Chapter 6 Chapter 2 Stop Arguing Who's Right and Who's Wrong: Knowing Others' Stories

For the same thing, the story we hear from Mike is very different from Jack: One of the most striking features of a "what happened" conversation is that the two sides of the conversation don't see eye to eye.Is there a better way than retirement?How much money should we spend on advertising?Should your daughter play soccer with the boys next door?Is the manual really not up to professional standards? Disagreement is not a bad thing, nor does it necessarily bog down the conversation.We often encounter situations where we disagree with others, and usually no one particularly cares whether the other person agrees with us or not.

However, in some cases, we will become "pretentious" and very concerned about whether the other party agrees with us.At this time, disagreement seems to be the main reason for the conflict in the conversation.We agree, they don't; we need them to do, they don't want to do.Whether or not we end up standing our ground, disagreements can leave us with a feeling of hurt and loss, or make us feel like we've been misunderstood.Moreover, the impact of disagreement will continue into the future. Whenever we think about it, the hurt and loss we suffered at the beginning will involuntarily come to our hearts.

When the two parties in the conversation disagree, the argument seems to become logical, and even irrational arguments are normal.But in fact, arguing doesn't help at all. Why do we argue, and why does it not help? From a tolerance standpoint, you might think, "Hey, everyone has their own ideas" or "There are two sides to everything."However, most of us don't think so.We are all very persistent in thinking that they are the ones with the problem. "My girlfriend won't go to a marriage counselor with me. She says it's a waste of money. I tell her it's important to me, but she doesn't care."

"When it comes to going to New York, my daughter starts her dream of acting and believes that she will be on the big stage there. She has no idea what she is going to face for it." "We have to follow the boss's requirements in everything we do. He always thinks his own ideas are the best, even when he doesn't know what he is talking about. This unreasonable behavior is driving me crazy." "Aunt Bertha sleeps on an old and uneven mattress. What's more, she has a serious back problem, but no matter what I say, she won't let me replace her with a new mattress. Everyone in the family People said to me, 'Rory, Aunt Bertha is out of her mind. You can't reason with her.' And I think they were right."

If that's what we think, it's no surprise that our conversations with others end in arguments.In the last example, Rory cared about Aunt Bertha, and she was able to help her.So, Rory did what most people would do: If the other party was stubborn, we would take a tougher approach and use a more persistent attitude to dispel their previous views. (As soon as you try it on, you'll see how comfortable your new mattress is!) If the other person is naive, we try to educate them in every possible way and tell them what life is really like. If they are selfish or controlling, we may cut to the chase and express our views directly to them.We are obsessed with the belief that conversations will turn out differently if only we speak up and stick to our point of view.

However, things backfired. Our persistence only resulted in a debate, an endless debate.Arguing doesn't and can't solve anything.Both parties in the conversation feel that the other party is deaf to their opinions and perspectives, or that they feel that they are being treated unfairly.In fact, we feel lost not only because the other party is unreasonable, but more importantly, the result will give us a sense of incompetence and frustration.In addition, chattering and arguing is more harmful than beneficial to the relationship between the two parties. Still, all we can do is keep arguing, because we don't know what else to do.We can't pretend that disagreements don't exist, we can't treat arguments as if nothing happened, and we can't pretend that nothing happened.Because, to us, it's all so important, how can we act like nothing happened?It is also because of this that we reacted so violently in the first place.But if arguing won't help, what can we do about it?

The first thing we should do is to hear what Aunt Bertha has to say. If you said her mattress was too old and worn out, Aunt Bertha would be the first to say yes. "This mattress has been with my husband and me for 40 years. From it, I feel an indescribable sense of security." Aunt Bertha said that now, people or things that have changed in my life There are already too many, so I would rather leave a little old stuff so that I can look back on it, how nice it is! At the same time, for Aunt Bertha, keeping the old mattress meant retaining the little bit of control she had over her life. The reason she complained now and then was not because she wanted something , but because she enjoys the warm affection that relatives feel when they care for her.

As for Rory, Aunt Bertha thinks so. I love Rory very much, but she is not an easy person to get along with.She doesn't listen or care about what other people think, and when I told her she didn't want to change the mattress, she immediately became very upset, even a little angry. "Rory believes that the key to solving the problem is to change Aunt Bertha's mind, and in Aunt Bertha's view, Rory seems to be the one who created the problem. This story raises an interesting question: Why is it that the problematic—selfish, naive, irrational, or controlling—is always the other?Why do we never think that the problem lies with us?If you're at an impasse in a conversation with someone, why don't you ever say "It's probably because what I said didn't help resolve the conflict" when someone asked you why you disagreed with the other person?

