Non-Violent Communication

[Moderator-2]

My beloved brothers and sisters and fellow readers of The Urantia Book,

The moderators of this website do their best to stay in the background and allow conversations to proceed without undue interference; we do not want participants to feel that they are constantly being scrutinized for every word they might utter. From time to time however we find it necessary to intervene either via direct contact with an individual participant or through a general posting such as this one. We have observed that several recent threads have contained posts that could be described as vexatious, belligerent, surly, and judgemental. It has become necessary to reaffirm the first rule or guiding principle relating to what is acceptable behaviour on this website:

• Be kind, fair, respectful and courteous at all times without personal attacks or foul language.

Notwithstanding that certain topics can provoke strong feelings such as anger, frustration, or resentment, this in no way excuses violations of the above stated rule. Persistent violations by any individual will not be tolerated. Offending individuals are always given a personal and private warning before any further action is taken. It is hoped that these procedures will not be seen as heavy-handed or authoritarian by the readership. Our over-riding objective is to create and maintain a friendly and supportive environment that will encourage even the timid and inexperienced to contribute their ideas and opinions.

As we share in the fellowship of the Spirit of Truth, let us always bear in mind these words of exhortation from our Master:

“Anger is a material manifestation which represents, in a general way, the measure of the failure of the spiritual nature to gain control of the combined intellectual and physical natures. Anger indicates your lack of tolerant brotherly love plus your lack of self-respect and self-control. Anger depletes the health, debases the mind, and handicaps the spirit teacher of man’s soul. Have you not read in the Scriptures that wrath kills the foolish man,' and that mantears himself in his anger’? That he who is slow of wrath is of great understanding,' whilehe who is hasty of temper exalts folly’? You all know that a soft answer turns away wrath,' and howgrievous words stir up anger.’ Discretion defers anger,' whilehe who has no control over his own self is like a defenseless city without walls.’ Wrath is cruel and anger is outrageous.'Angry men stir up strife, while the furious multiply their transgressions.’ `Be not hasty in spirit, for anger rests in the bosom of fools.'” Before Jesus ceased speaking, he said further: “Let your hearts be so dominated by love that your spirit guide will have little trouble in delivering you from the tendency to give vent to those outbursts of animal anger which are inconsistent with the status of divine sonship.” P.1673:2

In conclusion, I would also like to draw your attention to the principles and practices of Non-Violent Communication which I believe are pertinent to the subject at hand. This brief summary has been taken from the Wikipedia article on NVC. As with all extra-UB material, feel free to accept what is useful and reject the rest. Love to all!

NONVIOLENT COMMUNICATION

NVC Theory

Overview

Nonviolent Communication holds that most conflicts between individuals or groups arise from miscommunication about their human needs, due to coercive or manipulative language that aims to induce fear, guilt, shame, etc. These “violent” modes of communication, when used during a conflict, divert the attention of the participants away from clarifying their needs, their feelings, their perceptions, and their requests, thus perpetuating the conflict.

Assumptions

1. All human beings share the same needs
2. Our world offers sufficient resources for meeting everyone’s basic needs
3. All actions are attempts to meet needs
4. Feelings point to needs being met or unmet
5. All human beings have the capacity for compassion
6. Human beings enjoy giving
7. Human beings meet needs through interdependent relationships
8. Human beings change
9. Choice is internal
10. The most direct path to peace is through self-connection

 

Intentions

• Open-Hearted Living

1. Self-compassion
2. Expressing from the heart
3. Receiving with compassion
4. Prioritizing connection
5. Moving beyond “right” and “wrong” to using needs-based assessments

• Choice, Responsibility, Peace

1. Taking responsibility for our feelings
2. Taking responsibility for our actions
3. Living in peace with unmet needs
4. Increasing capacity for meeting needs
5. Increasing capacity for meeting the present moment

• Sharing Power (Partnership)

1. Caring equally for everyone’s needs
2. Using force minimally and to protect rather than to educate, punish, or get what we want without agreement

 

Communication that blocks compassion

NVC suggests that certain ways of communicating tend to alienate people from the experience of compassion: (^[29] ch.2)

