Understanding Human Relationships (Blog)

[Savage]

Use this thread to discuss the following entry from Steve Pavlina's blog:

Understanding Human Relationships

[Angela]

Interesting timing. I've been noticing that if I'm complaining or offering unsolicited advice, whether silently or out loud, it is 100% about me, and 0% about the other person. The other person is simply a generous (or unwitting) mirror for me. What a GREAT tool for personal growth -- just listen to my own complaints and the advice I give others! Every time, no exceptions. It's NEVER their problem.

But it's not easy to remember to do this! Good thing I've trained my friends to point it out to me. Argghhh.

[The Probabilist]

What about emphatic abilities?
What about telepathic abilities?

Are these the skills that actually cause the other person to start behaving differently as you start to focus on the given issue that previously bothered you? Isn't empathy actually a way to get an objective standpoint on another person's views and emotions over an issue?

And what about equanimity?

Isn't it best to just let things be the way they are and not get yourself bothered by anything? I certainly can't list a single thing that bothers me about other people. In turn, it seems that no other person I know is bothered by my behaviour in turn. It's not indifference - it's making yourself incapable of feeling negative emotions over people doing things differently than you are. Or are you saying that this in fact is what one should strive for and in turn the other person actually starts to do things your way and feeling great about it?

[Erin Pavlina]

Okay I have to jump in and say that I did indeed create a folder called "Stuff I don't need." But that's only because, "Stuff I probably won't need but am too afraid to throw out in case I'm wrong" was too long to fit on the label.

And I do still have that file.

[Tsuyu]

I think this article is great, except the example you gave about George Bush:

For example, if you dislike George Bush because you think he’s a poor leader, could this be because your own leadership skills are sub par? Then go to work on your own leadership skills, or work on becoming more accepting of your current skill level, and notice how George Bush suddenly seems to be making dramatic improvements in this area.

Your theory wouldn't work in that example, because you would need to have some kind of relationship with George Bush in order for it to work. If you were, say, just a regular US citizen who thinks Bush's leadership skills are sub par, and you decided to work on your own leadership skills, I don't see how that would affect him.

On the other hand, if you thought your brother lacked good leadership skills and decided to work on your own, he would probably be influenced in a good way.

[The Animus]

The tidiness illustration is interesting, but isn't very clear in that
you say-

I grew up in a house that was always — and I do mean always — neat and tidy. Even as a child, I took pride in keeping my room clean and well organized. So it probably comes as no surprise that I often push Erin to be neater and more organized.

In this case the solution is for me to work on improving my own standards for neatness and order.

so were you or were you not organized before?

If organization and tidiness was your value, and you had practiced it fully, then Erin's untidiness may still have irked you, simply because you expected her to live up to that same value. Not necessarily because a part of you wanted to become more organized.

The effect that occurs seems like you simply became more organized, as though your value 'purity' became cleaner, and Erin took note and changed her habits, as though by osmosis, perhaps because her habits took a more striking contrast to your increased tidiness.


--

Essentially, others may irritate us either because they are different than us (we expect them to live by our values), and in some cases, because they represent some part of us that we want to change. It is not always necessarily the latter (as your article implies).

[edmamula]

Originally Posted by Tsuyu

I think this article is great, except the example you gave about George Bush:

Your theory wouldn't work in that example, because you would need to have some kind of relationship with George Bush in order for it to work. If you were, say, just a regular US citizen who thinks Bush's leadership skills are sub par, and you decided to work on your own leadership skills, I don't see how that would affect him.

Always keep the subjective reality framework in mind.
Working on your own leadership skills does nothing to objectively improve President Bush's leadership abilities...he's not consciously aware of you.
Working on your own leadership skills CAN shift your perspective on the meaning of quality leadership,
which has the power to change your opinion of others' leadership abilities.

(That certainly doesn't mean that your opinion of another's skills will necessarily improve either!)

[tracyrtwyman]

Your theory wouldn't work in that example, because you would need to have some kind of relationship with George Bush in order for it to work. If you were, say, just a regular US citizen who thinks Bush's leadership skills are sub par, and you decided to work on your own leadership skills, I don't see how that would affect him.

Actually, you do have a relationship with George Bush. If you are a citizen, he is your President.

I think Steve's observation here is 100% applicable to reality, and in fact I think we're seeing the results of it now. How many people who complain constantly about "what a bad job" George Bush is supposedly doing are completely incompetent at their own, relatively unimportant jobs? Perhaps if people would concentrate on improving their own work, and uphold their own responsibilities more, they would see everyone else, including the President, start doing the same.

But more importantly, what if people just took some time to think about how important the Presidency is, and the fact that it's literally about the most stressful position you could be in? The entire world is literally riding on his shoulders. His spiritual welfare should be of the utmost importance to all of the citizens over which he presides. He does have a relationship with all of us. Some of us voted for him, and all of us are paying the taxes that run his government. He is our Commander-in-Chief, and our representative to the rest of the world. We have to live in this country under his administration. But since the very beginning, almost half of the American citizens have been wasting their emotional energy hating him, criticizing his every word and deed, wishing failure, misfortune, even death upon him, and sending him nothing but negative vibes. And this started even before he has committed a single act as President. It started before he was even inaugurated. Don't you think that this have affected him, not only on a conscious level, but on a subconscious and spiritual level as well? So if you've been doing this, don't you think you have some responsibility for manifesting the conditions which supposedly cause you such displeasure?

