Empathy, Needs And Understanding

A need for empathy is a need to feel heard and understood.

Understanding does not require agreement, i.e. one does not have to "agree" with another person to understand and hear how that person feels.

What we "disagree" with is not how the person feels, but their stated reasons for feeling so, or our interpretation for their reasons.

Feelings are not an argument; there is no reason to "agree" or "disagree" with the feelings of another.

One can hear and understand the feelings of another person without having to either agree or disagree with their stated, implied or interpreted reasons for feeling thus.

Understanding does not necessarily mean the same thing as "I can see why you would see it that way." Rather, understanding is simply stating back that you have understood what has been said.

Empathy is not sympathy. Regret, either internalized or projected (feeling sorry or feeling sorry for) is not a prerequisite for understanding and may actually hinder it.

Empathy is not how I would feel in another's shoes -- it is how they actually feel in their own shoes.

There is a relationship between empathy and acceptance. Empathy is the need to feel heard and understood -- feeling heard and understood is the precursor to feeling accepted.

The less my feelings are accepted, the less I feel willing to accept the feelings of others. The more I accept the feelings of others, the more my own feelings receive acceptance.

Feelings just ARE. They do not need to be judged, validated, agreed with, nor do they need to be "felt" by the other person. Rather, they just need to be heard, understood and optimally accepted. That seems to be what makes the cycle complete.

Once feelings are accepted, they can sort of come and go as they please. The ones which are life-alienating seem to stick around until they are heard, understood and accepted, i.e. they last longer the longer they are denied. Life-affirming feelings seem to have an inverse relationship with denial -- they go away quicker the more they are denied. Either way, accepting feelings seems to lead to experiencing more life-affirming emotions, thus acceptance is the more life-affirming response to all feelings.
Feelings do not need to be agreed or disagreed with -- they just ARE and are not an argument.

A need for empathy is a need to feel heard and understood, a need for feelings to be accepted, a need to encourage that which is life-affirming.

Empathy: Scared Stupid

I had an interesting experience this week in my attempts to use empathy.

I was reading comments on a page related to Noam Chomsky. I would generally expect that most people who were interested in him would have values similar to my own, so I was surprised when I found a comment by someone whose values were drastically different.

I felt myself reacting to the words, words I've heard before and words which frighten / anger me. I felt the chemical rush, the blood filling my cappilaries, the "fight or flight" response of cortisol.

Whoa... This is just some person on the internet expressing an opinion -- no need to get so worked up. So I looked at it as a chance to practice NVC, to see what would happen if I applied empathy. Here is a paraphrase of the result:

***********

(Them) "You ought to be shot for thinking like this. We need SECURITY in this country, not a bunch of Liberals whining about social justice. I mean, come on -- we're at WAR."

(Me) "Are you feeling afraid because you need to feel secure and safe? Are you feeling fear because you think that the public focus should be on the war and not on social issues?"

(Them) "You goddamned Liberals are screwing up the whole country -- why don't you just shut the hell up and let the president do his job."

(Me) "Are you feeling frustrated because there is dissent among the people of this country regarding foreign policy decisions? Would you like to see more harmony among the people of America?"

(Them) "Thank God there are still some red blooded Americans here who are willing to keep the rest of you whiny asses safe."

(Me) "Are you feeling a sense of community and acceptance with those who have similar views about foreign policy? Are you feeling frustrated because you would like to see more gratitude towards those in the armed forces?"

(Them) "And don't bother sending me a bunch of uneducated Liberal crap -- I won't read it. Peace would be nice, but war is the reality."

(Me) "Are you feeling frustrated because you don't think that the arguments against war are based upon logic? Do you feel sad that war is happening, but resigned because you think that it is necessary? Does this approximate how you are feeling in response to the page about Noam Chomsky?"

*********

I had this dialog in my head while I re-read the comment, and found that I had a TOTALLY different reaction the second time around. Instead of feeling defensive and like I wanted to argue with this person, to educate them, to make them feel so stupid for feeling the way they did that SURELY they would change their mind.

With empathy, I saw them as they were -- frightened and concerned about their safety in a sometimes very dangerous world. When viewed that way, how could I feel anger? They feel as many people do, and surely in a way that I have at times felt myself. The difference between this person and myself is our belief in the effective strategies to get that security and safety.

