4 ms·
Your example really doesn't illustrate the distinction that you claim. Non-violent communication is not about “being nice” and not using “aggressive” words, wha
by kachnuv_ocasek 3y ago
Your example really doesn't illustrate the distinction that you claim. Non-violent communication is not about “being nice” and not using “aggressive” words, whatever that means.
- Karunamon 3y agoIn which case the name is awful and the concept should be referred to with a different label. The point of those is to communicate meaning, if the very first thing that happens is this kind of misunderstanding that we have failed before we even started.
- nazka 3y agoYa I agree. When I bring this label I go into details into explaining it’s a method with a template etc. Or else people will get a very different idea from the name itself.
- kortilla 3y agoI don’t think you understand nvc: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonviolent_Communication https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonviolent_Communication > Notable concepts include rejecting coercive forms of discourse, gathering facts through observing without evaluating, genuinely and concretely expressing feelings and needs, and formulating effective and empathetic requests. Other than my wife saying “it pisses me off”, which is expressing a feeling, none of it is NVC. There are no needs or requests expressed. There is no fact gathering. Crucially, there is no empathy building.
- kachnuv_ocasek 3y agoNVC is not about the words you say. I can imagine the above dialogue being a perfectly fine example between two people practising NVC.
- kortilla 3y agoIt’s about what they portray. Read the link I pasted above. I explained why it’s not NVC.