I have heard Bush say in numerous interviews that he is aware that many people in America and throughout the world (mainly Christians) are praying for him, and that he can "feel" the positive effect of this in his life. Critics have attacked him for this, saying its evidence that he's crazy. I absolutely believe him on this. If you believe in the power of prayer, or using spiritual power to manifest reality, then you have to believe that the emotions we project towards the President affect him. So what would it be like if everyone was praying for George Bush, not just the people who already like and/or voted for him? Because we all have to live here, whether we like him or not, and we should all want our country to be as strong and prosperous as possible. But apparently some people would be willing to see the country fail as a whole just for the pleasure of watching Bush fail, to verify that they were "right all along."

I have observed that people still tend to look upon their leaders with the same sort of magical worldview that ancient, primitive man once had. In many ancient cultures, they believed that the king had a magical affect upon the crops and the weather. If the crops failed, the king would be ritually sacrificed to appease the gods. It is similar to the way in which modern people believe that the economy is controlled by the Presidency, even though it has much more to do with the Federal Reserve and the banking system, as well as other market forces not under the direct control of any politician. Office-holders can affect the economy in various ways here and there, but it's nothing like the power that the Federal Reserve chairman has on monetary policy. The real "magical" affect that the President can have on the economy is that if people feel good about the President, they often feel good about the economy too. As I've discussed before, public confidence in money, and the government that issues it, is what's really responsible for the wealth of nations.

I saw this happen with Clinton. People loved Clinton because the economy grew while he was in office, and people believed that he was somehow responsible - just like th ancients believed the fertility of the land was the responsibility of the king. But in the case of George Bush, many people seem to have decided beforehand to blame him for every negative thing that would occur during his administration. The economy was already beginning to dip before he was inaugurated, but I believe the public's prejudicial hatred of Bush contributed largely to the worsening of it. Certainly the public is responsible for the irrational financial panic after 9/11 that caused such a severe reduction in spending and hiring in the months that followed. And we are still recovering from that now.

I wish that people would put their own self-preservation, and that of our nation, ahead of their prejudice against Republicans, or New England preps, or whatever their stupid hang-up is, and send more good will towards the office of Presidency, not only now, but with whatever Presidents we may have in the future. If Hillary Clinton gets elected, I would encourage us all to do the same for her as well. The world is a dangerous place, and we need our President to be strong in the face of all of these growing threats to our peace and prosperity. There are millions of people who belong to a death cult that wants to topple our government and convert us all to their religion at the point of a sword, or cut our heads off if we don't. And yet so many people are using all of their energy trying to empower the enemy by weakening their own country.

[Bruce Achterberg]

Originally Posted by Erin Pavlina

Okay I have to jump in and say that I did indeed create a folder called "Stuff I don't need." But that's only because, "Stuff I probably won't need but am too afraid to throw out in case I'm wrong" was too long to fit on the label.

And I do still have that file.

To quote Steve from his article, Purging:

There are a few rules that have served me well whenever I go through a purge cycle:

1. When in doubt, throw it out.

That said, I can definitely relate, Erin. I tend to keep a lot of things (especially on my computer) that most people would say I should get rid of, but usually end up being useful (or very frustrating if I did take their advice and get rid of it). Generally I find that so long as I'm addressing purging when fairly conscious (as opposed to trying to do it when I’m in some sort of zombie-like stupor ), if I feel resistance to getting rid of something it's usually because that resistance is trying to tell me something important.

Sometimes it's your subconscious (which tends to have access to many more mental resources then your limited conscious mind) telling you: "Stop! you still need that". Sometimes it fear telling you: "Oop, don't go getting rid of that... don't do anything too crazy now... perhaps you should go and sit in that nice, safe corner and stay away from the scary world out there".

I find its best to acknowledge the resistance and accept it so that you can figure out what it's trying to tell you and what you can learn from it... kind of like what Steve spoke about in the article this thread is discussing (Understanding Human Relationships). On that note, there is also this to consider from the same article I quoted above:

[...]
2. Ask, “What would be the worst-case outcome if I threw this item out by mistake?” If the answer is little or nothing, throw it out.
3. Could someone else benefit from this item more than I would?

And finally, some further wisdom from the article that some of you may find insightful (particularly if you're trying to make an identity shift, as Steve describes in his Podcast #18 - Faster Goal Achievement):

I often ask myself, “Does this item still have energy for me?” when considering whether or not to purge something. Although the phrasing may be a little new agey for some people, I just think of it as a short-hand method for consulting my intuition. If I don’t sense that a part of me is invested in keeping the item, I feel confident that purging it is the right choice.