We never think of ourselves when we search for the cause of a conflicted conversation, because, in fact, we are not.What we say is not meaningless.However, it is often difficult for us to realize that what the other party said is not meaningless.Take Rory and Aunt Bertha, for example. Throughout the story, the two sides have always held their own.In Rory's view, her thoughts and actions are reasonable; Aunt Bertha believes that her thoughts and actions are also human, and there is nothing wrong with them.However, the whole thing is not a stand-up show, but a cross-talk, Rory and Aunt Bertha are not only the protagonists in their own stories, but also special guests in the other's stories.In Aunt Bertha's story, Rory seems a little pushy and inconsiderate of her feelings; and in Rory's story, Aunt Bertha's words sound almost unreasonable.

More often than not, we don't notice that we present facts differently than other people.So, for the same thing, key parts of the story we tell conflict with other people's stories, and that's exactly what gets the conversation bogged down.When the conversation fails, we take it for granted that the problem is the other person, and the other person thinks we created the conflict.But the fact that we both told the story differently, and we didn't realize the difference at all, was the "culprit" that made the conversation more and more difficult.Just like Princess Leia from an alien planet meets Huck, the waif, the debate is inevitable and not surprising at all.

However, in addition to the fact that arguments occur in conversation because we cannot see the differences between our own statements and others, the arguments themselves also play a role in fueling the flames.Once we start arguing, our ability to understand the other side's perspective is limited, and we tend to conclude the conversation with a transactional mindset, so the conversation becomes a "bottom line" contest of thinking on both sides: "Get a new bed Mat” vs. “Stop controlling me”; “I’m going to New York to get my wish” vs. “You’re so naive”; “Marriage counseling works” vs. “Marriage counseling is a waste of money”. However, as both sides of the debate, none of us cares about and considers the other side's stories and conclusions, so we naturally ignore the other side's point of view.Rather than helping us understand each other's different points of view, arguing creates an information war; after all, arguing only drives us away from each other, not bringing us closer psychologically. Arguing also leads to another issue in the conversation: It constrains change from happening.If you want to change someone, just saying "you need to change" will not work.This is because people rarely make changes until their feelings are understood and validated by others. Let's start with the conversation between Trevor and Karen that took place. Trevor is a treasurer for the state Department of Social Services.Karen is a social worker in the department. "No matter how much I ask and stress, Karen just doesn't turn in the documents on time." Trevor explained, "I've told her countless times that the deadline is coming up, please turn it in as soon as possible, but it doesn't work! And every time I bring up the subject, she gets upset." We know from experience that there must of course be a different version of this story.Unfortunately, however, Trevor was unaware of this.Trevor did tell Karen what she should do, but he never had a two-way conversation with Karen about it.When Trevor shifted the intent of his conversation from trying to change Karen's behavior — arguing why it was wrong to file late — to trying to understand Karen from her perspective and get her understanding in turn Then things took a dramatic turn, Karen told me, and she was so busy at work that she barely had time to spare.She feels that she has devoted all her energy to helping those who are in desperate need of help. She has been working hard, but I turn a blind eye to her efforts and have no appreciation for them. In fact, I And indeed.To this end, I explained to her that from my point of view, after she handed in all the documents, I had to spend a lot of time and energy to complete these extra tasks in order to read