Vana,
I can only offer some of my own methods of learning from my own emotional
responses:
I attempt to exercise the "moment of awareness" practice identified in the
Fieldbook...and think about what outcome I desire from posting a response.
That exercise helps me delete more than half of the e-mails I might
otherwise have sent. I also consider the "ladder of inference" and
question what the sources for my inferences may be. That helps me delete
or edit a number of potential e-mails.
The next thing I try to do is to "listen to my heart" and determine if my
response is from the heart...or merely an impulse to "talk." The exercise
I'm referring to here is the one we use in dialog, where we speak when
we're moved to speak...and we're silent when we're moved to silence. This
eliminates a number of e-mails...many of them completed and ready to send.
So, by the time I send an e-mail (if I've been honest with myself) to this
listing, it should be one that's been screened through each of these
mental, spiritual and emotional filters. From time to time my "tone" or
"words" brings a personal response from someone who thoughtfully uses
"inquiry" and "advocacy" to clarify my intentions. I appreciate these
notes of clarification because they're so critical to connecting with one
another.
I find a tremendous need for improvement in my "cyber-communications," but
I've been able to mature in this effort I think through the experiences
I've gained through the LO-list. Rick's gentle facilitation and the
feedback (both individual and collective) of others in this great dialog
have helped immensely.
So I suggest that there's a place for individual communiques to clarify,
inquire and advocate. Valuable learning, and important connections, may
occur through these tete-a-tete's.
There are several dialogues on this list occurring concurrently and
asynchronously...some with which I'm involved, and some with which I'm
not. There are great dialogues of silence which speak more dramatically
sometimes than than those threads which generate a lot of "vocal" response
(like this one has). I find silence is especially valuable to me when
I've shared my thought already and feel the need to defend or advocate for
it. I fight the urge to do that...if I've said it well the first time,
there's no need or room to say it again. This is especially true if I
feel that my original thought has been dismissed or just missed. When I
do respond to the urge to advocate, I often feel that I've been too
impulsive and then regret my follow-up response.
For anyone who is confused or puzzled by my postings...or wishes to
clarify, a personal post works wonders with me.
regards,
Doc
------------------
"Our first teacher is our own heart." -a saying from the Cheyenne People
Richard Charles Holloway -
P.O. Box 2361, Olympia, WA 98507 USA Telephone 253.539.4014 or 206.568.7730
Thresholds <http://www.thresholds.com>
Meeting Masters <http://www.thresholds.com/masters.html
---------the first part of Vana's message was snipped-------
> So, I am curious if others have ideas how we could find a way to channel
> that intellectual energy (i.e.: emotional response to an email) into
> learning. Is it simply a matter of "emotional intelligence?" It seems
> that when an electronic message is misunderstood at the start, it is very
> difficult to get intent and perception aligned at a later date. Each
> subsequent attempt to clarify only muddies the message with inferred
> innuendoes.
>
> Vana Prewitt <vana@PraxisLearning.org>
--"Richard Charles Holloway" <learnshops@thresholds.com>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <rkarash@karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>