Woah... that's a lot of quotes.

[pdamoc]

People trying to understand relationships might also take a look at Socionics.
Intertype Relations can explain a lot of the interactions we have.
However it is worth pointing out that if the change on the inside truly happens a phenomena called "dualization" could appear...
Dualization is the transformation of a deficient relationship into a dual relationship (the best that could be). It takes a lot of will but... it can be done.

[Traffic]

Originally Posted by Erin Pavlina

Okay I have to jump in and say that I did indeed create a folder called "Stuff I don't need." But that's only because, "Stuff I probably won't need but am too afraid to throw out in case I'm wrong" was too long to fit on the label.

And I do still have that file.

Don't worry, you sound a lot like me. You're not the only one...

Anyways, the article.

I don't usually comment on these, but there was a few things jumped out at me on this one and it was interesting to see that Steve has been putting these theories to the test in his usual analytical manner.

It struck me how closely this article coincided attitudes throughout Buddhism. The thing is, these types of attitudes can be extremely difficult to grasp. For example, if there is a war, you will always have anti-war groups. These groups will demonstrate in public and do whatever they can to stop war from happening around the world. And why not, because surely this is a logical way of going about it, right? It would certainly seem so. But, in reality, the anti-war movement is a war in itself. Not only does it fail to stop wars, but also create a new one. It's a heavy negative. You throw that negative about and people immediately become defensive, often rebellious. It adds fuel to the fire.

More often than not, I have heard Buddhist masters advise people to take care of themselves, do the best you can with your own life, and by doing that you silently encourage the rest of the world to follow.

I was going to say more, but I forget what now. Oh well.

[alexb5784]

I didn't realize that all the complaining I have been doing about others, was just me complaining about myself. I complained about people not saving money, while I'm not saving enough. I complained about people not working out enough, while I have stop doing my morning runs completely. I complained about the way people tried to get into relationships, when even though I'm changing, I was holding on to some old emotional habits. I'm reflection of others and they are of me. We are all part of each other.

I'm eliminating the need to judge people. Whenever I see people, I will see the good in them. It's not a habit I have yet, but with work and mental reconditioning, it can be one. I'll even look at the drunk bum on the street and see some good in him.

Thanks for waking me up Steve

[Athena]

I think this harmonizing your relationships idea makes more sense as simply- the things we don't like in others are projections of our own judgements, (not necessarily projections of our own qualities)
And to know that you can change your judgements if you want.


Harmony in relationships, like music, works when two people are alike, in values and qualities, and also when they are complementary. Either matching or complementing tones.

Disharmony or dissonance occurs when people are different, and those values don't match up, neither alike nor complementary.

Therefore, in relationships, the qualities we don't like in other people are usually because they don't match or complement ours.

Sometimes this signals elements that we need to work on ourselves (eg becoming less judgemental and more accepting) but I think that those elements are rarely the things that we are judging in others, imo.

[Glass Joe]

Hi everyone. I didn’t intend for this to be so long. But hopefully this post will be helpful to those who manage to get through it all. I was doing that thought exercise Steve suggested in the article and it kind of went off on a tangent. I hope reading this is helpful to those who also suffer from "analysis paralysis".

Originally Posted by Angela

Interesting timing. I've been noticing that if I'm complaining or offering unsolicited advice, whether silently or out loud, it is 100% about me, and 0% about the other person. The other person is simply a generous (or unwitting) mirror for me. What a GREAT tool for personal growth -- just listen to my own complaints and the advice I give others! Every time, no exceptions. It's NEVER their problem.

I'm the same way. Even though, rationally, I know that this isn’t true and that it cannot possibly be true, and even though I rarely complain about it to anyone, I still have the underlying feeling that 90% of business/career success "out there" is simply a result of dumb luck or unethical behavior. It's a knee-jerk reaction I have whenever I come across any positive business news. Now I’m not saying that I rip up the newspaper in a fit of rage or anything. It’s really just a tightening up in my stomach and I catch myself subtly shaking my head from side to side.

So... because I believe I live in a Dilbert-esque world, full of mostly incompetence and corruption, that is what I experience. I bring it all onto myself.

Because my personal philosophy (at least business-wise) has been "Don't Step in the Leadership", all I see around me regarding business/career decisions is where NOT to place my next step.

So I do nothing.

Or more precisely:

- I work in contract jobs at companies solely for the socializing opportunities.
- I work in contract jobs mainly for the learning experience of working in a different industry.
- I dabble in developing various passive internet income streams but never actually complete or launch anything.
- I read books and listen to audio programs on business / economics / finance (mostly for fun, because it's enjoyable to me) but I still don't apply most of what I've learned directly to my life.

Originally Posted by Adam

Well, I just tried a test of this...

Just before reading the thread, I was wondering why a business owner who I'm sub-contracting with was being so flaky...

After reading it, I decided to stop being flaky about the project, I gave him a call, an viola, I have all of the information for that project, plus I was contacted by another company for a very large project that they were being flaky about as well not more than half an hour later.