• Moralistic judgmentsimplying wrongness or badness on the part of people who don’t act in harmony with our values. Blame, insults, put-downs, labels, criticisms, comparisons, and diagnoses are all said to be forms of judgment. (Moralistic judgments are not to be confused with value judgments as to the qualities we value.) The use of moralistic judgments is characterized as an impersonal way of expressing oneself that does not require one to reveal what is going on inside of oneself. This way of speaking is said to have the result that “Our attention is focused on classifying, analyzing, and determining levels of wrongness rather than on what we and others need and are not getting.”
• Demandsthat implicitly or explicitly threaten listeners with blame or punishment if they fail to comply.
• Denial of responsibilityvia language that obscures awareness of personal responsibility. It is said that we deny responsibility for our actions when we attribute their cause to: vague impersonal forces (“I had to”); our condition, diagnosis, personal or psychological history; the actions of others; the dictates of authority; group pressure; institutional policy, rules, and regulations; gender roles, social roles, or age roles; or uncontrollable impulses.
• Making comparisonsbetween people.
• A premise ofdeserving, that certain actions merit reward while others merit punishment.

 

Four components

NVC invites practitioners to focus attention on four components:

• Observation: the facts (what we are seeing, hearing, or touching) as distinct from our evaluation of meaning and significance. NVC discourages static generalizations. It is said that “When we combine observation with evaluation others are apt to hear criticism and resist what we are saying.” Instead, a focus on observations specific to time and context is recommended. (^[29]3)
• Feelings: emotions or sensations, free of thought and story. These are to be distinguished from thoughts (e.g., “I feel I didn’t get a fair deal”) and from words colloquially used as feelings but which convey what we think we are (e.g., “inadequate”), how we think others are evaluating us (e.g., “unimportant”), or what we think others are doing to us (e.g., “misunderstood”, “ignored”). Feelings are said to reflect whether we are experiencing our needs as met or unmet. Identifying feelings is said to allow us to more easily connect with one another, and “Allowing ourselves to be vulnerable by expressing our feelings can help resolve conflicts.” (^[29]4)
• Needs: universal human needs, as distinct from particular strategies for meeting needs. It is posited that “Everything we do is in service of our needs.”^[30]
• Request: request for a specific action, free of demand. Requests are distinguished from demands in that one is open to hearing a response of “no” without this triggering an attempt to force the matter. If one makes a request and receives a “no” it is recommended not that one give up, but that one empathize with what is preventing the other person from saying “yes,” before deciding how to continue the conversation. It is recommended that requests use clear, positive, concrete action language. (^[29]6)

 

Modes

There are three primary modes of application of NVC:

• Self-empathyinvolves compassionately connecting with what is going on inside us. This may involve, without blame, noticing the thoughts and judgments we are having, noticing our feelings, and most critically, connecting to the needs that are affecting us. (^[30] 4)
• Receiving empathically, in NVC, involves “connection with what’s alive in the other person and what would make life wonderful for them… It’s not an understanding of the head where we just mentally understand what another person says… Empathic connection is an understanding of the heart in which we see the beauty in the other person, the divine energy in the other person, the life that’s alive in them.. It doesn’t mean we have to feel the same feelings as the other person. That’s sympathy, when we feel sad that another person is upset. It doesn’t mean we have the same feelings; it means we are with the other person… If you’re mentally trying to understand the other person, you’re not present with them.” (^[30]5) Empathy involves “emptying the mind and listening with our whole being.” NVC suggests that however the other person expresses themselves, we focus on listening for the underlying observations, feelings, needs, and requests. It is suggested that it can be useful to reflect a paraphrase of what another person has said, highlighting the NVC components implicit in their message, such as the feelings and needs you guess they may be expressing. (^[29] ch.7)
• Expressing honestly, in NVC, is likely to involve expressing an observation, feeling, need, and request. An observation may be omitted if the context of the conversation is clear. A feeling might be omitted if there is sufficient connection already, or the context is one where naming a feeling isn’t likely to contribute to connection. It is said that naming a need in addition to a feeling makes it less likely that people will think you are making them responsible for your feeling. Similarly, it is said that making a request in addition to naming a need makes it less likely that people will infer a vague demand that they address your need. The components are thought to work together synergistically. According to NVC trainer Bob Wentworth, “an observation sets the context, feelings support connection and getting out of our heads, needs support connection and identify what is important, and a request clarifies what sort of response you might enjoy. Using these components together minimizes the chances of people getting lost in potentially disconnecting speculation about what you want from them and why.”^[31]

 

Source: Wikipedia

 

[nelsong]

Sorry

got to ask

if I’m out of line will you please let me know? You named manny earlier. I certainly don’t want to rub anybody the wrong way so either let me know directly or pm me privately please

i sincerely appologize to anyone who takes offense to my ideas and if so it is certainly not intentional.

