In a comment on Friday’s post, Ursula wrote,
When you are in the thick of what life throws at you (good and bad) you hardly go into scientific mode analyzing “opportunity”, “how can I grow and learn from this”. Like Tammy I believe it better to go with the flow and not observe yourself all the time. If and when life wants to teach us a lesson I am sure it’s perfectly able to do so without constant supervision and us monitoring our navel.
Not surprisingly, I look at it differently. I remember a workshop I attended years ago. We were doing a role model exercise and one woman was supposed to be verbally attacking me, and I was supposed to get angry and lash back. Say what? The leader was all set to analyze my inability to express anger, but I just looked at him. Well, no. That wasn’t quite it. In a situation like that I would try to slip into the observing mode and notice what the situation was, what I was feeling, what I thought the woman wanted, and what outcome I wanted from the situation. Then I would try to respond accordingly. Oh, yeah. That works too.
The leader than started talking about the benefits of maturity. That word sounds too judgmental to me, but I do like the way my preferred method works — when I manage to use it!
Another time I was in a group discussing Marshall Rosenberg’s Nonviolent Communication. Whenever I talked about thinking, someone would say, “You’re speaking from your head, not from your heart!” Uh. In Myers-Briggs terms I’m on the borderline between Thinking and Feeling, so I like to do both at the same time. Why would I have to choose?
Anyway, it works for me. What about you?
January 25, 2015
Like you, I always analyze what I feel and what others might be feeling. I wouldn’t rank high in my ability with the instant verbal comeback, for sure, but I haven’t found blurting out my first reaction to be a particularly useful tool in human relationships, anyway.
“…I haven’t found blurting out my first reaction to be a particularly useful tool in human relationships, anyway.”
Amen to that!
I’m also on the borderline between thinking and feeling, but try to stay away from adversarial situations and seldom analyze feelings.
I hate adversarial situations too, and I wouldn’t say I analyze feelings as much as listen to them. It’s a variation of Eugene Gendlin’s Focusing.
no worries monk!
i wear a mental helmet!
i have always been kind of a fly by the seat of my pants person i guess.
and yet at the same time . . . i’m what some might call hopelessly introspective.
i love philosophy. especially the eastern philosophies of zen and the tao.
zen is very much ‘in the moment’ and i find i am most comfortable with that now.
that’s all i meant. i just said it poorly before!
If anyone has a mental helmet and life jacket it’s you! I’m so impressed by your resilience and courage.
I spend most of my time in the present moment, too, so I would never argue against doing that. It’s just that I’m a Six in the Enneagram (liking to be prepared for danger, just in case) that makes me smile and think of waterfalls when someone says “go with the flow.” You didn’t say it poorly, it’s just my reaction is a strange one and I trusted you not to take offense when I mentioned it. 🙂
Me too, on that borderline. That’s probably why for me “speaking from the heart” all too often becomes “blurting out a first reaction”. The reason I could tolerate long-term therapy, I think, and find it productive, is that it takes ages for me to gradually move into an understanding of what’s going on, what I’d like to do about it, etc. and then come up with a useful response or action.
I’m not a blurter either. Therapy never appealed to me, but I have done a lot of tuning into to myself over the years. It has been well worth it. I noticed years ago that my subconscious mind was running the show, so it behooved me to make friends with it.
The thing that amused me about the nonviolent communication group is NVC is about taking time to notice what’s going on, not just expressing our feelings. It seemed there was a disconnect between the purpose of the group and what most of the members wanted to do. It was still interesting and educational.
If I allow myself to respond to an adversarial situation immediately, my response is usually aggressive, and, unfortunately, effective in getting what I want. I like myself better when I can step back and figure out how to tactfully turn events in the direction that I want. But, I sometimes spend too much time analyzing and not enough time acting when I take this approach, so I don’t steer the situation at all…
I tend to err by overdoing the stepping back and thinking, but I have no regrets. The problem mostly doesn’t come up for me any more, and when I need to be assertive I keep thinking of Dr. Benjamin Spock encouraging parents to be “cheerfully firm.” It’s a great phrase.
I am often called a control freak and to that extent I suppose that I do come across as an aggressive alpha type but I am also often called a very mature person when it comes to interpersonal relationships. So, I suppose that the definition that maturity is acting with courage but tempering the action with concern fits my personality.
Ursula is right now going through some very difficult times and her take on many things now are clouded by her immediate concerns. But they do throw up some interesting insights.
Yes, Ursula is going through a hard time right now, but I don’t think it has affected her opinions on the subject. She’s consistently argued against self-help and personal growth for as long as I have known her. I figured it was time to talk about an alternative approach to life. Again, we’re talking about differences and personal styles, not about “better” and “worse”.
I think thinking is one of our valuable capacities.
As is feeling. As is our sensitivity to values and our physical sensations.
A soft answer can turn away wrath. And sometimes it really helps to match a person’s intensity. In anger people usually want to feel met, so they may find thinking annoying.
When you are in the thick of something can be the best time to think – you may well have lots of energy to change your behaviour and/or the situation.
I don’t think there is a problem speaking from our head. I think there is a big problem if we won’t speak from our heart (this will have a negative impact on our intimate relationships I think).
Or, in brief: It depends.
The main point is we’re all different. What works for one person doesn’t necessarily work for another.
re Myers-Briggs. The quiz measures the preference processes (sensation, intuition, thinking and feeling) – in the Myers-Briggs way of seeing things they aren’t traits.
Yes, they are continuums.
I must say that temperamentally I’m a bit like Ursula. I tend to just go with the flow and adapt to circumstances as the need arises, without thinking too much about what’s going on. I’m not much of a systematic thinker and I’m not given to stepping back and analysing. Which probably explains why I’m still so bad at dealing with a lot of everyday situations….
The main point is one size doesn’t fit all. Even as a little kid I wanted to see a bigger picture. When I would have a fight with my sister I would want to stick up for myself, but I also wanted to see how she saw things. It puts one at a disadvantage, but I didn’t want to limit my vision just for the sake of winning an argument. I was obviously torn.
In Myers-Briggs terms I’m strongly Intuitive and I’d be amazed if Ursula wasn’t strongly Sensing. Hence her statement on one of her posts:
That’s good advice for a Sensor, but it’s not too likely an Intuitive would listen. 🙂
Jean, stand by to be “amazed”. Your intuition has let you down. And not for the first time.
U
Yay, differences! Yay, failure! LOL 😀
It depends
It could be the flow today or for some thing
Or it might just be part of my personal journey
Or something else, I can’t pinpoint today….
I agree, it varies.