Gosh, I guess I've been really flaky lately...

I think my problem isn't being flaky but it's somewhat similar to yours. I think it's just me trying to "fly by the seat of my pants" most of the time, with as minimal preparation as possible. Just like how some people pride themselves on how much they can memorize without writing anything down, I think I pride myself on how little I need to prepare beforehand. I still prepare to a degree and take pride in my work. But I rarely over-prepare, which is probably a better way to go than my tendency to under-prepare and just wing it.

I guess, subconsciously, I think that a lack of preparation somehow equals agility and flexibility, and that “going with the flow” somehow equals an automatic “flow” state. That last one is kind of true though, now that I think about it. But I already know that the flow-state only can last for so long and "going with the flow" can only take someone so far.

Thinking about “flow” and "going with the flow" some more and how it relates to my feelings about my work/business relationships, this is what I came up with:

Ultimately, it’s 100% all me. No one else is doing anything to me. For example, it’s so easy and natural for me to see that everyone is truly doing the very best they can in all the other dimensions of life, but for some reason I have a lot of resistance to that idea whenever it comes to work / business. All I see is incompetence and corruption. However, people in work and business REALLY ARE doing the very best they can too. Even if I can't see it. There is no "incompetence" or "corruption". Even the (seemingly) pointy-haired managers, jaded engineers, deceptive marketers, sleazy salesmen, greedy entrepreneurs. Those labels exist only in my mind. Ultimately, it's just a bunch of people trying to make a living, doing the best they can with what they've got.

My negativity towards most of my work/business relationships is basically because I have a bad strategy and outlook towards work/business in general.

This strategy, or lack of one, is:

- Fly by the seat of my pants which gets me into a quick flow state.
- While in flow, my mind divides, classifies, and organizes. Divides, classifies, and organizes. Over and over again. But eventually though, my “flow wagon” approaches an insurmountable wall of complexity. (too much challenge, not enough capability)
- I still persist and try to continue on with my flow state for as long as possible, trying to crash through this barrier even though my mind can’t process everything anymore (which sets up a perpetual feedback loop of increasing stress, anxiety, and exhaustion)
- I then fall off my “flow wagon”, pick up the pieces, and repeat the process all over again.

This “go with the flow” approach has worked fine in the short term because I rarely fall off with small projects, but eventually it breaks down on longer term work / business goals and I get buried under a mountain of complexity. I mean, it works fine in most lower-level office jobs, but it fails miserably whenever I try to start my own business. And it works fine in higher-level programming jobs, but it usually means I have to sacrifice time/energy in other areas of my life in order to meet my own quality standards.

So when I look at other people’s work/business success and try to apply my own mental model to it, I just get frustrated. Failing over and over again always sucks. Failing constantly at what you naturally enjoy and are naturally talented at really sucks. Not being able to see how/why you keep failing or why you can’t ever finish what you start sucks even more.

So when I look at other people’s results and try to backtrack their steps and figure out how they got there, I guess I just write it off as either luck or cheating somehow. (Now that I think about it, a lot of people can easily fall back on those two excuses) Truth is, I have no idea how they got where they are. But my current mental model only allows for those two conclusions.

Why do I only see luck or cheating as options? The best reason I can come up with is that when I’m working on a longer term, more complex goal and when I eventually reach the point where my “flow wagon” is about to run off it’s rails again, I basically have two choices (other than slowing down or stopping on my own):

- (a) I can just coast along, zone out mentally, and pretend I know what I’m doing and that everything is under control. Just like how a stereotypical pointy-haired manager would. (success by dumb luck)
or
- (b) I can resort to lower-level-consciousness behaviors (yelling, intimidation, guilt-trips) to deal with all the stress and extra input since all my higher-level faculties are already at 100% cpu utilization. (success by cheating / unethical behavior)

I don't want either option, so I usually just opt out. And I hate failing, so I subconsciously avoid situations that just set me up for this kind of failure scenario, where the only possible way I can succeed is either by cheating or blind luck.

This has been a great exercise and has really opened my eyes. It’s a tough pill to swallow though. But still, it’s great getting at the source, or at least one of the sources, of all these negative feelings.

Bottom line is that, personally, I need to learn how to "small chunk", delegate/cooperate, automate repetitive tasks, encapsulate complexity, iterate my output in order to get immediate feedback, and realize that whatever I do is never EVER going to be "just right" the first time around.

I can still "go with the flow" with everything else in my life. Just not in work/business. In my experience, trying to plan the other stuff just doesn't work. You really can't plan your friends, what you will like or won't like to do for recreation, who you have the hots for, who you fall in love with, or what your spiritual path will be. It's so much more fun and rewarding to "go with the flow".

[paurnima]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Use this thread to discuss the following entry from Steve Pavlina's blog:

Understanding Human Relationships

hi steve,
this was very nice informative and at first glance quiet hard to digest issue. I found it good once i read it..

thanks a lot.

[aartist]

You must be the change you want to see in the world.” Mahatma Gandhi.

Steve has presented the same concept and has gone in depth, to explain how to live this.

