Good video - Nonviolent Communication: Marshall Rosenberg

[Naudian]

Marshall Rosenberg created Nonviolent Communication and is Founder and Director of Educational Services for the Center for Nonviolent Communication, an international non-profit organization based in California.

Dr Rosenberg talks about Teilhard de Chardin's theories of human evolution which sought to return to a more natural way - one where no-one advances at the expense of another. He speaks of his own experiences working with Nonviolent Communication (NVC) and how enriching the lives of others is the most rewarding work mankind can engage in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dpk5Z7GIFs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbgxFgAN7_w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8fbxPAXBPE

TL;DW: Instead of opposition and competition, understand your needs, other's needs, and the environment's needs. Communicate in terms of needs and not in terms of who's right or wrong or good or bad.

"Soo Teilhard de Chardin sees a rapid evolution...he sees this last 8000 years as just a temporary snag in evolution where some things lead us to get culturally ignorant, and to get involved in violence and competition, and he says it's just an evolutionary phenomena. He sees a rapid movement back to the more natural consciousness. Well I agree with him, that it's happening, and I think it's rapid but, my not being a paleontologist, I don't think in terms of thousands of years, I have a granddaughter - I would like to see us speed it up. We're living on a planet where we have enough resources to meet everyone's needs, we have enough food so that it isn't necessary for millions to starve, we have the medicines to prevent millions from dying of diseases. So, it's only the consciousness that we need to alter, and there is a rapid movement towards the evolution of this consciousness, I just want us to do it faster."

Wow hey me too.

 

[Dead Phil]

Why did you make this post?

 

[Naudian]

Why did you make this post?

Um, so you can watch it and talk about it.

Why do you ask? Or are you trying to find out my NEEDS? :O

 

[Remus]

He sees a rapid movement back to the more natural consciousness

Violent, impulsive, competitive, that's the "natural" conciousness.
So, no, I have no idea what the hell he means by that.

 

[VirusType2]

I just don't see people giving away or sacrificing for others in any significant way until they feel they have too much, and nobody ever thinks they have too much material goods. I mean, we can't even feed the local homeless, now we are going to feed the world?

 

[<RJMC>]

so violent comunications is like saluting whit a shotgun blast?

 

[Naudian]

Violent, impulsive, competitive, that's the "natural" conciousness.
So, no, I have no idea what the hell he means by that.

Yeah I was thinking about that, it's easy to misinterpret.

Instead of "back to natural consciousness", I would have said "forth toward consciousness uninhibited by certain social conditions". I don't know what makes them think that 6000BC was so lovely, but I haven't looked into it yet.

And is it "natural" to be those things? Sure, if that's what you're born into. But what if you are born into a community that actually provides for each other's needs and does not revolve around competition? One that provides education about violence? I would imagine it natural to be competitive in less violent ways, like proving someone wrong in an argument, or seeing who can hold the most limes. In other words, maybe it's just natural to mimic your social environment?

 

[unozero]

rosenberg.




nuff said.

 

[VirusType2]

I would imagine it natural to be competitive in less violent ways, like proving someone wrong in an argument, or seeing who can hold the most limes. In other words, maybe it's just natural to mimic your social environment?

I think you are slipping from what you are trying to say. Instinctively, people resort to violence. It's not society that gives us our primal instincts. But you do have a point about education, because many fights could be avoided if people knew how to explain themselves or how they feel.

 

[Stigmata]

I interpret "natural consciousness" as meaning "egoless consciousness". Without the ego, we would feel no need to attack that which threatens our worldview.

 

[Stylo]

We live in an imperfect human world. It's highly likely that it's never going to be perfect. We'll always have those who communicate in terms of right/wrong and good/bad.

 

[Naudian]

I think you are slipping from what you are trying to say. Instinctively, people resort to violence. It's not society that gives us our primal instincts. But you do have a point about education, because many fights could be avoided if people knew how to explain themselves or how they feel.

I interpret "natural consciousness" as meaning "egoless consciousness". Without the ego, we would feel no need to attack that which threatens our worldview.

Yeah I wasn't clear, I'm not really backing my words with anything either. Mimicking people is just one kind of instinct, and certainly an essential one.

If I were to build on my point, "Ego" would definitely come into the discussion, that is very important. But then we have to define ego and all the other terms and derp I'm not an expert on any of this. I know what instinct is supposed to mean, the question is how does it all fit together? What discernible types of instinct are there? How do we draw behavior from instinct? How do we draw from our environment? How do we integrate the two? One thing I do know is that we have proven our capability of overcoming instinct, unlearning and learning anew, and practicing. Don't ask me how to get the whole world to shed their egos and love each other unconditionally, but I won't tell you it's impossible.

I wouldn't quite say that people "instinctively resort to violence" because it leaves out something important. It seems to me that when a person's ego-self is challenged, it goes into survival mode, which may lead to the most primal action - physical destruction of the opponent (violence) - or "flight", or whatever learned behavior, all to preserve whatever thing is trying to preserve itself. That's what is being turned to, that's where ego becomes problematic and yeaaah if I wanted to continue any further with that I'd have to do me homework.

Hylo Stylo,
Perfection is a funny concept when applied to people. Even if we are just talking about two individuals, rather than all of humanity, what is perfection between the two individuals? How is that even defined? Seamless, perfect communication of ideas, needs, perceptions, etc? Some kind of all-encompassing understanding of each other, of each individual's reality?

We don't need "perfection" of this basic social act, but there's plenty room for improvement. We just need to perfect it to the extent that our needs can be met efficiently, right? Unfortunately, society kind of exploded out of control before getting a good handle on this communication thing. Even if some people got it, the majority of the world has always lagged behind, dominated by this [instinctive?] self-preservation complex within the ego. I'm not saying we shouldn't have egos, we just have to learn how to...unlearn some things. No shit.

These are just my thoughts, I don't mean to preach. Communication/expression is honestly a great difficulty for me a lot of the time.

rosenberg.

nuff said.

I think this is a compliment towards the man in the videos, but there's not much to go on