and organize them; She explained the details of the job.After listening to it, she felt sorry, obviously, she had never thought about the whole thing from my point of view before.She assured me that in the future, she would submit written documents on time according to my requirements, and so far, she has done so. " Ultimately, Trevor and Karen both know a lot of things they didn't know before, and that's when the change happens. In order for the two parties to reach a certain consensus, we first need to learn to empathize, and understand the reasons and significance of their conclusions on the basis of fully understanding the other party’s specific situation; at the same time, we also need to help the other party understand us, Understand where our conclusions come from and what they mean.Getting to know and understand each other doesn't necessarily "solve" the problem per se, but, like Karen and Trevor, it's the first step toward solving it together, and of course, it's crucial step. As we move from arguing to trying to get to know and understand each other, one of the first things we have to figure out is why people's stories are different.The stories of each of us are not rootless, let alone fabricated.Our stories are systematically formed on the basis of facts, it's just that it's often an unconscious act.In terms of process, first of all, we absorb all kinds of information.We experience the world through sights, sounds, and how we feel.Next, we digest the information.We interpret and interpret information in our own way, giving meaning to everything we see, hear and feel.Finally, we draw conclusions: what the hell happened.In each of these three steps, there will be disagreements and the possibility of conflicts. To put it simply, the reason why each of us sees the world differently and has a different understanding of things is because each of us absorbs different information, and then uses different methods to interpret and understand the information. In difficult conversations, we often only emphasize and prove our conclusions repeatedly, but do not pay attention to the substantive content that really affects the outcome of the conversation: the information that guides us to see the world and its meaning. The information obtained by each of us is different for two reasons.First, life experience—including the difficult situations we have been through—provides us with an endless amount of information available, but there is a limit to the amount of information we can absorb on a given matter. Everything seen, heard, felt, and facts are all integrated into it.Therefore, at this time, we will inevitably selectively select the information we think is useful, while the others will naturally be ignored by us.Furthermore, each of us has different methods and criteria for selecting information.Second, the channels and ways we obtain information are different. Dong took his four-year-old nephew Andrew to watch the annual Summer Carnival parade.Andrew, sitting on his uncle's shoulders, cheered loudly and excitedly as performers in fine costumes and local bands swaggered by in dazzling floats.Later, Andrew yelled: "This is the best and greatest float I have ever seen!" To us, each float was pulled by a truck and it didn't seem any different.However, Anderfu, who likes floats, only noticed this float that he thought was the most special; but in his uncle's view, every float was similar, and there was nothing special about it.In a sense, Andrew and his uncle were watching two completely different parades of floats. Just like Andrew and Dong Wang parade above, because there are differences between people, and at the same time, everyone's focus is also different, so even the same thing is different in the eyes of each of us. Different.Some people pay more attention to emotion and the relationship between people, while others only care about identity and rights, while for some people, facts and logic are the most important.There are artists and scientists and pragmatists among us.Some of us are obsessed with proving ourselves to be right, while others just want to avoid conflict or gloss over it.Some people will see themselves as a victim, while in his eyes, others are either