[Antemeridian]

There are a few points on this I'd like to contribute.

As far as the original article, I'd largely have to agree. This actually reminds me of a time in high school (probably a little over 10 years ago now, I guess) when a band director who was a large influence on me said something along the same lines. Basically, when you recognize something, whether it be good or bad, in another person or in music, etc., then you're really recognizing it in yourself. That's something I've kept in my mind since then, and this article further expands on the idea, and I very much enjoyed it.

Now, the second point I wanted to make was this. Reading the article and these posts, I've also thought that this is a tool to use when dealing with others as well. In some cases, it can be easier to understand where certain behaviours are coming from if you look at other people's actions towards you in the same way. Now, this is taking things a step further away, which means that it may not be accurate, or might be too subjective, but its an interesting way to further extrapolate.

For example, and if this seems a little convoluted, I apologize, I'm working as I go here:

A friend/colleague of yours has been complaining to you about certain things, perhaps commenting over how they feel you aren't being ambitious enough in your career advancement goals. Thus, you may be able to infer that they may be unhappy with their own drive for success. Now, depending on your situation, you may be able to do something to help, you may not, but at the very least, you may now have a better understanding of the person you are working with, and what they are thinking and feeling. And, when tied into the previous article on gratitude, you may now find it easier to feel grateful for the person complaining or commenting, as you can see deeper into the situation.

I guess if I worked with the article's example, it would be that Erin would understand that Steve was really, unknowingly unhappy with his own level of organization if he started commenting on how she should become more organized.

Hmmm . . . not sure if that's making a whole lot of sense, but I'll put the thought out there, as perhaps as a group people will be able to make more of it rather than my own ramblings . . .

Thanks,

Adam

[ferociousgoals]

Don't have much time here, sorry if this is hurried--

Though I don't agree with much of Steve's blog this time, I think some people are misreading the lateness issue, which can be fixed in your own head (I know because I had to do it with one persistently late pal who was driving me CRAZY).

She was late because she didn't value other people's time is the ultimate conclusion. She valued being able to take her own time, screw around, mess with her own stuff, knowing that others were waiting for her. After a long time of steaming about it, I realized that by waiting for her, I also wasn't valuing someone's time--my own. As soon as I prioritized my time and stopped waiting for her (value-free**) she began to respect my time in turn. I had the power to place value on it for myself.

**I didn't yell or moan or even confront, I just left if she wasn't there after ten minutes past our agreed time. When she asked, I'd say, neutrally, something like "oh yeah, I had a bunch of things to do so I didn't have the time if you weren't there when we agreed. Does next Saturday work?"

[Vanilla]

Originally Posted by ferociousgoals

Don't have much time here, sorry if this is hurried--

Though I don't agree with much of Steve's blog this time, I think some people are misreading the lateness issue, which can be fixed in your own head (I know because I had to do it with one persistently late pal who was driving me CRAZY).

She was late because she didn't value other people's time is the ultimate conclusion. She valued being able to take her own time, screw around, mess with her own stuff, knowing that others were waiting for her. After a long time of steaming about it, I realized that by waiting for her, I also wasn't valuing someone's time--my own. As soon as I prioritized my time and stopped waiting for her (value-free**) she began to respect my time in turn. I had the power to place value on it for myself.

**I didn't yell or moan or even confront, I just left if she wasn't there after ten minutes past our agreed time. When she asked, I'd say, neutrally, something like "oh yeah, I had a bunch of things to do so I didn't have the time if you weren't there when we agreed. Does next Saturday work?"

I agree. While a friend's lateness may play a totally different role in another person's life. It's about finding the role that their lateness plays in your life. And in your case it was about valuing your time.

[Scientist]

So, if I'm mad at other people for driving gas-guzzling SUVs, I'm really just mad at myself for not being better at fuel conservation?

If I conserve more fuel, then less people will drive SUVs?

But, it isn't enough for me to just save fuel is it? If I walk more often or get a new job within walking distance, that wouldn't be enough would it?

I would have to intend to use less fuel, I would have to vibrate on the same frequency as the thought of fuel conservation, and hold that vibration in order for it to have any substantial effect?

[Megan]

It's not about fuel, it's about how we connect with people.

When we judge other people, it just adds to the burdens they are already carrying. It's like static in their heads.

What we've done is transfer the static in our heads to their heads, via projection/scapegoating.

When we withdraw judgment, there is a palpable lifting of oppression, and they are more free to behave in resourceful ways.

If we are modeling those higher ways, it potentiates their growth.

I know this whole idea is counterintuitive, but maybe just sit with it awhile, better yet, experiment with it, I would say.

[Scientist]

Originally Posted by Megan

...When we withdraw judgment, there is a palpable lifting of oppression, and they are more free to behave in resourceful ways

If we are modeling those higher ways, it potentiates their growth.

I know this whole idea is counterintuitive, but maybe just sit with it awhile, better yet, experiment with it, I would say.

Thank you for replying.

So, I just need to let go and stop judging people? I need to stop thinking about other people and just focus on how I want myself to be?

