<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Thank You, Marshall.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://goesping.org/archives/2005/12/17/thank-you-marshall/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://goesping.org/archives/2005/12/17/thank-you-marshall/</link>
	<description>Pinging stuff I care about.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:21:28 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: t23</title>
		<link>http://goesping.org/archives/2005/12/17/thank-you-marshall/comment-page-1/#comment-18793</link>
		<dc:creator>t23</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 15:24:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goesping.org/?p=756#comment-18793</guid>
		<description>Your post reminds me of part of an "interview" of Marshall, I've posted below.

"Then you believe that the language of our culture prevents us from knowing our Divine Energy more intimately?

Oh yes, definitely. I think our language makes it really hard, especially the language given to us by the cultural training most of us seem to have gone through, and the associations “God” brings up for people. Judgmental, or right/wrong thinking is one of the hardest things I’ve found to overcome in teaching Nonviolent Communication over the years. The people that I work with have all gone to schools and churches and it’s very easy for them, if they like Nonviolent Communication, to say it’s the “right way” to communicate. It’s very easy to think that Nonviolent Communication is the goal.

I’ve altered a Buddhist parable that relates to this question. Imagine a beautiful, whole, and sacred place. And imagine that you could really know God when you are in that place. But let’s say that there is a river between you and that place and you’d like to get to that place but you’ve got to get over this river to do it. So you get a raft, and this raft is a real handy tool to get you over the river. Once you’re across the river you can walk the rest of the several miles to this beautiful place. But the Buddhist parable ends by saying that, “One is a fool who continues on to the sacred place carrying the raft on their back.”

Nonviolent Communication is a tool to get me over my cultural training so I can get to the place. It’s not the place. If we get addicted to the raft, attached to the raft, it makes it harder to get to the place. People just learning the process of Nonviolent Communication can forget all about the place. If they get too locked into the raft, the process becomes mechanical.

Nonviolent Communication is one of the most powerful tools that I’ve found for connecting with people in a way that helps me get to the place where we are connected to the Divine, where what we do toward one another comes out of Divine Energy. That’s the place I want to get to."

http://www.cnvc.org/en/what-nvc/spiritual-basis/spiritual-basis-nonviolent-communication</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your post reminds me of part of an &#8220;interview&#8221; of Marshall, I&#8217;ve posted below.</p>
<p>&#8220;Then you believe that the language of our culture prevents us from knowing our Divine Energy more intimately?</p>
<p>Oh yes, definitely. I think our language makes it really hard, especially the language given to us by the cultural training most of us seem to have gone through, and the associations “God” brings up for people. Judgmental, or right/wrong thinking is one of the hardest things I’ve found to overcome in teaching Nonviolent Communication over the years. The people that I work with have all gone to schools and churches and it’s very easy for them, if they like Nonviolent Communication, to say it’s the “right way” to communicate. It’s very easy to think that Nonviolent Communication is the goal.</p>
<p>I’ve altered a Buddhist parable that relates to this question. Imagine a beautiful, whole, and sacred place. And imagine that you could really know God when you are in that place. But let’s say that there is a river between you and that place and you’d like to get to that place but you’ve got to get over this river to do it. So you get a raft, and this raft is a real handy tool to get you over the river. Once you’re across the river you can walk the rest of the several miles to this beautiful place. But the Buddhist parable ends by saying that, “One is a fool who continues on to the sacred place carrying the raft on their back.”</p>
<p>Nonviolent Communication is a tool to get me over my cultural training so I can get to the place. It’s not the place. If we get addicted to the raft, attached to the raft, it makes it harder to get to the place. People just learning the process of Nonviolent Communication can forget all about the place. If they get too locked into the raft, the process becomes mechanical.</p>
<p>Nonviolent Communication is one of the most powerful tools that I’ve found for connecting with people in a way that helps me get to the place where we are connected to the Divine, where what we do toward one another comes out of Divine Energy. That’s the place I want to get to.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cnvc.org/en/what-nvc/spiritual-basis/spiritual-basis-nonviolent-communication" rel="nofollow">http://www.cnvc.org/en/what-nvc/spiritual-basis/spiritual-basis-nonviolent-communication</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed That Goes Ping</title>
		<link>http://goesping.org/archives/2005/12/17/thank-you-marshall/comment-page-1/#comment-8875</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed That Goes Ping</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Nov 2006 20:58:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goesping.org/?p=756#comment-8875</guid>
		<description>Heh!  Nice!  I didn't know "Lev Bronstein" was Leon Trotsky's real name.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Heh!  Nice!  I didn&#8217;t know &#8220;Lev Bronstein&#8221; was Leon Trotsky&#8217;s real name.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed That Goes Ping</title>
		<link>http://goesping.org/archives/2005/12/17/thank-you-marshall/comment-page-1/#comment-8873</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed That Goes Ping</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Nov 2006 16:20:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goesping.org/?p=756#comment-8873</guid>
		<description>Lev, I had noted the point of commonality with, say, Ayn Rand: the NVC bunch do have an interest in "enlightened selfishness."  (Much more apparent in Kelly Bryson's book tha in NVC:ALOL.)

