Hi Tim,

I really appreciate your post here and below, along with the responses.

All of the comments – Jeffrey’s, Roger's and others - also interest me from the point of view of a book I’m reading right now. It’s one I’d recommended to Robert R, before I'd read it myself - (my suggestion, which I explained at the time, was based on a single interview with a mediator who’d undertaken “Transformative Mediation” training):

http://www.amazon.com/Promise-Mediation-Transformative-Approach-Conflict...

Also, I recently read this book (below), which covers some of the same themes:

http://www.amazon.com/Facing-Shame-Fossum/dp/0393305813/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/...

The authors talk about conflict itself – quite apart from the particular situation or the particular actors - as generating some fairly predictable reactions in people. Namely, a kind of closing in and closing down, or “self-absorption” - and other common responses, which are discussed in these books.

It’s interesting to me to notice Roger’s language (which in some ways echoes Jim, with his use of one of the same words Jim had used in his write-up on the conference, i.e., - RC modifies as “azz”) (see http://www.energybulletin.net/36065.html), and also Roger’s use of wager. Jeffrey’s focus on the accuracy of Jim’s predictions, and so forth.

Anyway, though it may seem counter-intuitive, the authors, Robert A. Baruch Bush and Joseph P. Folger, talk about “empowerment” and “recognition”, which I could try to summarize as “regaining a sense of clarity in oneself" and “feeling empathy towards another”, or, to pick a random quote from the book to share: “…interactional change begins with a party calming down, getting clear and thus regaining strength; with this renewed strength, the party then begins to open up to a different view of the other.” (p. 67).

*Not* that the authors see the role of mediation as having the *goal* of “calming people down” – quite the opposite, in fact, by supporting people’s full expression. And doing so in a way that mirrors the expression, acknowledges and helps gain clarity.

I wanted to share this, because to me, (IMVHO as they say), some of these efforts to address patterns of conflict are illustrative of a kind of a contribution to our understanding that is as remarkable as any technological or scientific advancement. (I’ve sometimes also referred to www.cnvc.org, www.gordontraining.com, and www.newconversations.net.)

And may help us.

Thanks Aniya,

This is the discussion I was trying to generate. When I was writing the original post I thought about adding a link to How to Win Friends and Influence People, but I decided against it and only listed the things I learned from the conference. My original post was intended to help people reach important decision makers in their community and I used the Kunstler example to illustrate a mistake that some of us are prone to making when talking to people in our community.

If you are reading this post on this site then you already know what the problems are and what the solutions are. The next step is doing something about it. If you are reading this post on this site you may not know how to reach your community and that is what I was trying to address.

Tim

Hi Tim,

And I appreciate your acknowledgment - thanks.

There's something so fundamental here - it's about how people feel (emotions) and see each other. That's one of the essential discussions in books and other references (eg., organizations whose founders have also written some "classics" - Thomas Gordon and Marshall Rosenberg.)

It's along the lines of: how do we see each other? Is another human being only a means to an end (of my own choosing)? A "human being" or a "need object"?