My thinking about what other people should or shouldn't do is interfering with what they are doing and not doing? How is it that my thoughts are able to affect other people?

[Gary]

Hm...so what would be the ideal way to a react of a friend hurts your feelings and disrespects you? Would it be to remain aloof and uncaring of the relationship?

According to Steve, he's saying that if someone disrespects you, you are disrespecting yourself. But it's such a broad concept how will you be able to correct it?

For the disrespectful issue

I think it is important to break it down into smaller pieces. You can’t look at an emotional interaction between two people and say one element is “the” issue. Dynamics in our mind and emotions are complex enough. When you add another person you multiply it by about six. (That’s right I said six) But here are a few elements to consider.

1. Someone can disrespect you totally independent of what you do. They are late to meetings as their own habit. They are rude and say unkind things as a matter of their personality. This is their half.

2. We take it personally. We are offended by their behavior and feel hurt. This part is our half. We create it by our interpretations of what their behavior means about us. We react because their behavior doesn’t fit our expectations of how people should treat us or others. Treating our self with this kind of emotional reaction is disrespectful to our self. We are hurting our own emotional body. They didn’t create our emotions.

Our reaction is based in the unseen beliefs of these expectations. With different beliefs and expectations we would have a different emotional reaction. Therefore, our emotions are our half.

3. Not wanting to feel hurt emotionally, we go to defend our self from their hurt. The mechanism to do this is to generate anger which would push them away. This is often how we learned to create boundaries. Anger and frustrations are our creation. Generating anger and treating our emotional body to this experience is not respectful either.

How someone else treats us is one thing. How we create our reaction is a completely separate event. How we react is an indication of how we treat our self.

4. Boundaries are healthy. Anger is a way of forming a boundary. Its roots design is to control another’s behavior through punishment. It’s unconscious and poor logic, but it goes like this; people will treat us better if we punish them with anger when not treating us well.

A boundary can be a good healthy and self respecting thing. When done with anger however it tends to be disrespectful and detrimental to both parties. With conscious awareness we can place boundaries with people who are disrespectful without using anger.

5. How should you react to someone when they are disrespectful??? That depends on whether you can dissolve the taking it personally and the anger reaction. As long as those are in play you choices will be limited.

6. In any case put boundaries there or make adjustments. Someone said earlier, if the person they are meeting is habitually late, leave after ten minutes, or bring a book or invite another friend, or don’t agree to meet them. There are a thousand choices. The change that will make the real difference in your emotions is to drop your expectations of what they should do. That expectation is your half that I assume Steve is writing about. It is your subjective reality of them. It isn’t them.

When you shift the expectation you dissolve the taking it personally and anger reaction. Then you might conclude that their behavior is no big deal. It is no big deal because you no longer create emotional reactions to them. At that point why would you need to go change someone that you aren’t creating emotional reactions about?

7. Create Boundaries. To continually put your self in situations where people disrespect you is disrespecting your self. You can’t always control this. Not reacting may not change another person’s behavior. Sometimes in a job it may not be easy to just quit. If you have to pay rent and feed children you don’t always have the option to stand up to an angry boss or quit. It may take time to create an exit strategy. But in the mean time, you can dissolve the core beliefs and emotional reactions that make up your half of taking it personally.

Placing a boundary with person is a separate element. Your choices in how you do that expand as you clean up your half of the emotional reaction.

In summary. There is how a person treats you. Then there is your reaction. Third, there is the boundary or what you do about it. Each of the three parts has its own subparts of emotions, interpretations, core beliefs and expectations. The way to clean up your half is to do a core belief inventory on it.

Relationships are complex issues. When there is conflict and emotional reactions there isn’t one thing to point to and say, “That is the problem.” It’s some work to break it down and understand who owns what, and what you will do about your half. But at least then you aren’t chasing a symptom.

[Lychee]

Originally Posted by Gary

For the disrespectful issue

I think it is important to break it down into smaller pieces. You can’t look at an emotional interaction between two people and say one element is “the” issue. Dynamics in our mind and emotions are complex enough. When you add another person you multiply it by about six. (That’s right I said six) But here are a few elements to consider.

1. Someone can disrespect you totally independent of what you do. They are late to meetings as their own habit. They are rude and say unkind things as a matter of their personality. This is their half.

2. We take it personally. We are offended by their behavior and feel hurt. This part is our half. We create it by our interpretations of what their behavior means about us. We react because their behavior doesn’t fit our expectations of how people should treat us or others. Treating our self with this kind of emotional reaction is disrespectful to our self. We are hurting our own emotional body. They didn’t create our emotions.

Our reaction is based in the unseen beliefs of these expectations. With different beliefs and expectations we would have a different emotional reaction. Therefore, our emotions are our half.

3. Not wanting to feel hurt emotionally, we go to defend our self from their hurt. The mechanism to do this is to generate anger which would push them away. This is often how we learned to create boundaries. Anger and frustrations are our creation. Generating anger and treating our emotional body to this experience is not respectful either.