heroes, bystanders, or survivors.As a result, the information we ultimately choose to absorb varies from person to person. Of course, despite seeing different scenes, Andrew and his uncle did not deviate from the theme of the float parade. "From my own point of view, I enjoyed this float parade very much." After the parade, they all felt "I like this parade very much."Both Andrew and Dong believed that they had grasped the essence of the float parade, and what they saw was the "most exciting" float parade. Now, let's switch to a slightly more serious background story: Randy and Daniel are both Americans, and at the same time, they are also partners on the same production line.They too, like Andrew and his uncle, had different perspectives on the same event.They had had many conversations on the topic of race, but each time they broke up.As a white man, Randy believes that, generally speaking, the recruitment and promotion system of the company they work for is relatively fair, and there is no discrimination and exclusion against people of color.He noticed that there were seven people on his working group, two of whom were African-American and one was from Latin America, and the union president was also from Latin America.In addition, Randy also learned that his supervisor is also a Filipino-American.Randy believes that a diverse work environment is good for the company, and he is happy to agree with the company's recent decision to promote several employees of color. Daniel, a Korean-American, disagrees with Randy.From his own point of view, his qualifications have been seriously questioned by others because he is a person of color. At the same time, he has also been racially discriminated against by colleagues and a foreman.To this day, he still remembers these experiences vividly.He also learned that some minority employees like him in the company lost many promotion opportunities because they were not white, and he noticed that the company's top managers were overwhelmingly white.In addition, Daniel heard more than once from the words of executives that they only care about two kinds of people: whites and African Americans. Some of the information Randy and Daniel got overlapped, but a lot of it was different.However, they both believed that the facts were obvious, while the other's point of view was really irrational.If we only look at it from the point of view of two people, we may even feel that Randy and Daniel work in two companies at all. Many times, when we start a conversation—or, say, a relationship—to the end, we may not realize that we and the other person have completely different focuses, and our two perspectives are naturally based on completely different based on the information. In addition to choosing information differently, each of us obtains information in different ways and channels.For example, some people can obtain information about themselves through many unique ways and methods that other people cannot obtain or master.They know very well what their hopes and dreams are, what they are afraid of and what they are worried about; and these are things that we, as "outsiders", cannot understand.Perhaps, on the surface, it seems that we always have all the important information, including various information about other people, but it is not the case.Their personal experiences and inner thoughts are far more complex than we imagine. Let's go back to the example of Jack and Mike.When Mike described what happened to us, he didn't say a word about Jack staying up all night for it.He probably didn't even know that Jack had stayed up all night because of this, or even if he knew about it, but in terms of Jack's personal experience, his "knowledge of facts" seemed very limited.As the person involved, Jack obviously knew better. He knew what it was like to fight sleepiness in the dead of night and try to keep his head awake.He also knew how uncomfortable the cold after turning off the heating in the middle of the night was.He also knew how angry his wife was when he had to cancel her dinner date.Of course, only he knows how uncomfortable the anxiety in his heart is when he puts down his important work in order to help Mike.Likewise, only Jack understood the joy he