𧾠View Thread
𧾠Thread (32 tweets)
2ď¸âŁ thereâs a useful linguistic move that goes when people are saying âyouâre trying to fuck with meâ, you can translate that âi canât trust that what youâre doing is not trying to fuck with meâ and then you canât argue with that trust just is
you can come back and say, âiâm not trying to fuck with youâ you think youâre arguing with the metaphysical statement, âyouâre trying to fuck with meâ, but youâre not thatâs a misunderstanding of how trust works
5ď¸âŁ Malcolm isnât describing a technique for trust; heâs describing /the way trust is formed, any time it is formed/ non-naĂŻve trust is less in the class of things like NVC and more in the class of things like aerodynamics: it is the study of the /thing that is going on/
7ď¸âŁ protocols are great, like NVC, but when protocol breaks down, the thing you need is not necessarily more protocol or other protocol itâs a meta-understanding of how things are working so you stop trying to apply more protocol, and abdicate to (4)
8ď¸âŁ blame is a type of explanation, in the same way geocentrism is an explanation of how things are working itâs trying to explain how things work, and what can be done, and like geocentrism, itâs very intuitive, but it an be wrong or confused
9ď¸âŁ trust dancing is a lot about âinterruptingâ and âevidencesâ other peopleâs trust patterns and blockers itâs asking what do you need, what are the emotional dream mash-ups youâre in, and offering interrupts and evidence in a non-naĂŻve way
1ď¸âŁ1ď¸âŁ âtrust dance is about learning more about the moves we are already doing all the time anywayâ âwhat everyone is doing is already part of the dance, and all of it needs to be included for all of it to workâ
reminds me of âyou cannot fall out of the universeâ, also something i learned from malcolm https://t.co/N2hsGtuTor
1ď¸âŁ2ď¸âŁ a lot of this seems to boil down to interrupting and making different choices in our patterns if your existing patterns were working for you, well, great! you donât need any of this you need this to make different choices to get different outcomes
he answers something like 1. @m_ashcroftâs narrow awareness. sometimes feels unsafe, and then youâre in this very embodied sense of what are the stakes and what needs to be done 2. very explicit beliefs! like if two people disagree, one of them is wrong. or someone is at fault
1ď¸âŁ4ď¸âŁ âdeep coherenceâ seems a big part of all this recognising the /coherence/ of things without / agreeing/ with it but not /disagreeing/ with it but also just recognising the deep /existence and fact and coherence of it/
1ď¸âŁ5ď¸âŁ one of the subtle ways these frameworks like NVC or a marriage communication book works is that they are kind of building trust just by the fact that both of you seem to be participating in this activity where you kind of want to communicate better
1ď¸âŁ6ď¸âŁ one way to summarise all this is âforce doesnât workâ or more precisely: âwhen force doesnât work, more force often doesnât workâ something else might, or it might ont, but probably not more. we try more force more often than it works
@AskYatharth video is now live: https://t.co/Eft5BslkQQ
My stoa video about my NNTD framework is now live! I think the presentation was a solid "okay", but the Q&A was stellar on all counts (as I would expect from the stoa!) Check it out here đ (Q&A starts 27mins in if you already know the gist of NNTD) https://t.co/6TZAPcF2rJ