How someone else treats us is one thing. How we create our reaction is a completely separate event. How we react is an indication of how we treat our self.

4. Boundaries are healthy. Anger is a way of forming a boundary. Its roots design is to control another’s behavior through punishment. It’s unconscious and poor logic, but it goes like this; people will treat us better if we punish them with anger when not treating us well.

A boundary can be a good healthy and self respecting thing. When done with anger however it tends to be disrespectful and detrimental to both parties. With conscious awareness we can place boundaries with people who are disrespectful without using anger.

5. How should you react to someone when they are disrespectful??? That depends on whether you can dissolve the taking it personally and the anger reaction. As long as those are in play you choices will be limited.

6. In any case put boundaries there or make adjustments. Someone said earlier, if the person they are meeting is habitually late, leave after ten minutes, or bring a book or invite another friend, or don’t agree to meet them. There are a thousand choices. The change that will make the real difference in your emotions is to drop your expectations of what they should do. That expectation is your half that I assume Steve is writing about. It is your subjective reality of them. It isn’t them.

When you shift the expectation you dissolve the taking it personally and anger reaction. Then you might conclude that their behavior is no big deal. It is no big deal because you no longer create emotional reactions to them. At that point why would you need to go change someone that you aren’t creating emotional reactions about?

7. Create Boundaries. To continually put your self in situations where people disrespect you is disrespecting your self. You can’t always control this. Not reacting may not change another person’s behavior. Sometimes in a job it may not be easy to just quit. If you have to pay rent and feed children you don’t always have the option to stand up to an angry boss or quit. It may take time to create an exit strategy. But in the mean time, you can dissolve the core beliefs and emotional reactions that make up your half of taking it personally.

Placing a boundary with person is a separate element. Your choices in how you do that expand as you clean up your half of the emotional reaction.

In summary. There is how a person treats you. Then there is your reaction. Third, there is the boundary or what you do about it. Each of the three parts has its own subparts of emotions, interpretations, core beliefs and expectations. The way to clean up your half is to do a core belief inventory on it.

Relationships are complex issues. When there is conflict and emotional reactions there isn’t one thing to point to and say, “That is the problem.” It’s some work to break it down and understand who owns what, and what you will do about your half. But at least then you aren’t chasing a symptom.

Hm, so we should carry expectations ourselves but never for others? If that were the case, how would an employer make sure that the work was getting done by the employees?

I think what you're saying that you have to have expectations set by yourself of how people can treat you. Either you settle for it or don't and if someone violates the boundary that you've set, you let them know. Anger can be the good way to enforce that boundary but caution should be used before doing something that may damage the relationship even further.

But getting upset and keeping that anger doesn't make sense. Recognize your emotion and move on. The purpose of anger isn't for the sake of getting angry, but to recognize an expectation which wasn't met. Am I right? Let it go and focus on being friends with people who do respect you?

[Gary]

I don't think what you are describing as your understanding is at all what I said.

[Megan]

By Scientist, Today 06:52 AM

Thank you for replying.

So, I just need to let go and stop judging people? I need to stop thinking about other people and just focus on how I want myself to be?

My thinking about what other people should or shouldn't do is interfering with what they are doing and not doing? How is it that my thoughts are able to affect other people?

Scientist, I'm in the process of working this out in my own life, so my answers are, of course, provisional, at best, for myself, included--'working hypotheses,' you might say.

I think this understanding of nonjudgment is a kind of cultural groundswell, though, and that a lot of people are coming to this consciousness, sort of all at once, even though this understanding can be found at least in Buddhism and Christianity, that I know of.

I think it has very much to do with feeling, and not just thinking and analyzing.

Buddhism teaches compassion, "feeling with," and I think this is key to this process. When we judge a person, we withdraw compassion from them, and make them "other." Perhaps a moment's reflection will suggest the impact that withdrawing compassion from our fellows has had on human history.

Compassion is about recognizing the suffering of others and wishing for that suffering to be alleviated.

Basics of Buddhism - Compassion and Loving Kindness

In the Christian tradition, Jesus was asked, "Who is my neighbor?" He responded by telling the story of the man who fell prey to thieves and was beaten and left for dead, and subsequently passed by by two religious travelers on the road. Then a good Samaritan (a hated sect) man came and gave him aid. Jesus then asked, "Of these three, who was a neighbor to this man?"

The Samaritan could have judged the unfortunate man worthless, as did the other travelers, but he is described as having compassion, literally, "to have the bowels yearn for," in other words, he was deeply moved by the man's plight.

So it is not that we just mechanically "stop thinking about other people and focus on how we need to be." It's having a growing sense of compassion for other people, as the Buddha and the Christ taught, and seeing ourselves in those "others," identifying with the human condition altogether and ceasing to see even the most wretched people as "other."

Our thoughts affect other people profoundly. Think about people you have known who have seemed to have an 'attitude' towards you, maybe a teacher when you were a kid, for example, but it remains unspoken. Think how draining it is to be around people like that.

