![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]Shown: posts 1 to 7 of 7. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by 64bowtie on April 8, 2006, at 9:18:54
GG, you shared...
> In the spirit of being direct...I just have to point out that the other person cannot "make you feel bad" just because they might react to something you do in a negative way. Feeling bad about it is something that begins within you. If you were entirely indifferent to the others' feelings, you wouldn't feel bad if they reacted negatively. Or, your own empathy about how the other person now feels may lead you to feel bad for your perceived role in it. But that comes from within you in reaction to what happened.
and...
> I guess in some ways this relates because it's about emotional boundaries. I'm still working on this myself, but being able to separate out our actions and reactions to others from their actions and reactions is a healthy boundary and goes a long way to feeling balanced about emotions.
> Another example is one I discovered recently about my feelings for my FIL. I am very angry with him about certain behaviors I have. I found I was intensely angry, and in thinking about it, I realized that some of that anger really is about my own father and stuff from the past. That part of the anger is my responsibility to manage separate from my anger towards my FIL. Being able to start separating that out has helped me figure out what my real reaction to my FIL's behavior versus what has been heightened by stuff from within myself. It's helped me feel more balanced in my feelings towards him. And it's helped me
feel more in control of those feelings. So in figuring out what's mine and what's his and what's current and what's past, I've been able to "re-set" the emotional boundary to a more
balanced and realistic place.<<< Wow, what a great, yet simple way to put this! I love your gentle way of presenting this info...
<<< Yes, "In the spirit of being direct...." Is their any other way when dealing with "Causal Attribution"???
In sales, directness deals immediately with any objections... Aren't objections a big "bugga-boo" to the recovery process, allowing clients "wiggle-room" so that new information doesn't have to "stick"??? Afterall, attribution itself is purpose driven to present an explanation that is "other-centered", a type of "social buck-passing", in hopes of deflecting any guilt (and mostly the presumptive shame) of being caught making a mistake...
How many times have you heard siblings squabbling, one says, "You did it!", the other says, "No, you did it!" etc, etc... Each assigns the blame (the cause) to the other (by attributing the blame), in hopes of deflecting attention away from the self, as if the self isn't tough enough to be wrong and still have "grace"...
The breakdown of sensibility in the above example is that kids learn this through an induction or attribution process from good solid parents... Somehow kids sometimes miss the lessons that pertain to "coming of age", and fail to morph those lessons into healthy guidelines for their own deductive processes of their own adulthood... Wouldn't it simply be more efficient to sidestep attribution and say to the self, "Gee, I made a mistake and I still have all my fingers! Now I've learned another lesson how inappropriate behavior can have negative "Outcomes". I now know what to lookout for in the future..!" ...seems more efficient to me, and a more graceful (beautiful) outcome...
Yet, how many client stories start out with attempts to deflect blame??? Tons of 'em..! "Causal Attribution" is big stuff that both coaching and therapy can address... Coaching is working at the strategy level... Therapy assumes pathology and therefore is limited to eliminating the pathology before the stategy approach can make any sense to the client... However, "Causal Attribution", usually leading to unnecessary conflict, will eventually have to be dealt with and strategies put place, if the client is ever to make it out of this bad set of habits...
GG, I know you know this stuff... I am continuing to practice how to say stuff so that folks eyes don't "gloss over"... Please bear with me a little longer... I really have the public's interest in mind...
Check out www.avinstitute.net... The site has been passed around for a couple of years and has sputtered alot... I started making suggestions and now I am sorta the new manager, so things will start happening... I am toooo committed to "The Peck Protocol" to let this opportunity pass...
In a couple of weeks, it will be 3 years since David (Peck) passed away... I miss him every day......... He helped me find my own "Purpose Driven Life"..........
Rod
Posted by Phillipa on April 8, 2006, at 12:17:23
In reply to GG, its ok to be direct about Causal Attribution, posted by 64bowtie on April 8, 2006, at 9:18:54
huh? Love Phillipa
Posted by 64bowtie on April 9, 2006, at 2:06:41
In reply to Re: GG, its ok to be direct about Causal Attribution » 64bowtie, posted by Phillipa on April 8, 2006, at 12:17:23
Posted by special_k on April 9, 2006, at 5:52:27
In reply to Re: GG, its ok to be direct about Causal Attribution » 64bowtie, posted by Phillipa on April 8, 2006, at 12:17:23
admitting one has done wrong
can be too hard on the ego
especially if you tend to make attributions of negative traits that are likely to persist through time...
tends to lead to depression
(people with depression tend to make more accurate self attributions rather than people who are not depressed who tend to have over inflated images of themselves)in other words...
it might in actual fact be healthier to DENY responsibility...
though probably better still...
to attribute to something shortlived and unlikely to recur.
act of god?
hrm.
;-)
Posted by gardenergirl on April 9, 2006, at 13:56:46
In reply to GG, its ok to be direct about Causal Attribution, posted by 64bowtie on April 8, 2006, at 9:18:54
Thanks for your kind words, Rod. Nice to see you here.
>Aren't objections a big "bugga-boo" to the recovery process, allowing clients "wiggle-room" so that new information doesn't have to "stick"???Yes, but it also is an indicator of where they are in the process, i.e. how empowered they feel to make changes. It's good to assess this, because if you work actively to make change with a client who is ambivalent, you're jumping the gun, imo.
>Therapy assumes pathology and therefore is limited to eliminating the pathology before the stategy approach can make any sense to the client...
I disagree. One does not need to have any pathology to seek therapy, and therapists do not need to find and/or label pathology in order to engage in therapy with a client. Psychologists are experts in human behavior, not just psychopathology.
But yes, it is important to understand what is and has been within an individual's locus of control and what is not/has not been in order to make effective change.
Good luck with your new venture. I'm glad what Mr. Peck passed on to you continues to inspire you.
gg
Posted by 64bowtie on April 12, 2006, at 2:55:45
In reply to Re: GG, its ok to be direct about Causal Attribution, posted by special_k on April 9, 2006, at 5:52:27
> admitting one has done wrong
> can be too hard on the ego
> especially if you tend to make attributions of negative traits that are likely to persist through time...
> tends to lead to depression
> (people with depression tend to make more accurate self attributions rather than people who are not depressed who tend to have over inflated images of themselves)
>
> in other words...
>
> it might in actual fact be healthier to DENY responsibility...
>
> though probably better still...
>
> to attribute to something shortlived and unlikely to recur.
>
> act of god?
>
> hrm.
>
> ;-)
Posted by 64bowtie on April 12, 2006, at 2:58:28
In reply to Re: GG, its ok to be direct about Causal Attribution » 64bowtie, posted by gardenergirl on April 9, 2006, at 13:56:46
I do hope you visit the website from time to time...
Rod
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.