Dear Kat,
There’s nothing to report – we just continue to get on magnificently.
WAIT! That’s the weird thing – how does this happen?
Firstly I want to distinguish between disagreements and arguments. The former is possible, the latter unimaginable. Why would I want to persuade you to do something against your will? It may improve my lot in some way, but the cost of your compliance must be deducted from the benefit.
Let’s say that I see my benefit as M and the cost to you as Y. Then I should go ahead if M > Y.
But you may see the benefit to me as M2 and the cost to you as Y2, so I shouldn’t do it if M2 < Y2.
For this clash not to take place, either
- Our assessment of each others’ states must be accurate.
- If not accurate, our assessment of each others’ states must be generous.
- We believe the reporting of the other.
This may be overly intellectual and abstract, but the point I want to make is that we fully accept the reported reality of the other and do not discount it as less important than ours. This requires two things: that we accept the other as fully equal to ourselves, not in skills and desires but in rights and consciousness, and that we trust the other to be truthful.
Oh, I see I riffed on this a couple of posts ago.
Digg this
Recent Comments