Conference on World Affairs

Overall Impression: This is one of my favorite panels. I learned a lot about listening and what it means to have a dialogue instead of a debate. I will view various conversations differently and my writing style has changed as a result of what I learned.

Liz Weir

Liz is a story teller and as such started with a couple of stories. The first involved a couple of goats trying to cross a bridge that is one goat wide. In the first version they decide to butt heads and everybody just has a bad day. In the second version one goat backs up to allow the other to cross, and they both get to go on their merry ways.

I enjoyed the message of the second story much more. It involved a young lad who had gotten into a fight with another lad on the school playground. The lad asked his grandfather where all that hate inside him came from. Grandpa replied that inside him were two wolves. There was a black wolf that represented hate and rage. The white wolf inside represented love and compassion. Grandpa noted that these two wolves were always fighting inside him. "But which wolf wins?" asked the boy. "Whichever one I feed."

The final point Liz made was that we should learn to listen with our heart as well as our ears. I later thought that might work better if it was listen with our hearts as well as our minds. That was based on all sounds going in through the ears and then being processed. In any case, it did coincide with previous learning about the need to pay attention to the emotional content of messages as well as the intellectual content.

Dorothy Marcic

Dorothy started off by asking, "What is a difficult conversation?" She defined it at having emotional escalation. It is one of those conversations where people get up and leave. In these situations we can ask ourselves, "What we are doing to trigger things?" Is there an edge in our voice? Is it the way we stand or respond?

She talked about two different communication models. The first involved control or being in control of the communication. In this situation there is no learning. The second model is a learning model. In this one nobody is really in control and information and learning can occur in both directions. As an example, one could communicate something to someone else in a non-threatening way, and then ask, "Where do you think there are holes in my argument?" Not being too attached to your ideas is one way to make conversations less difficult.

Jane Bullock

The story I remember most here was how FEMA (her former agency) changed how they responded to disasters. Most people did not need much help, but they really wanted their stories heard. My recall is fuzzy here, but what I have in my notes is "dialogue room." I can picture this being a very effective place where people can have their stories heard, and get that little bit of help they most need to help them recover.

Sonya Hamlin

Sonya has a book, "How to Talk So People Will Listen." Sonya has a very casual, thoughtful speaking style that usually has me leaning forward in my seat. She is also very wise. She started by defining a debate as a situation where someone is trying to win. The loser is disenfranchised. Emotions are not allowed because they are a sign of weakness. She then transitioned to one of the problems with listening.

Listening is too hard for most of us. Television has conditioned us to hate dead air. We are not used to pauses for thought between ideas. We hear the first half of what someone is saying, then spend the second half preparing what we are going to say. Self-interest is our major motivation. We need to work on setting aside "me" and learn to listen to "you."

QUESTION PERIOD IDEAS

Sometimes the following items include the question that prompted them. Other times they are just ideas that I had in my notes that can help improve dialogues or difficult conversations.

• The sequence of listening, supporting, and differing was mentioned. In other words "I got it," "I heard you," and "This is what I can do." After hearing and showing you understand the other person you can say "My way is different. Let me share a way that I use."
• A mediator can play a useful role in a difficult conversation. The mediator will take turns listening to each side, say for ten minutes. They then report what that side said, preferably without emotional language. "Hearing" by both sides is crucial. See the next note about pretending you are laying out your argument on an imaginary table in front of you.
• "What can we do about fighting?" To improve the chance of dialogue, imagine there is a table in front of you. Lay the problem out on the table. Instead of directing your communication toward another person, which increases the emotional content, pretend you are just laying out your side of the story on the table for others to see and respond to.
• Nelson Mandela had one goal (in a conversation? I hate my little notes in the margin) . Logic must prevail over feelings. This is true. If we are to have an enduring standard of understanding, logic must play a significant role.
• The Talking Ball was mentioned. As a dialogue tool it can be very useful. The ball is passed around a group. The person holding the ball is empowered to speak. Everyone else is empowered to listen.
• To listen is to risk being changed. (Attributed to Carl Rogers)
• How can you have a dialogue with dogmatists? You need to create an environment that will allow dialogue. As a set up it was suggested that one can start with, "You have strong beliefs. Let us pretend my beliefs are just as strong."
• Sometimes the circumstances are not working. It may be better to leave than stay and suffer.
• I was able to ask Liz Weir about the difference between the Israeli-Palestinian situation versus Northern Ireland. Sometimes people get a vested interest in continuing the confrontation. In Northern Ireland people just got fed up with all the fighting. [So if we let things go until people were fed up? Or do we try and educate them so they decide they are fed up?