I-thou vs I-it encounter

…the person should never be reduced to mere social meanings because no person is only a social construction. The person transcends reductionistic labels and simple categories buy virtue of his or her dignity. To relate to the other person as a person of dignity is to engage with him or her in an I-thou encounter, as opposed to an I-it encounter, as Buber described; it is to bear witness to the other as a person rather than a thing.

Stephen Joseph (ed.), “Positive Psychology in Practice: promoting human flourishing in work, health, education, and everyday life”, (New Jersey: Wiley, 2015), p.37.

The Process of Decision-Making

One of the astonishing learnings in such large group experiences is the incredibly complex ramifications of any decision. In ordinary life, a course of action is ordered by authority, and unless it outrages us, we tend to obey the order, follow the rule. Although people may mutter, it appears that, in general, everyone accepts the regulations. All the complex reactions are hidden.

But in a (person-centered) workshop community, where persons feel a sense of their own worth and a freedom to express themselves, the complexities become evident. Someone in the workshop proposes a way of dividing into small groups: “Let’s draw numbered lots. Then, all the “ones” will constitute a group, all the “twos” another, and so on.” It is hard to imagine the variety of responses. Reasons are given for this idea. Points are raised against it. Slight variations are offered. Exceptions are suggested. One discovers that there are not one or two, but dozens of personal reactions to this seemingly simple plan. Often the group seems on the verge of consensus, when one more member speaks up, “But I don’t like this because it doesn’t fit me.”

Such a process can be seen as – and often is – a cumbersome, complicated, irritating, frustrating way of arriving at a decision. After all, does the wish of everyone have to be considered? And the silent answer of the group is that, yes, every person is of worth, every person’s views and feelings have a right to be considered. When one observes this process at work, its awesome nature becomes increasingly apparent. The desires of every participant are taken into account, so that no one feels left out. Slowly, beautifully, painstakingly, a decision is crafted to take care of each person. A solution is reached by a process that considers each individual’s contribution – respecting it, weighing it, and incorporating it into the final plan. The sagacity of the group is extraordinary.

The process seems slow, and participants complain about “the time we are wasting.” But the larger wisdom of the group recognizes the value of the process, since it is continually knitting together a community in which every soft voice, every subtle feeling has its respected place.

Carl R. Rogers: A Way of Being. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1980), p195-196.

Unity Out of Separateness

The sense of community does not arise out of collective movement, nor from conforming to some group direction. Quite the contrary, each individual tends to use the opportunity to become all that he or she can become. Separateness and diversity – the uniqueness of being “me” – are experienced. This very characteristic of a marked separateness of consciousness seems to raise the group level to a oneness of consciousness.

We have found that each person not only perceives the (person-centered ) workshop as a place to meet personal needs, but actively forms the situation to meet those needs. One individual finds new ways of meeting a difficult transition in marriage or career. Another gains insights that enable inner growth. Another learns new ways of building community. Still another gains improved skills in interpersonal relationships. Others find new means of spiritual, artistic, and aesthetic renewal and refreshment. Many move toward more informed and effective action for social change. Others experience combinations of these learnings. The freedom to be individual, to work toward one’s own goals in a harmony of diversity, is one of the most prized aspects of the workshop…… 

Carl R. Rogers: A Way of Being. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1980), p190-192.

A way of Being (in the staff of person-centered workshops)

Staff members spent time working through interpersonal frictions and differences, which we did not wish to expose to the participants. Gradually we have come to see our function as a staff in a very different way. Briefly, we believe that our major task is to be ourselves. To this end, we spend several days together before the workshop convenes so that, insofar as we are capable:

We are fully open – first to one another, and later to the whole group;

We are prepared to explore new and unknown areas of our own lives;

We are truly acceptant of our own differences;

We are open to the new learnings we will receive from our fresh inward journeys, all stimulated by our staff and group experiences.

Thus it can be said that we now prepare ourselves, with much less emphasis on plans or materials. We value our staff process and want that to be available to the group. We have found that by being as fully ourselves as we are able – creative, diverse, contradictory, present, open and sharing – we somehow become tuning forks, finding resonances with those qualities in all the members of the workshop community.

In the relationships we form with the group and its members, the power is shared. We let ourselves “be”; we let others “be.” At our best, we have little desire to judge or manipulate the other’s thoughts or actions. When persons are approached in this way, when they are accepted as they are, we discover them to be highly creative and resourceful in examining and changing their own lives….

……we do not persuade, interpret, or manipulate,…..during periods of chaos, or criticism of staff, or expression of deep feelings, we listen intently, acceptantly, occasionally voicing our understanding of what we have heard. We listen especially to the contrary voices, the soft voices, those that are expressing unpopular or unacceptable views. We make a point of responding to a person if he or she spoke openly, but no one responded. We thus tend to validate each person……

We are a thoroughly open staff, with no leader and no hierarchical organization. Leadership and responsibility are shared…… 

Carl R. Rogers: A Way of Being. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1980), p185-188.

Roberta's Rules of Order

閱讀推介：《羅伯特的議事規則》
李怡: 一分鐘閱讀 (3047-3048)  收聽

6 Habits of Highly Empathic People (HEP)

1.      Cultivate curiosity about strangers;

Curiosity expands our empathy when we talk to people outside our usual social circle, encountering lives and worldviews very different from our own. 

2.      Challenge prejudies and discover commonalities;

We all have assumptions about others and use collective labels—e.g., “Muslim fundamentalist,” “welfare mom”—that prevent us from appeciating their individuality. HEPs challenge their own preconceptions and prejudices by searching for what they share with people rather than what divides them.

3.      Try another person’s life;

HEPs expand their empathy by gaining direct experience of other people’s lives, putting into practice the Native American proverb, “Walk a mile in another man’s moccasins before you criticize him.”

4.      Listen hard – and open up;

But listening is never enough. The second trait is to make ourselves vulnerable. Removing our masks and revealing our feelings to someone is vital for creating a strong empathic bond. Empathy is a two-way street that, at its best, is built upon mutual understanding—an exchange of our most important beliefs and experiences.

5.      Inspire mass action and social change;

We typically assume empathy happens at the level of individuals, but HEPs understand that empathy can also be a mass phenomenon that brings about fundamental social change.

6.      Develop an ambitious imagination

We also need to empathize with people whose beliefs we don’t share or who may be “enemies” in some way. Empathizing with adversaries is also a route to social tolerance. That was Gandhi’s thinking during the conflicts between Muslims and Hindus leading up to Indian independence in 1947, when he declared, “I am a Muslim! And a Hindu, and a Christian and a Jew.”

To read more: click here

Roman Krznaric (2012) Six habits of Highly Emphathic People. (greatergood.berkeley.edu)