Worst thing is for something like this to happen and nobody say anything directly to me

Thanks

 

[Moderator-2]

Hi Nelsong…..there is no need to worry. The moderators will always contact individuals privately if they consider it necessary to give them a warning. This would only happen if the individual persistently violated the rule against personal attacks.

Thank you for your concern and for your gracious attitude.

[Anonymous]

It must be noted that there are members on this forum who have taken it upon themselves to be the defenders to the “Spirit of Truth” by using their own method, either individually or grouped for specific purpose.  There are many ways to project “Violent Communication” upon fellow forum members who may only wish to present an alternate form of either interpretation or opinion, and when perceived by those who would otherwise take it upon themselves to be the defenders of The Urantia Book, who refrain from asking questions, as to the reasoning behind adverse, or differentiating perceptive interpretations, thereby attempting to punish those open-minded persons by implanting derogatory words or statements within their responses, either well hidden within context, or blatantly presented, then give a negating loving response after the fact, thinking that with this loving statement, all is forgiven.  A Trojan Horse, so to speck, with a hidden or direct slap in the face, and while the iron is hot, present an Ah, that’s not what I meant to say but, sorry for having said it, with a retraction all in one paragraph.  Most people are not that stupid when reading these type of responses, but they appear to be sincere yet deceptive.  For those who have presented these type of responses, I have attempted to reply in kind, but it would seem apparent that their continued presentation, after a short hiatus, to regroup, makes is evident that their true intentions are not merciful, and are against the Masters teachings, even while they site, these teaching directly.

For those I proclaim to practice what you preach, and attempt to follow the Golden Rule, which has in most cases been forgotten on this forum, for some individuals who have taken it upon them self to be the perfecters of the “Spirit of Truth”, and His principles.

I no longer find it enjoyable to contribute on this Forum, because of these type of practices and I fear that these principles have taken over this forum, for their own purpose, which seems to be for self aggrandizement of ego, or recognition, rather than enlightenment of self.

 

[nelsong]

Midi

i hear what you say but just don’t see it that way. I think you and manny contributed much and always enjoyed reading your ideas

i bring up manny because I’m missing him lately

Rules are a beach but those that make forum possible set them down by right of ownership

reconsider

[emanny3003]

MidiChlorian wrote:

I no longer find it enjoyable to contribute on this Forum, because of these type of practices and I fear that these principles have taken over this forum, for their own purpose, which seems to be for self aggrandizement of ego, or recognition, rather than enlightenment of self.

I agree Midi. Its like the ‘cool’ girls at the school cafeteria who try very hard to accept the fat girls but their heart isn’t in it. They will complement their jewelry but pull out a snarky remark about their dress size. “She is so beautiful inside”. “Can I sit here?” the fat girl asks. “Not really, we are saving it for a cool girl.” “Really really sorry”. “But go in peace. Go far far away in peace.”

[Mark Kurtz]

The Urantia Book is loaded with good teachings and there is ample description and suggestion for human relationships.  Perhaps the greatest modeling we have seen on earth is described and narrated in Part IV showing Jesus’ life and personality.  The authors tell us the best answer to the question of what is God like, is found in his life.  It is his example that we ought to emulate and use here in this forum, in my humble opinion.  The authors tell us what people admired about Jesus.  They tell us many people considered him their best friend.

Reading Part IV we see how we should relate to one another; we see we can disagree and still be kind.  The Apostles learned this very well over time.  We can do the same here.  I believe this is at the heart of why UAI has rules for the Forum and is willing to enforce the rules, as Moderator 2 has done so nicely.  Mod2 presented a case for kind civility in a tender but firm manner.  I believe UAI, as an organization, has demonstrated a desire to relate well to people and it wants to embrace kindness even as people may disagree on topics or with decisions.

In short, if we behave like Jesus we will enjoy more friends and become enjoyable persons.  This is want is sorely needed throughout Urantia.

Humbly,

[emanny3003]

Mark Kurtz wrote:

I believe this is at the heart of why UAI has rules for the Forum and is willing to enforce the rules, as Moderator 2 has done so nicely.

How about the Golden Rule? Easier to remember and not uniform in thought, but united in spirit.