felt when he helped his friend. Likewise, there are many things that Jack doesn't know.Unbeknownst to Jack, that morning, the customer was throwing a fit because he wasn't happy with the pictures on another brochure that Mike had prepared.What Jack doesn't know is that revenue figures are the most talked about information in the whole brochure because it's relevant to many of the questions the client is having with some of his recent business decisions.Jack didn't know, because the album designer's unplanned leave happened to be at the busiest time of the company, so not only this project was affected, but the progress of many other projects was also hindered.Unbeknownst to Jack, Mike wasn't really happy with some of the work he'd done before.There is another point, which is beyond Jack's understanding: Mike thinks he is very happy to help Jack's business. Of course, we cannot predict in advance what things we do not know.However, at times like this, rather than thinking we know everything we need to know, it's a good idea to remind ourselves that there's a lot of important information we don't know because, well, that's the way it is. In the movie Annie Hall, Alvy Singer complains that we have no sex at all, to which his girlfriend says we have sex all the time. ’ However, when their counselor asked, ‘How many times a week do you have sex? ", they replied in unison: "Three times a week!" " The second reason everyone's story is different is that even when we get the same information, we interpret and understand it differently—we assign different meanings to it.I say "half," and you might think that's a code word for vulnerability.Two key factors affect our understanding of information: our past experiences; and our own custom principles about the state of things. For the present, the past has and has great significance.Usually, this principle only emerges when we need to use someone's past experience to understand what they say or do. To celebrate the end of a lengthy project, Bonnie and her colleagues chip in to treat their supervisor, Caroline, to a nice restaurant.Before, Caroline barely participated in the planning activities of this dinner party, and during the dinner party, she complained all night-"The prices here are too expensive!" "How can they treat customers like this?" "You Gotta be joking. Desserts here cost five dollars!" All this made Bonnie feel a little embarrassed and frustrated, and she thought about it when she got home. "We know she's frugal, but this is ridiculous. We all pay the bill, not her, and she doesn't have to think about the price at all, but she keeps complaining about the price and thinks the meal is flashy. Today All the good mood at night was ruined by her." Although in Bonnie's opinion Caroline was a miser and a disappointment, she eventually decided to ask Caroline why she reacted so strongly to the expense of the dinner.In this regard, Caroline explained: Because of this childhood experience and feeling, even after many years, even a moderately priced answer is still a luxury for Caroline. Past experiences can have an incredibly profound effect on us, and our perspectives, on a large scale.Where you go on vacation, whether you slap your kids, how much your ad should cost — all are influenced by your family circumstances and life experiences.Most of the time, it is difficult to realize how these experiences affect us and our perception of the world.Too often we simply pick up that last conclusion—that's how it is. More often than not, our past experiences end up being self-defined "principles" that we live by.Whether consciously or unconsciously, we live by these principles in our dealings with others.Our understanding of how the world works, how people behave, and how things are is derived from these principles.In difficult conversations, our accounts of what happened are largely the result of these principles working "in the dark". When our principles collide with those of others, conflicts between us and others are inevitable. Take Ollie and Hilma as an example, they have fallen into deep conflicts because of their different principles.As sales reps, a lot of their time is spent traveling to meet customers.One night, they agreed that