Posted by gardenergirl on December 10, 2008, at 11:36:33
In reply to Re: the reasons for my post... » Dinah, posted by twinleaf on December 10, 2008, at 10:01:36
and I did not interpret those statements the way it was suggested any reasonable person would. I believe twinleaf is a reasonable person, too. And her perception of Dinah's post is her own experience, and thus is valid, as is anyone else's perception about it. Dinah's experience of making the post is equally valid.
I think it's helpful to clearly distinguish the difference between one person's actions and another person's experience of those actions, and that is the whole point of "I-statements." Both aspects of the communication, both experiences are real. Each are true for that person, even while the two experiences may seem diametrically opposed. I don't view this or any communication about our internal experiences about a shared event as a zero-sum situation where only one experience is "the right one." And that's why I think "I-statements" are always more effective, more accurate, clearer, and more respectful communications about a shared experience of an event than "You-statements". And that's why I agree with that aspect of the civility rules, since the stance or frame of reference a person takes when communicating really does make a difference in the message. Saying, "I felt X about what someone did" is not just another way of saying, "Someone did X." Anyone could argue about whether that person really did do X, but no one can rationally argue with my feeling about it.
gg
poster:gardenergirl
thread:867435
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20081003/msgs/867858.html