[emanny3003]

BRADLY WROTE:
Again, incorrect. Words, spoken or written, have meaning. They reveal much about motive, intention, agenda, and disposition – as well as about context, perspective, and opinion. You cannot write something hateful and then claim you didn’t mean or say it because you’re not really “present”. What a falsehood you present again here. Words matter. Indeed, it is the written words of text that we discuss here and they do indeed convey meaning – quite clearly and redundantly. You have hijacked every topic (regardless of what it may be) for your own agenda and self promotion while playing the victim….endlessly, and then attacking, viciously, whenever someone disagrees with you, which I must admit is often enough. I would ask that you focus on the topics at hand and utilize text to support your positions or to ask about or to directly refute but use that which we are here to study to guide the conversation and your agreements, disagreements, and confusions which is the point of this forum. You have done yourself and your positions no favors here.

MANNY REPLYS:
You are the one who is incorrect, Bradly. Written words are symbols of symbols and therefore, twice removed from reality. I cannot give meaning to unrealities. Spoken words are once removed from reality. Words reveal nothing in reality.

You claim that I present falsehoods here but words matter not. It is idolatrous to consider words meaningful. That would give unreality meaning and you still do not understand this very basic lesson I have provided you on reality. Does God talk to you in word symbols? Please say yes so we can end it right here.

I refrain from utilizing text because they have no meaning to me but I am forced to write and quote for your benefit only. I do not want anyone to take any position here because any position would be meaningless. I want you to think before symbolizing your thoughts. I know not your thoughts, even after I read what you have written. Meaning is lost in going from the reality of thought to the unreality of symbols.

TUB is a grouping of word symbols, that is all. A true revelation would speak directly to your soul as does The Spirit of Truth. It the last of the seven spirit ministries to be given us and is the only meaningful teacher we need.

If TUB speaks to your soul then you have created an idol. The hypocrite points to symbols and demands that you revere the symbols as he does or else. The hypocrite recites the word symbols and uses them against another as a weapon, all the while projecting judgements of self onto those in the sites of his sniper rifle.

Words are not violent, intent is. I do not know your intent but you do. The hypocrite and idolator must project his/her judgements in order to release the pressure valve of self hate and fear.

Jesus was well justified to be righteously indignant when it came to these worshipers of words and scripture and law as they waved their hypocritical finger at others.

[tas]

You’re at a forum that’s only intent is to provide a space for written communications between people as a means of sharing opinions about a written book — and you come here with such nihilistic thoughts about words as these:

“Words reveal nothing in reality.”

“Words matter not.”

“It is idolatrous to consider words meaningful.”

“I refrain from utilizing text because they have no meaning to me”

“Meaning is lost in going from the reality of thought to the unreality of symbols.”

“If TUB speaks to your soul then you have created an idol.”

There’s no point to these posts in my judgment except baiting and trolling for reactions.

And for the record Jesus’ indignation was at the hypocrisy of those who told others to follow scripture and law but did not do it themselves.  He held great respect for honest and sincere followers of words and scripture and law:

“Jesus had great respect for the sincere Pharisees and the honest scribes, but he held the hypocritical Pharisees and the dishonest theologians in great contempt; he looked with disdain upon all those religious leaders who were not sincere.” (126:0.3)

[emanny3003]

tas wrote:

You’re at a forum that’s only intent is to provide a space for written communications between people as a means of sharing opinions about a written book — and you come here with such nihilistic thoughts about words as these:

Let me add to your assessment above. We are sharing opinions about a written book of opinions from celestials. My thought are not nihilistic just because I give no meaning to the written or verbal word. Nihilism refers to the meaningless of life. This is a big difference but perhaps too subtle.

Words have no meaning in and of themselves. They are given meaning by persons, either in the writing of thoughts or the expression in language. A reader of words or a listener of oral communications gives meaningless words and utterances their meaning. The problem lies in that the meaning intended is not necessarily the meaning received by the person that interprets them.

tas wrote:

There’s no point to these posts in my judgment except baiting and trolling for reactions.

There is a point even though you have judged otherwise. And you have been baited. Jesus made the equivalence of thought and deed when he told of the adultery in thought as being no different than adultery in deed.

Words cannot be violent. Deeds can be violent and thoughts can also be violent. From this comes my statement that I cannot exhibit behaviors on a blog, violent or otherwise, and neither can anyone else.

Insincerity is a disconnect between thought and deed. Hypocrisy is a disconnect between words and deeds.

The former requires you to know the person’s thoughts as you observe the deeds. The latter requires an interpretation of a person’s words and an observation his deeds.

Neither of these can be determined on a blog because deeds are not observed and thoughts cannot be read.

The only thing to be determined on a blog is to evaluate inconsistencies, and then to presume to judge insincerity and hypocrisy.

I suggest that you forget about Nietzsche and read some Ludwig Wittgenstein if you wish to deal exclusively in words.