they would meet in the hotel lobby at seven o'clock the next morning to prepare for the sales presentation. As usual, Hilma arrived at the agreed place on time at seven o'clock sharp, but Ollie didn't arrive until seven ten. points appear.This had happened many times before, and Hilma was angry and frustrated that she couldn't concentrate for the first 20 minutes because of Ollie's late arrival.At the same time, her depressed mental state also made Ollie really unable to cheer up. In this case, clarifying the respective "principles" of both parties will make solving the problem more effective.According to Hilma's principles, "being late is unprofessional and inconsiderate".And according to Ollie's principles, "it's unprofessional to let trivial things affect you and prevent you from concentrating on important things."Both Hilma and Ollie were dissatisfied with each other's performance because they viewed the matter through "colored glasses" with their own custom "principles". We usually set a standard of "should be" or "shouldn't be" for people or things based on this self-defined principle: "you should spend your money on education, not on clothes", "you should not Criticize your co-workers in front of other people", "You should get into the habit of putting down the toilet seat after using the toilet, you should not squeeze toothpaste from the middle, and you should not let your children watch TV for more than two hours."There are many more "shoulds" or "shouldn'ts" like this, and they cover all aspects of work and life, almost endless. There is nothing wrong with having principles and acting on them.In fact, we need them to regulate our lives.However, when you have conflicts with others, stating your principles and encouraging the other person to do the same will help you resolve conflicts: the less likely you are to conflict with others because of these self-defined principles. will be greatly reduced. When we think about the reasons for speaking out about our knowledge of the world, there is a fact that none of us can avoid, that is, our conclusions are often tinged with strong self-interest, that is, our conclusions reflect is self-interest.We seek out all the information that supports our point of view, and then use that as a basis to explain things in our favour.In this way, we will naturally be more sure that our point of view is correct. Professor Howard Rayfa of Harvard Business School proved this with examples. He gave the complete set of information about a company to several groups, and then told some of them that they would participate in the negotiation to acquire the company; Several groups, who will participate in negotiations to sell the company.Finally, he assessed the value of the company as objectively as possible for each group (what the company was really worth, not what they planned to buy or sell for).Refa found that the groups planning to sell the company ended up appraising an independent and fair market value by 30 percentage points; those that were told they would buy the company valued it almost 30 percent below market value. %. Each group could not help incorporating egoism into their assessments, but they themselves made no sense of it.Everyone subconsciously focuses on the conditions and factors that they are willing to pay attention to, ignoring the facts that they do not want to see.Self-interest has become the main basis for them to explain things, so they will naturally forget those unfavorable conditions and factors.Our companion Fisher confirmed this conclusion after reflecting on his time as a prosecutor: "Sometimes I have a hard time convincing a judge that I am right, but when I do I have never failed when my partner is replaced by myself!" Such unconscious and biased thoughts and practices are natural, but dangerous.It reinforces our internal identification with the "truth" of our own statements, especially when things we value are at stake. There is only one way to understand the other party's story objectively and thoroughly, and that is to listen with curiosity.After listening, ask yourself what information do they have that I don't have? "Instead of asking ourselves how could they think that way?" We have to ask ourselves, from