But as Marshall would say, "I'm not in agreement" with most of the rest of your assessment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lev, I had noted the point of commonality with, say, Ayn Rand: the NVC bunch do have an interest in &#8220;enlightened selfishness.&#8221;  (Much more apparent in Kelly Bryson&#8217;s book tha in NVC:ALOL.)</p>
<p>But as Marshall would say, &#8220;I&#8217;m not in agreement&#8221; with most of the rest of your assessment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lev Bronstein</title>
		<link>http://goesping.org/archives/2005/12/17/thank-you-marshall/comment-page-1/#comment-8872</link>
		<dc:creator>Lev Bronstein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Nov 2006 05:05:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goesping.org/?p=756#comment-8872</guid>
		<description>What struck me about "non-violent communication" when I read the book was how rooted it is in liberal capitalist ideology.  Like liberalism, "non-violent communication" is an atomistic theory of the individual.  As in classical Western liberalism, "non-violent communication" provides some magic formulas for making the pursuit of self-interest turn into something other than what it is.  I can't buy either the notion that the Self is an atom rather than a node in a social network, or the idea that the pursuit of self-interest, mutual or not, will lead to anything other than the pursuit of self-interest.  

It's interesting to note that the values of public morality in Nazi Germany were not that far from the middle-class bohemian values of Rosenberg's programme: solidarity, simplicity, honesty, etc.  Of course, these same values existed alongside their negation: the pursuit of self-interest.  It's much the same within Rosenberg's target consumers and in Rosenberg's facile book.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What struck me about &#8220;non-violent communication&#8221; when I read the book was how rooted it is in liberal capitalist ideology.  Like liberalism, &#8220;non-violent communication&#8221; is an atomistic theory of the individual.  As in classical Western liberalism, &#8220;non-violent communication&#8221; provides some magic formulas for making the pursuit of self-interest turn into something other than what it is.  I can&#8217;t buy either the notion that the Self is an atom rather than a node in a social network, or the idea that the pursuit of self-interest, mutual or not, will lead to anything other than the pursuit of self-interest.  </p>
<p>It&#8217;s interesting to note that the values of public morality in Nazi Germany were not that far from the middle-class bohemian values of Rosenberg&#8217;s programme: solidarity, simplicity, honesty, etc.  Of course, these same values existed alongside their negation: the pursuit of self-interest.  It&#8217;s much the same within Rosenberg&#8217;s target consumers and in Rosenberg&#8217;s facile book.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MW</title>
		<link>http://goesping.org/archives/2005/12/17/thank-you-marshall/comment-page-1/#comment-6156</link>
		<dc:creator>MW</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2006 09:57:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.goesping.org/?p=756#comment-6156</guid>
		<description>It is a compelling post, this. It's the challenge of the world view that I enjoy, the sense of moving up one awareness level, rather than down.

I don't get it, though. Why and how? Maybe the mystery is part of the enjoyment, maybe not. At any rate, good luck!

Life,

/Mattias</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is a compelling post, this. It&#8217;s the challenge of the world view that I enjoy, the sense of moving up one awareness level, rather than down.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t get it, though. Why and how? Maybe the mystery is part of the enjoyment, maybe not. At any rate, good luck!</p>
<p>Life,</p>
<p>/Mattias</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