[Mark Kurtz]

Here is another excerpt from the book we all might find instructive:

From 181:2.21
“Then went the Master over to Nathaniel. As Nathaniel stood up, Jesus bade him be seated and, sitting down by his side, said: “Nathaniel, you have learned to live above prejudice and to practice increased tolerance since you became my apostle. But there is much more for you to learn. You have been a blessing to your fellows in that they have always been admonished by your consistent sincerity. When I have gone, it may be that your frankness will interfere with your getting along well with your brethren, both old and new. You should learn that the expression of even a good thought must be modulated in accordance with the intellectual status and spiritual development of the hearer. Sincerity is most serviceable in the work of the kingdom when it is wedded to discretion.

No doubt there are many more to inspire to us mortals to greater love, tolerance, patience, mercy, kindness, etc etc etc for divine-likeness.

[emanny3003]

Mark Kurtz wrote:

Here is another excerpt from the book we all might find instructive:

Will you live by excerpts alone? How can you claim to be inspired by words in a book? God inspires and your brothers inspire when they do the will of God. Words cannot so anything of the kind. Words are dead and if you give them life then you have made an idol of them.

Why did the Master leave no written words behind? Because he never left us. Because the Spirit of Truth is living. Words are dead and would not have left us dead things when he is the truth, the way and the LIFE.

[Mara]

 0:0:1 IN THE MINDS of the mortals of Urantia — that being the name of your world — there exists great confusion respecting the meaning of such terms as God, divinity, and deity. Human beings are still more confused and uncertain about the relationships of the divine personalities designated by these numerous appellations. Because of this conceptual poverty associated with so much ideational confusion, I have been directed to formulate this introductory statement in explanation of the meanings which should be attached to certain word symbols as they may be hereinafter used in those papers which the Orvonton corps of truth revealers have been authorized to translate into the English language of Urantia.

4:5:2    One of the greatest sources of confusion on Urantia concerning the nature of God grows out of the failure of your sacred books clearly to distinguish between the personalities of the Paradise Trinity and between Paradise Deity and the local universe creators and administrators. During the past dispensations of partial understanding, your priests and prophets failed clearly to differentiate between Planetary Princes, System Sovereigns, Constellation Fathers, Creator Sons, Superuniverse Rulers, the Supreme Being, and the Universal Father. Many of the messages of subordinate personalities, such as Life Carriers and various orders of angels, have been, in your records, presented as coming from God himself. Urantian religious thought still confuses the associate personalities of Deity with the Universal Father himself, so that all are included under one appellation.

Thus, the Word made book.

[Keryn]

emanny3003 wrote:

Mark Kurtz wrote:

Here is another excerpt from the book we all might find instructive:

Will you live by excerpts alone? How can you claim to be inspired by words in a book? God inspires and your brothers inspire when they do the will of God. Words cannot so anything of the kind. Words are dead and if you give them life then you have made an idol of them.

Why did the Master leave no written words behind? Because he never left us. Because the Spirit of Truth is living. Words are dead and would not have left us dead things when he is the truth, the way and the LIFE.

Louis, you continue to ask questions that are clearly answered in TUB.  This is a discussion forum to share thoughts about TUB, so one should have at least somewhat of a knowledge of what is contained in the book when posting here.  You ask “Why did the Master leave no written words behind?”  Please read papers 120  which describes the prebestowal charge to Michael by Immanuel.  Also, see paper 136 in which Jesus remembers the counsel that was given him.

^{(1330.2) 120:3.7} “6. To the end that you may not unnecessarily contribute to the creation of subsequent stereotyped systems of Urantia religious beliefs or other types of nonprogressive religious loyalties, we advise you still further: Leave no writings behind you on the planet. Refrain from all writing upon permanent materials; enjoin your associates to make no images or other likenesses of yourself in the flesh. See that nothing potentially idolatrous is left on the planet at the time of your departure.

^{(1514.3) 136:4.2} The first thing Jesus did, after thinking through the general plan of co-ordinating his program with John’s movement, was to review in his mind the instructions of Immanuel. Carefully he thought over the advice given him concerning his methods of labor, and that he was to leave no permanent writing on the planet. Never again did Jesus write on anything except sand. On his next visit to Nazareth, much to the sorrow of his brother Joseph, Jesus destroyed all of his writing that was preserved on the boards about the carpenter shop, and which hung upon the walls of the old home. And Jesus pondered well over Immanuel’s advice pertaining to his economic, social, and political attitude toward the world as he should find it.

[Author]

Posts