There is never a conflict in needs, only a conflict in strategies to fill those needs.

The phrase "scared stupid" popped into my mind, and though it sounds judgmental, it actually carried with it a heart opening experience. This person was not using logic particularly effectively -- if I had wanted, I could have torn his argument apart and left him with nothing to hold onto or believe in. (I've done this before, many times.) I could have made him feel defensive, attacked, and thus furthered the uncomfortable rift he was already feeling between himself and those he labels "Liberals." I could have shaken his tree, thus causing him to cling to it all that much tighter. I could have experienced my own sense of righteousness, of superiority, of holier than thou looking down my nose because I am much more educated snobbery.

But I didn't. Or rather, I stopped myself when I found myself going there and consciously tried a different perspective. It was amazing how much different I felt, and how much different my communication with him would have been had I chosen to engage with him.

I'm thinking about purposefully seeking out "inflammatory" commentaries from perspectives I do not agree with and trying this out again. I may even, with a little practice, try some actual empathic communication with the writers of such commentary.

Hmmmmm.......

Needs (vs Strategies)

I am yet noticing another thing while I try, sometimes in vain, to discern my underlying needs in different situations.

In the four part formula of NVC (observe, feeling, need, request) I find I have the most difficulty figuring out what my need is. Often, my first need is too specific or too general -- rather, it is a desire that masks the greater need underneath.

I kid you not -- sometimes it takes me DAYS to figure out how to observe, identify my feeling, identify my need and then formulate an actionable request... and mostly it's the "need" part that hangs me up for so long.

Just last night I was examining needs that I seem to have, needs that often go unmet. Marshall Rosenberg talks about how needs are never in conflict -- we all need the same things -- but that the strategies we may use to get those needs met can be in conflict.

So. How to identify a need.....

What I found was that, often, a need I think I have is actually a STRATEGY for getting a need met, not the need itself.

For instance, I was believing that I had a need to spend intimate time alone with my husband. This is a need which, with small children (read: toddlers with sometimes erratic sleeping habits, who get teeth, cough at night, or otherwise wake themselves up) is sometimes difficult to fulfill. After the third night in a row (now the fourth, but I'm over it) of spending hours trying to get a usually easily sleeping baby to sleep instead of spending alone time with my husband (which was my intended plan), well, I started to get a little cranky about it.

But what happens then? When my needs conflict with the needs of my children?

I remembered what Marshall said -- he's a very smart man who has considered these things deeply -- I tend to believe him. So, okay, needs are not in conflict, but rather the strategies to get those needs met.

And, other times I have looked at it personally and realized that what is in my family's best interest is always in my best interest as well. I am part of my family, therefore what is best for me is best for them and vice versa. Realizing that has led to effortless prioritization -- if I think about it from the collective perspective, the choice is almost always clear. So how does that apply to this situation?

I need to spend alone time with my husband.... or do I? Is it possible that spending time with him is a strategy for MEETING a need rather than the need itself? Hmmmm..... So what do I get out of the experience? What need(s) is it fulfilling?

I have a need for relaxation, for bliss, for laughter. I have a need for "down time," for jumping around however I want with myself as the focus of my caring. I have a need for sexual expression, for intimacy, for health, healing and energy. I have a need for love, companionship, camaraderie, fellowship, spiritual realization, vigor, peace, understanding and communion.

Wow. Time with him meets a lot of needs -- guess that's why I like him so much. BUT, in the instances where I am temporarily unable to employ that particular strategy of having those needs met, might I meet them in some other ways? At least some of them?

Why yes, I might. So now that I realize that I am no longer quite so.... stressed about not getting to spend as much time with him as I would sometimes like. Sure, a wonderful time is had by all when we do get to be alone, but why not have a wonderful time even when we don't? This is what's happening -- I may as well enjoy it. My children will not be young forever. In fact, they are young for only a very, very short time.

So, now when I think I have a need, I am examining it very carefully to see if it is REALLY a need and not 1) an ego-desire (no one really NEEDS six hundred jelly beans) or 2) I have confused a strategy with a need. Once I can discern the real need, only then will I be able to effectively fill it.