There definitely is that energy imbalance between people, and I don't deny that, but I say we can learn to transcend it.

We can learn from our ancient spiritual traditions, or we can learn from each other and our own hearts. How we learn is not important. But that we learn is literally a life and death matter. That's why I said that this may be Steve's most important blog ever. The implications of our learning to relate to each other in an impeccable way are immense.

If we want George Bush to be an effective leader, the best thing we can do is take responsibility for our own judgments about him, work on the things in ourselves that we are judging in him, and send him all good wishes.

That's not to say the political process is unimportant, but it is not adequate if we are destroying ourselves from within by negative judgment.

Americans currently seem to be suffering from a collective psychic autoimmune disease.

We'll not have more compassion on others than we have for ourselves, and so nonjudgement is dependent on a certain gentleness to ourselves to build upon.

It helps to laugh.

Nonjudgment Day Is At Hand! When a majority of human beings would rather laugh than condemn, we will have an uncritical mass, and this will usher in Nonjudgment Day.

On Nonjudgment Day, we will all win beauty contests. Lawyers will disappear, and all our trials will be over. On this glorious day when enlightning strikes, our clown chakras will open, we will become fooly-realized, and we will finally get the joke. The world will stop and everyone will get off.
--Swami Beyondananda

[Lychee]

Originally Posted by Gary

I don't think what you are describing as your understanding is at all what I said.

What was off about it?

[Gary]

Why I thought you didn't understand what I said. For starters this format loses so much in the translation. You don't get the tone, inflection, emotion, or attitude and so I might be putting the emphasis in completely the wrong place. A re-read of what we both wrote from a different point of view and perhaps we aren't completely off. But for starters here are some points of interpretation.

Hm, so we should carry expectations ourselves but never for others? If that were the case, how would an employer make sure that the work was getting done by the employees?

1) I don't think I said we should carry expectations of our self and not of others. I point out where our expectations of others can be a set up for our own emotional reaction. This is a consequence. When you are aware of the emotional suffering from misplaced expectations, you make your own choices about having them or not. I am not telling people what they "should" do.

2) About a managers expectations of an employee. This is a different scenario than what I was addressing and unfair to apply it. I was addressing how the emotion gets generated and who is responsible for what half. It doesn't mean don't communicate necessary expectations and have agreements about effort. It just means that you don't have to get emotionally upset if work or workers don't meet expectations. There are still consequences, but if you are mindful of expectations you can master the emotions.

I think what you're saying that you have to have expectations set by yourself of how people can treat you. Either you settle for it or don't and if someone violates the boundary that you've set, you let them know. Anger can be the good way to enforce that boundary but caution should be used before doing something that may damage the relationship even further.

3) You don't have to have expectations of how people will treat you. I don't know how people will treat me from one person to the next. I don't need to know. As I have interactions with them, I learn how they treat people and decide if I want to continue to interact.

If people do not treat me with respect I will put boundaries with them (Perhaps this is what you meant.) Often I don't let them know. I just make myself unavailable for their company and I don't have to bring it up with them at all.

4) I didn't say that anger was a "good" way to enforce a boundary. It's a way that most people learn, and use with limited awareness that is generally damaging emotionally to both parties.

But getting upset and keeping that anger doesn't make sense. Recognize your emotion and move on. The purpose of anger isn't for the sake of getting angry, but to recognize an expectation which wasn't met. Am I right? Let it go and focus on being friends with people who do respect you?

I don't know what is meant by "purpose of anger." The purpose of anger isn't to recognize an expectation. But you can use anger as a helpful clue to identify your misplaced expectations. Perhaps this is what you mean. In this case you have a purpose to clean up your mind and emotions, and identifying your expectations--->anger reactions is helpful.

Perhaps that clarifies some of the details. Much is lost in translation between writer and reader's minds. I know my writing isn't the clearest of tools for communication in these forums as I don't want to put 1500 words in these posts.

We do our best.

Gary

[Andrew Brunelle]

There was a great saying some Buddhist or something like that said, and it went something like this, "Make no appointments and you'll have no disappointments." I'm sure it doesn't work in the employer world, but in the rest of your life, if you expect nothing, then anything else is a bonus. You are better off focusing on experiences, rather than expectations. That is just the way I feel. Experiencing life, rather than placing a label or a judgment on it, just let it be. It is what it is.

[The Wise Turtle]

Another way to look at this strategy is to realize that you have the more control over your own life than anything else, so that if you want more of something in the world, it is far simpler to add it yourself than to try and get someone else to do it.

So, if you want more organization in the world, do more organizing yourself. If you want more peace in the world, be more peaceful yourself. If you want more intelligence in the world, become more intelligent yourself.*

And while you're adding all this good stuff to the world you'll be acting as a role model for others, who may just be inspired by what you're doing and want to help you out, especially when they see how happy it makes you feel.

Peace, Love, and Bicycles,
Turtle

* and when you aren't as successful as you might have liked, you will be able to me more sympathetic to the similar struggles and failures of everyone else who is also doing their best to add more good to the world :-)