Some things that I noticed when I was listening "empathetically" was that it is really really hard to do. One of the big things that you need to do is to "be non-judgmental" or to "suspend our own agenda's". I sort of struggled with this a bit because if I heard something that was wrong or something that I disagreed with I would want to have comment/rebut what was said. Other than that I think I did pretty well with the whole "listening empathetically" thing. I was able to let them speak, maintain eye contact(well not really since this was through the internet), give my friend my full attention, ask good questions, and try on their shoes. Something that I think is different between communicating live and online is that it is much easier to formulate good questions or understand what they are saying when you are talking online. It feels like you have more time if you are talking online rather than offline. I'm not sure why but thats what I think. What I think I would need to work on is not trying to use examples from my life to solve any problems my friends might have. If they wanted it they would have asked me. It isn't really a empathetic thing to do. Something that I learned from empathetic listening is that most of the time people just want to be heard, they don't need anything from me.
Brian on the first two things I completely agree with you. Listening empathetically isn't easy, especially if its with someone you know well. And yes, it is easier to formulate questions and communicate with someone when you re talking to them online rather than in person because the internet allows for a certain degree of personal space between you and your concerned other.
ReplyDeleteWhat I disagree with is that when you are being empathetic with someone, you need to try and be in there shoes and for that the best thing IS to use examples from your own life. Its one thing if you haven't had any experiences worth mentioning but if you do, it can be a very useful tool.
Akbar
I think one possible reason for why it felt easier for you to have an open conversation online rather than in person is that you weren't as pressed for time and that you weren't as distracted by your environment.
ReplyDeleteI don't completely agree with you on how we shouldn't offer our personal experiences in helping others. It's true that they aren't always necessary or even helpful, but in some cases, it may just be what the other speaker needs to hear. You would just have to be careful to make sure that the conversation is still about them instead of you if you offer your own examples without being asked to do so.
You say that you struggled to comment on things they said, but did you have any opportunity to bring those topics back to relevancy the next time it was your turn to speak? This could have made them feel more comfortable telling you things that they might have needed to get out of their system.
Brian:
ReplyDeleteI think you should present an example to better illustrate your point. Maybe it is better to connect to a detailed conversation you have with your friends,family or other people. Your have good knowledge and theory on how to be a good listener. I agree with you. BUT you need to have some real life situations. Then you can relate the theory to the practices better.
I believe that the disapproval or argument is also a kind of communication. As there is discussion between the listeners and speakers, there is a literal interaction and you are indeed “listening empathetically". The last case you mentioned, I believe, also belongs to “listening empathetically. What the speakers ask you to do is to listen to them without any literal response. What you just do is to listen and make eye contact. They may release their pressure and emotion through communication, and they just talk about their problems. You just watch their eyes and listen, that will give enough respect and feedback to the speakers. As a result, I think this kind of communication also belongs to the listening empathetically.
ReplyDelete