Actionable Requests

In NVC, the most common phrasing for actionable requests begins with the clause "Would you be willing....?" I have been adapting and using this phraseology in my conversations, trying to replace the old clause "Would you mind....?"

This seems like a small, simple step, and it is, which is probably why I'm having at least some success in actually *doing* it. When I examine it, however, the implications are pretty profound, at least to me.

"Would you be willing....?" This is asking someone if they would or would not do X action, not if they would "mind" doing it. Asking if they mind doing it, regardless of their answer, doesn't indicate if they WILL do it -- it just ascertains their level of inconvenience at the possibility. It is not a direct request; it is more like a hint that one would like someone to do something: "If I asked X would you be annoyed at me while / if you did X?"

I find it interesting that in our culture we use the sentence stem "Would you mind....?" a whole lot more often than "Would you be willing....?" To me, this indicates that what we are culturally concerned about is not how willing someone is to do something, but how annoyed they might be at us for asking them to do it. We are not conditioned to directly request things from people -- rather, we are taught to make demands, hint or some combination thereof.

I have certainly caught myself doing all of the culturally accepted and conditioned methods of making requests. Luckily, my family is aware that I am practicing NVC and trying to change my communication patterns. Now a "request" often sounds something like this:

"My back hurts; I wish my red ergonomic rocking chair wasn't stacked on the table so that I could sit on it." [Wait for husband to take hint. He doesn't.] "If my back didn't already hurt, I'd get it down myself." [Wait. Nothing.] "I guess I'll just sit on the floor." [Realize I haven't asked for the chair.] "Hey -- get my chair for me." [Realize I've gone from hinting to demanding.] "I mean, that is, if you don't mind." [Hear myself and try again.] "Would you be willing to get my red chair down off of that table? [Chair appears, I sit down.]

It is amazing how difficult it is to make direct actionable requests -- most of us have little modeling for that behavior. That's the other thing -- it has to be actionable, i.e. a concrete action that the other person can actually DO. Vague things like "doing more work around the house" or "paying more attention to me" are not actionable. Rather, those things might be expressed as "picking up your towel after you shower" or "going out to dinner with me every Friday night."

So, for now I'll focus on changing the phrase "Would you mind....?" to "Would you be willing....?" It is short and simple... but not always easy.

Actionable Requests

In my examination of the idea of "actionable requests" I realize that I have confused two things in my head: The idea that one has the right to make requests but not demands HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH one's right to decide what one is and is not willing to do in response to demands. Just because I don't feel fulfilled when I make demands of others doesn't mean that I "should" feel fulfilled when I accept (real, implied or imaginary) demands from others. :<) This seems obvious upon reflection, but was a big revelation.

Current events combined with thinking about this issue are instigating an examination by me of the concept of "directness." I am noticing how this quality is lacking in our cultural discourse and how I have internalized that lack in my own discourse. My need for clarity applies to myself and my own interactions as well -- I am observing that I hesitate to be direct.

Directness + empathy -- these are the foundations upon which I would prefer to base my communications. What have I been taught / modeled culturally? Indirectness + defensiveness? No wonder we don't get our needs met.

And what is this cultural fear of directness? This fear of letting our preferences be clearly known? Is it a fear that if others know what we want they will purposfully keep it from us? Is it a belief that others already (should) know what we need but don't "want" to give it to us? Is it an underlying belief that we're not "worthy" of having our needs met? Or that we're "weak" if we have needs at all?

How dysfunctional.... and I mean that as an observation, not a judgment. I mean this system just doesn't work to get needs met, i.e. does not function.

And when I internalize and try to use this methodology I don't work as functionally either. But oh -- the cultural pressure to hint -- it is nigh irresistable.

I will endeavor to be even more direct. (There's that word "even" which allows me to strive for something different while at the same time acknowledging my accomplishments thus far.) I will endeavor to be brave in the face of implied requests / demands, neither accepting nor perpetuating them. This is my assignment, my current challenge -- I'll keep you posted.

ID Feelings

In doing some homework for my NVC study group recently, I noted something interesting....