their point of view, is there any other desire or meaning to see things this way? ’ Instead of asking yourself: ‘How could they be so irrational? "The certainty of self-view is like a lock that locks the door to our understanding of each other's stories, and curiosity happens to be the key to open this door. Let's take a look at how the feud between Tony and his wife Keko came about. Tony's sister had just given birth to her first child.The next day, Kai Kou prepared everything and planned to visit her in the hospital with Tony, but to her surprise, Tony said that he would not go with her, and he would stay at home and watch the football match broadcast.When Keiko asked him why he wasn't going, Tony murmured that it was a "big contest," before adding: "I'm going to see her in the hospital tomorrow." Kaiko was very puzzled by this, and couldn't calm down for a long time.She asked herself what kind of person would think that football is more important than family?This is really too selfish, too unreasonable, too ridiculous!I have never heard that there are such people in the world! ’ Fortunately, though, her mind wasn’t completely clouded by the certainty of her own opinion, so she didn’t question her husband, “How could you do that? ’ It was a self-negotiation from a curious point of view. She wanted to figure out what Tony knew that she didn’t, and whether it was something else from his perspective. cause or meaning. In fact, in Tony's view, things are indeed different from what Kekou thought.In the eyes of outsiders, Tony gave up visiting his sister for such a trivial matter as watching the TV broadcast of a football match. However, for Tony himself, this is a major event related to his spiritual life.After a week, he had to work ten hours a day under great pressure.When he gets home, he still needs to play with his two sons and do what they want to do with them.After finally putting the two naughty little guys to sleep, he still has to spend the little time left with Kekou, and most of the time he is listening to her talk about the various things that happened to her that day .After doing all this, he was exhausted and fell asleep in exhaustion.Therefore, for Tony, the only time he can completely relax is when he is watching a football match.During these few hours, his stress gradually dissipated, as if he had entered a state of meditation.For him, these seemingly ordinary hours are actually significant-whether he will be able to face the challenges of work next week with energy depends on them.As far as whether he will visit his sister in the hospital today or tomorrow, Tony believes that his sister doesn't particularly care about it. Therefore, under balance, he chose to satisfy his spiritual needs first. Of course, when it comes to this, the matter is not over yet.Kekou also needs to tell Tony what he thinks.Only when the two of them put forward their respective points of view, can Tony and his wife find a solution to the problem together and resolve the matter in a satisfactory and harmonious way.But if Keko had just taken it for granted from the start that she knew Tony well, no matter how sure she was, such a happy ending would never have been possible. One way to shift your whole mindset from simple self-confidence to seeing things from every possible angle is to be always curious and curious, to learn everything you can about yourself that you don't know Information, this approach may sound a bit strange.After all, you are yourself, and is there anyone who knows yourself better than you?And who is more familiar with your own perspective and point of view than you? However, the answer is yes. The process from examining the world to forming our own stories is usually not very long, and it is often completed in an instant. It is so fast that it is difficult for us to do it. In this process, it is inevitable to ignore or forget some factors that affect our perspective.For example, in Jack's conversation with Mike, we get what he really thinks and feels, but when he talks to Mike about it, he doesn't say a word about turning off the heating, or about his wife being out because of the date. Messages such as being angry about a temporary cancellation.即使是杰克本人也根本没有意识到他的强烈反应其实是受到了所有这些信息的影响。 