that is largely true then it seems to me that some kind of agreement needs to be made before the opportunity for conflict has a chance to arise. Without a connection (like an agreement to have a dialogue when issues arise) how can anyone expect to have the dialogue?

There is an understanding established by certain schools of communication that real communication requires some level of shared reality and affinity between the parties involved in order to have a complete communication cycle. If the attempt to communicate by one party to another is one that only presents accusations that are not with a shared reality and are not with affinity then the attempt to communicate may likely fail.

If all the components that make for a successful communication cycle are universally known, understood and accepted then when an attempt to communicate is without the necessary components an individual can honestly say they did not get the communication because communication is a "package deal" that is more than just the words that may be spoken. The intended "listening party" may report their observations of apparent upset emotions by the other individual and words spoken but if that observation did not give an increase of shared reality and shared affinity from what was said by the other individual (which real communication gives) then what was said may have fallen short of a complete understanding.