The assignment was to list words that one might feel when they were 1) having their needs met and 2) when they were not having their needs met. Okay... no problem.... Start with list 1:

Content
Blissful
Fulfilled
Relaxed
Grateful
Energized

Well, that was fun! As I wrote I found myself experiencing each of the feelings, as though each one was a little emotional chocolate in a big shiny box. But on to the second part of the assignment....


Sad
Despair
Loathing
Dread
Shameful
Angry
Resentful
Overwhelmed
Conflicted

After that list, suddenly I didn't feel so hot anymore. Life looked sort of dark, sort of gloomy, definitely not-shiny. But since I was out of words, I went back to exercise one...

Excited
Gleeful
Delighted
Creative
Exuberant
Turned On

Hey -- not so bad. Starting to feel pretty up again. Now back to exercise two...

Stubborn
Trapped
Contentious
Aggressive
Isolated
Vulnerable
Scared
Anxious
Self-righteous

Bleh. Bleh. BLEH!!!! Back to number one...

Stable
Grounded
Unstoppable
Connected
Harmonious
Ecstatic

Just to keep things spiffy, I ended with exercise one and didn't go back to number two again. It was amazing -- every time I though about the words and their meanings and repeated them to myself, I started to feel what the words expressed. Hmm....

There are often several ways I can choose to view a situation I'm in, or the emotions I am having in relation to that situation. When I'm feeling particularly "down" I find that I am more likely to pick words which reflect that "down" feeling. (See words from exercise two.) If, however, I make a conscious choice to re-lable my experience, or as is often the case, to observe the situation without judgment, then I tend to choose less emotionally skewed words to view my internal state.

I wonder, though.... what if I just periodically read or thought about a list of words which describe how I would feel if my needs were met? Would I be more likely to experience life as a series of ongoing fulfilling events? Or, conversely, if I often thought in terms of the second list, would I be more likely to experience life as a series of ongoing disappointments? Hmmm....

I am willing to try the former approach, though I think I'll leave the latter to the realm of theoretical possibility. And, really if I'm honest, I have *plenty* of experience labeling my internal state in a variety of "negative" (pardon my evaluation) ways.

Hmmm..... things that make me go "hmmm...."

Ob w/out Judge ~ 4th of July

Conditioned reaction:

"Uck, I hate fireworks. Every year I spend a whole weekend tense, jumping every five seconds, wondering if it's a gun or a firecracker.... is someone getting shot next to my house? Oh my gawd! What if that's a.....??!!!!?? F*&$*#($@!!! I HATE fireworks!!!"

Post NVC, Observe without judgment:

There are people lighting explosives in a parking lot about fifty feet away from my house.

There is a physical element to the blast that my body registers independent of the actual sound, i.e. it occurs a split second after I hear the blast.

A few seconds after I perceive the sound, a second sub-sonic wave follows. When it passes through me it causes a sensation of movement in my solar plexis.

This is a similar physiological response as the one evolutionarily experienced by humans when something large was chasing them, and therefore alerts a part of my limbic system that a sound above a certain decibel level followed by a sub-sonic wave has occurred and might be a source of potential danger.

Therefore, in the absence of examining the condition objectively, I interpreted automatically that the sound indicates some kind of threat since it is always accompanied by a physical sensation that I associate with fear. If, however, I just observe the situation without the fear, I see that the sensation occurs independent of my feelings about it. A physical sensation that I associate with fear occurs, therefore I interpret that I am afraid, when in fact I'm not. It would be like interpreting that one is afraid of the waves because one is standing on the deck of a boat.

Hmm....

I am also aware that if I didn't already have a body cortisol level above a certain threshold, then it is likely I would have experienced the sounds of fireworks differently. However, because I already had unprocessed cortisol floating around in my system, the limbic response from the physical effect of the sound jumped on that cortisol bus and took off.

Woo hoo! We've taken this ride before! Cortisol and adrenaline team up to make Fyshmom hop, pop and curse all weekend long!

I find my neuropeptides more amusing if I give them quirky personalities. I used to be filled with demons; now I'm merely harboring imps.

Furthermore, I am also not observing the situation without judgment if I am jumping to preconceived conclusions about my predicted emotional state, i.e. that I hate fireworks, I''ve always hated them, and it is inevitable that I am going to dislike them now. By making assumptions about my current situation based upon how I've reacted in the past, I don't allow for the fact that my experience now is unique and new. By recalling my past negative judgments and assuming they will be relevant for the current situation, I automatically asses the present in a negative light.