那么，什么才是他所重视的原则呢？一方面，杰克认为“我难以相信迈克竟然会如此对待我”，可另一方面，他却没有意识到自己的这一想法是建立在人们“应该”如何对待他人这一自定义原则的基础上。对此，杰克的原则是“不管情况如何，你都应该表示出对他人的赞许和欣赏”。我们许多人也许都认同这一原则，可我们必须意识到，这并不是真理，它只是一条个人的自定义原则。对此，迈克的原则可能是“好朋友也会因为工作而迁怒于对方，但应该做到公私分明，不能夹杂个人情感因素”。在这件事情上，问题的关键不在于谁的原则更好更合理，而在于双方的原则根本就相同。然而，杰克却没能了解到这一差异，除非他开始考虑自己在评判这件事情的时候是基于一种什么样的原则。 还记得之前提到过的安德鲁和他的董叔叔在嘉年华上发生的故事吗？我们说安德鲁“对彩车很着迷”，而这一观点恰恰就是从他叔叔的角度出发而得出来的。董叔叔发现了“安德鲁如何如何”，可是，相对而言，他对自己在这件事上的认识就少多了。如果我们以董叔叔对彩车的喜好程度——他并不是特别喜欢彩车——作为衡量安德鲁的基线，那么，安德鲁实在算得上是对彩车很着迷。可是，如果从安德鲁的角度来看的话，他会认为董叔叔“对彩车小姐很着迷”。对一群四岁的孩子来说，安德鲁的这一观点似乎更能引起大家的共鸣。 在现实世界中，当你心中已经有了自己的想法，此时，如果仍然让你怀着一颗好奇心去了解他人的想法，这的确是相当不易，尤其是在你认为只有一种可能性——对与错是绝对的——的时候，那就更难了。毕竟，你和对方的想法差距是如此之大，而且事情本身对你的意义又如此重大，面对此情此景，你又怎么能够做到平心静气地去聆听对方的故事呢？其实，想要始终保持好奇求知的状态并没有你想象中那么困难，这很大一部分取决于你自己，只要你能够始终铭记一个字：“和”，一切就会变得轻松容易了。 我们通常都会认为自己与对方的故事无法共存，只能二者取其一，如果我们接受了对方的观点和想法，这就意味着我们必须放弃自己的。可是，看看之前的例子，杰克和迈克，奥利和希尔玛，以及邦妮和她的老板，孰对孰错真的是那么绝对吗，真的就那么泾渭分明？有的人喜欢开着窗睡觉，而有的人则喜欢关着窗睡觉，面对这两种人，我们能说第一种人就绝对是对的吗？ 其实，这样的问题根本就没有正确答案，因为问题本身根本就毫无意义可言。不要强迫自己在两种故事中做出选择；你完全可以聆听对方的故事，同时也保留自己的。这就是我们所说的“和”姿态。 这种兼容并包的建议听起来就好像一句含糊其辞的空话。这似乎是告诉我们“你可以假装把两个故事都当成是正确的”。但事实上，这个建议给我们带来的其实是一种完全不同的谈话姿态。你不用伪装也无需伪装；也不用为了思考究竟是该接受还是拒绝对方的故事而彷徨或担忧。你要做的只是理解——完全透彻地理解。这是一个很单纯的行为，仅仅就是了解对方的故事，仅此而已，所以，你根本不需要放弃自己原有的故事和观点。采用了“和”姿态之后，你就能更加深入而透彻地了解到这件事对双方的重要性，以及其间你们的感受对各自又有何意义。如此一来，你就能抛开种种顾虑，无需为自己接下来该做什么而踌躇，也无需介怀自己的故事是否会影响对方，抑或是自己是否会受到对方故事的影响，因为你很清楚，对双方而言，各自的故事都很重要。 “和”姿态的基础其实很简单，就是一个设想：世界很复杂。从中，你可能会受到伤害，会感到愤怒，也会被冤枉，而对方也一样，他们也会受伤，会愤怒，会被冤枉。他们可能已经竭尽全力，而你则可能认为他们做得还不够好。对于双方的矛盾，可能是因为你做了件愚蠢的事情，也可能是他们的某些言行导致了矛盾的产生。对于他们，你可能会怒不可遏，也可能会爱护呵护，欣赏有加。 站在“和”姿态之上，你无需否定他人的观点和感受，也同样可以证明自己的观点，并让他人了解你的感受。同样地，你可以在不放弃自己故事的前提下聆听他人的感受，从不同的角度看待事情。因为，这时的你可能已经获得了一些不同于之前的信息，又或是对信息有了不同的理解，所以你明白了你和他人的故事是可以并存的。 当你与对方分享各自的故事之后，由于获得了新信息或采用了不同的视角，你的故事可能会发生变化；也有可能你仍然坚持之前的观点过，那都没有关系。有时候，出于诚实的角度，人们难免会有不同的意见，但是，尽管如此，我们必须明白，面对分歧，最有效的解决问题的疑问不是“谁是正确的”，而是“既然我们都已经真正理解了对方，那么，什么才是解决这一问题的好方法”。 现在，你可能会认为上述建议——从肯定和争执转变为好奇与“和”姿态——就是解决谈话矛盾的万灵良药，可是，我很遗憾地告诉你，世事无绝对，这条建议也不例外。让我们来看两个看似可能会是例外的重要问题：一是有多少次我完全能够确定自己是正确的？二是“理解对方的故事”这一建议是不是适用于任何情况呢，譬如说，我已经怒发冲冠了，或已经与某人决裂了？ 曾经有一个古老的故事，讲的是两个传教士为了如何才能完成上帝赋予他们的使命时争吵起来。开始，他们谁都无法说服对方，最后，其中的一位传教士妥协了，说我和你看待事情的方法和角度都不同，好了，就让此事到此为止吧。我们根本无需达成一致意见。你可以继续按照你的方式完成上帝的工作，而我也会依旧按照我的方法为上帝服务。 " 能够拥有这样的思维方式，这位传教士的确令人钦佩。很多时候，即使你很清楚对方的观点颇具洞察力，也了解对方的种种感受，你可能还是会固执地选择继续坚持自己的下一步行动，并且告诉自己，无论他们的观点或看法对他们多有么重大的意义，你仍然是“正确的”，而他们就是“错误的”。 例如，当你和女儿谈论她抽烟的问题时，你知道且十分确信，吸烟对她不好，她越早戒烟越好。 客观公平地说，你的观点是正确的。可是，这也是你们之间摩擦之所在：这并不属于你们原本的谈话范畴。你们谈论的应该是各自对于她抽烟这件事情的感受，她应该如何对待这一问题，以及你在这其中应当扮演什么样的角色。事实上，你是想通过这次谈话告诉她，每当你想到她的身体可能会因此而受伤害，甚至变差，你就会感到很悲哀而且也十分担忧，所以你会为自己无法阻止她继续吸烟而迁怒于自己。与此同时，女儿则想借机告诉你，她现在需要的是一种独立的感觉，而“好女孩”的称呼就像一副枷锁，压得她简直就快要窒息了，所以，她迫不及待地想摆脱这副“刑具”的束缚。其实，对于吸烟这个问题，她也感到很矛盾，一方面她很享受吸烟给她带来的那种自由独立的感觉，另一方面她也很害怕它带来的种种恶果。你和女儿之间的这次谈话原本谈论的应该是了解介于你和她之间关于吸烟的种种复杂且重要的事实，说出各自的感受，而不是争论吸烟是否有害健康。事实上，你和她对此的观点是一致的：你们都认为吸烟有害健康。 哪怕是在那些看似就是分辨对与错的纠纷当中，你也很可能会发现，即使你是对的，矛盾也不会因此而化解。你的朋友也许会否认自己酗酒，更不会承认饮酒已经影响到了他的婚姻。在这种情况下，即使全世界的人都站在你这一边，并试图帮你迫使他承认这一切，也依然于事无补——你的朋友并不会因此就欣然承认一切，并接受你的帮助。 与其如此，你倒不如告诉他，他饮酒对你造成了哪些影响，然后，你再慢慢地进入他的故事，了解他的境况。究竟是什么让他一直否认你的观点？对他而言，承认自己有问题究竟又意味着什么？究竟是什么横亘于你和他之间，阻碍你们之间的深入沟通？除非你能够完全了解他和他在这件事情上的境况，并将你的真实想法和感受告诉他并让他明白这一切，否则，你是不可能帮助他找到解决问题的方法，重新谱写人生的篇章。在这种情况下，你也许是正确的，而你的朋友可能错了，但是，仅仅争论对错却不能解决你们的问题。 当你不得不解雇某人，或是结束一段关系，又或是你需要通知某个供货商你要减少八成订单的时候，你该怎么做呢？在许多高难度谈话中，谈话的结果并不是你单方面就能够控制的。当你需要解雇某人，结束关系或是削减订单时，情况就是如此。这时，理智的做法就是首先考虑了解对方的感受是否仍然有助于你解决问题。 绝大多数关于解雇某人或结束关系的谈话难点就在于情绪对话以及自我认知对话，对此，我们将会在之后的章节中谈到。尽管如此，谈话中适时转变角度也同样很重要。请记住，了解和理解对方的感受和看法并不意味着你必须接受它们，更不代表你需要放弃自己的故事；而你愿意尝试着去理解对方的观点，也并不会削弱你执行自己的决定的力度，更加不会影响你对自己的决定的忠实度。 事实上，当你因为传递或执行坏消息而身陷高难度谈话中时，“和”姿态往往才是最有利的突围法宝。如果你与某人的关系破裂了，你可以说“我之所以和你闹翻完全是因为我应该这样做（这就是原因），而我也很明白你受到了多大的伤害，如果你认为我们应该重新来过的话，我能做的仍然和这次一样。你也许认为我应该早一点把心中的困惑说清楚，对此，我表示理解，可我认为这样做并不代表我就是个坏人。我知道我所做的一切伤害了你，可我也很清楚你的行为同样也伤害了我。我可能会因为这个决定而后悔，不过，我只能这样做……” “和”能够帮助你始终保持一颗好奇心，也能帮助你把一切都弄明白，说清楚。 在学习如何更好地处理高难度谈话的过程中，你会注意到，有一个问题就像影子一样始终伴随着你：我们眼中的事实究竟是如何影响我们乃至我们的观点和决定？这个问题就仿佛海边的灯塔，无论你在哪儿，也无论你是为了何种难题而苦恼，你都可以求助于它，让它为你指点迷津。 当然，进一步了解对方和自己并不意味着你们的分歧就会消失，也不代表你就可以对真正的问题置之不理、逃避问题、不做抉择。与此同时，这样做也不代表你要一视同仁地对待所有的观点，而你坚持自己的信念就是错误的。这一建议起到的其实是一种客观评估的作用，当你获得新信息或对事情有了不同的理解之后，它会帮助你评估自己的坚持是否有意义，与此同时，它也会帮助你让其他人感受到这些观点的力量。 无论你想去哪儿——试想一下，你进入了对方的世界，站在他的角度来看问题——首先你必须先了解自己的想法，之后，你才能迈出第一步。在你尚未想清楚如何前进之前，你需要做的是弄清楚自己在哪儿。 在接下来的两章当中，我们将会进一步深入地探讨面对这一境况时我们通常会采取的另外两种立场。它们存在于我们所陈述的故事中，并且常常给我们制造麻烦——误解对方意图的倾向，以及着眼于责备对方的倾向。