So this is how behavior patterns develop..... hmmmm....

And I guess that is what NVC is all about -- changing, breaking out of old conditioned patterns, responding to what is there rather than reacting to conditioned interpretations of it. This whole "observe without judgment" thing just keeps paying off. Not once have I regretted taking the time to do it -- it is a tree that repeatedly bears fruit.

Observation Without judgment

(Just to make a note, I've decided to entitle each of these journal entries by category, i.e. by what chapter in the NVC book inspired my musings.)

Observation without judgment.... wow -- this one has been one of the most intensely useful and transformative topics for me to consider. For the sake of this post, I'll try to pick one short point to ponder -- it's late, I have a cold, and I've taken NyQuil, so we'll see how this goes.

I am noting how much of my perception of reality is colored by my categorization of things or events as "good" or "bad." I've been working on this area for some years, realizing that there is often no reason to plop everything into One Category or Another, yet I still find myself doing it sometimes. One point which struck me profoundly about practicing NVC was how many of my "problems" disappeared as if by magic as soon as I transformed my evaluative judgments int true observations.

For instance, I found myself earlier internally bemoaning how "terrible" I felt, noting the "awful" sensations in my throat, the "horrible" stuffiness in my nose, and the "annoying" pain in my back. I noted myself doing this, and decided to practice observing without judgment instead:

My body is experiencing tiredness.
My throat is experiencing pain.
My right sinus passages are blocked with mucus.
There is muscle tension in my lower back.

Two things occurred when I made this verbal transition:

1) The "heavy feeling" in my mind and body disappeared. Yes, I was still experiencing the same physical symptoms as before, but suddenly they didn't feel so overpowering any more. I think this came about for two reasons:

a) The sensations were put into concrete perspective rather than the ambiguous language of judgment. (Words like "terrible" and "awful" aren't really all that descriptive if I think about it.)

b) Once the sensations in my body were acknowledged for what they truly were, it was like my body was able to release some of the intensity of the sensations, sort of like the way an emotion often calms once it has been acknowledged and empathized with.

Which leads to the second shift that occurred with this verbal transition...

2) I was able to give myself genuine empathy for how I was feeling. Just as I've found it easier to do that when I name my emotional feelings, I found it likewise to be the case with my physical sensations.

I feel happy to notice self-empathy coming so easily and unbidden since that is an area I have traditionally struggled with. Also, I didn't *try* or plan to give myself empathy -- it just sort of happened. So, here it is again -- one more life-affirming reason to observe events, feelings and sensations without judgment.

Which leads to one of my current decisions / experiments -- I am going to attempt to strike particular words from my vocabulary for a while. Not forever -- perhaps someday I can use those words from a more neutral perspective -- but for now these words have so many "push-button" connotations to me they are effectively meaningless, or at least not particularly accurately descriptive.

The first two words are "good" and "bad." Even "positive" and "negative" are a bit questionable to me right now..... to adopt NVC terminology, perhaps "life-affirming" and "life-alienating" are more to the point.

Then there are the words which are ultimately just other versions of "good" and "bad," though for my purposes I'm more interested in setting aside the more "negatively skewed" words. And it isn't that I believe I need to totally strike them from my list of potential words, just that I think I would be better served by limiting their use, noting when I use them and checking whether or not those words are even truly descriptive of my present situation.

For instance, I find my internal dialog labeling objects or events, but then when I check and ask myself, "Do I really think that X is terrible?" I find that the answer is often "No." It's like I've been conditioned to believe that certain situations are negative by nature, even though I intellectually know that not to be the case. (There is nothing terrible but that thinking makes it so.)

I enjoy my life so much more without the boxes of "good" and "bad." Without those boxes experience has the ability to be more expansive, richer, more textured, and from what I've found, often more enjoyable. I have discovered myself making life-alienating judgments about situations that, once I dropped the judgment and just observed it for what it was, suddenly became neutral or even enjoyable experiences.

It is quite a large pay-off for taking ten seconds out of my conditioned thought stream to ask myself to observe the situation without judging it. If I really think it's useful, I can always judge it later.