Why Don’t We Listen Better

Practical Book Review Why Don’t We Listen Better? Communicating & Connecting in Relationships Melvin Ballard 22274758 Dr. Marcus Tanner In partial fulfillment of the requirements of Introduction to Pastoral Counseling PACO 500 Liberty Baptist Seminary Lynchburg, VA 4/7/2013 SUMMATION James C. Petersen book, Why don’t we listen better? Communicating and Connecting in Relationships surmised good communication skills can be achieved through active listening, understanding from the part of the talker and the attitude of the listener.This process of sharing and connecting can be attained through our acceptance and valuing one another. The word communication derives from the root to â€Å"commune†, it has at least two levels- sharing information and connecting with others (Petersen, 2007, 18). Active listening allows a person to actually hear what is being said; this invites the talker to feel as though they are valued. By active listening gives a person the ability to interact and communicate that will bring about healthy and fruitful relationships.This book is a road map to helping people learn to engage in positive communication and foster wholesome relationships. Petersen explored how one can become a better communicator by using various tools; the flat-brain theory, the talker-listener card and exploring various listening techniques. Petersen explained the concept flat-brain theory as emotions that are displayed in our stomach, heart and brain. The brain is the central area of our communication this is where we find and form our words to say.The head functions incorporate thinking, planning, remembering, reviewing, deciding, rationalizing, what we consider the logical part of us (Petersen, 12). Petersen describes the stomach as the emotional area where we contain past hurt feelings, feelings of inadequacy, worry, anxiety which leads to not being able to store anything too many new things (23). The heart is the functionality of a person. How we function depends on how our heart is whether healthy or unhealthy. When our system goes out of whack Petersen refers to it as the Flat-brain syndrome.He describes it as our stomach expand with mixed emotions which cause our heart to turn into bricks sending our relating ability to respond inappropriately and ultimately the upward expansion from our heart causes our brains to flatten to the top of our head (23). A good communicator is able to balance these stimuli’s that causes one to become out of kilter. Petersen uses examples of how to make sure one is able to stay in control of his emotions, his actions and his arguments. The talker-listener process engages people to take turn in talking and listening.Petersen developed the talker-listener card in hope of promoting individuals to improve the ability to interact and communicate better. The card is placed in between two people or groups and the side that has talker that person or group will talk while the other side liste ns. After the talker finishes the card is turned around to give the other an opportunity to talk while the other side or person listens. This tool keeps a person or a group from talking while others are talking i. e. everyone is talking and no one is listening. As the saying goes we can all sing at the same time but we all cannot talk at the same time.Petersen formulated this idea in order to stop flat-brain tango. The rest of Why Don’t we Listen Better? Communicating and Connecting in Relationships deals with techniques in the development of good communication skills. However, Petersen notes that good communication hinges on authentic listening techniques (115). REFLECTION I started playing sports when I was five years old; I have always had a competitive nature about myself. I guess it has to do with having an identical twin brother, always trying to outdo him. With that competitive nature I always wanted to win.In reading Petersen’s book I realized my competitive na ture causes me to win battles but lose the war. Even in discussions (arguments) I have to win. Petersen states, this is unhealthy when I choose not to respect the feelings of others moving from a friend to a victor (40). The book describes the feeling of a ‘thud’ this is the initial clue that a person feels when they sense they are being attacked. I know the feeling; it causes me to react in a defensive way. In college I actually lost a girl friend and did not realize she was trying to help me and it was for my own good and benefit. I saw it as her thinking she was better than me.Petersen declares that instead of reacting negatively but acknowledging what can be bother the other person begins the downshift from anger to resentment (43). I know what they are feeling, so why do I respond in a negative manner because I view the person as attacking me. In defense I strike back. On many times and different occasions I found myself using words that were not helpful but hurtfu l. I assumed they were attacking me with their words so in return I felt justified to attack them. INVESTIGATION The new terminology Petersen uses to describe the feeling within a person is refreshing and appreciative.He does not use the typical therapeutic terms but uses everyday layman words to discuss and explain his scenarios. Petersen has brought a new fresh perspective in the communication model. Petersen uses such basic elementary techniques that will help a person to become a better communicator. Petersen encourages you to use the finger method when you are bothered with someone in order for you not to be accusing or blaming. Wow, how simple but profound at the same time. The Talker-Listener card is a great tool to use to promote healthy communication skills.He uses the card as a game in which individuals or groups can play in order to have an effective moment of sharing. As we look at our total man; spirit, soul and body dealing with our soulically part, which our emotions lies we can connect with Petersen as by utilizing his concept. When we feel like someone is harming us through words before we react allow the Holy Spirit to control our tongue. The Book of James 3:6; calls the tongue a fire, a world of iniquity it is the unruly untamable member of the body. Applying Petersen’s techniques and concepts will help us to control our tongue.We cannot be imitators’ of Christ if we allow our words to destroy and not build up. Jesus edified using words. His words ministered grace to the hearers. As representatives of Christ we must not grieve the Holy Spirit which seals us to the day of redemption. We grieve the Holy Spirit when we allow corrupt communication that come out of our mouth, which does not edify or minister grace to the hearer (Eph. 4:29). APPLICATION Why Don’t we Listen Better? Communicating and Connecting in Relationships has challenged me to change my habit of not actively engaging in good communication.Being a good liste ner will afford me to take focus to other’s interest and not just mine. I had an opportunity after reading in applying what I learned. Petersen is right I was able to use it successfully a few times and not at other times. I have already purposed in my heart to change my mind about the way I choose to communicate. This book has confronted me with developing my communication skills through active listening and recognizing how I can be able to help someone in their time of need. It will be beneficial for me to put this card in my wallet look at it when I feel I’m feeling that action in my stomach.This will allow me to focus on the needs of the other rather than my feelings. I will not be a good communicator if I choose to allow my emotions to control my actions that will ultimately alter my argument. I must realize through the Holy Spirit’s leading, when He nudges me, I must began to change my attitude and put in use techniques that will allow me to become a bette r participant in communicating with others. Once I have learned this method I will be able to share it with others who find themselves hurling harmful, hurtful, and hideous words at a love one.As proverbs 15:1, reminds us; grievous words stir up anger but a soft answer turns away wrath. A good communicator learns to hear with his inner ear, the Holy Spirit. Petersen, James C. 2007. Why Don’t We Listen Better? Communicating & Connecting in Relationships: Portland, OR: Petersen Publication Practical Book Review Grading Rubric Name: Criteria| Points Possible| Points Earned| General| Paper adheres to TRS formatting (title page, in-text citations, References page, etc. ) Correct File Name. Rubric pasted in. 10| | Writing is clear with appropriate grammar, spelling, and punctuation. Headings are appropriately labeled. | 10| | Summation (no more than 500 words)| The author and chapter(s) are identified. | 10| | Concise summation with no personal reflection on content is provided. | 10| | Reflection (no more than 250 words)| Personal life experience is applied. 1st person usage (â€Å"I† is used). | 10| | Investigation (no more than 300 words)| Discussion regarding how the material interfaces with model of personhood and assessment is present| 10| | Thought-provoking questions are posed. 10| | Positives and negatives are discussed. | 10| | Application (no more than 300 words)| Details are included concerning how this information informs the process of checking/controlling student’s particular DISC relational style. 1st person (â€Å"I) usage is appropriate. | 10| | There is a description that indicates what action will be taken or what change the student are going to make to influence his/her personal and professional growth and development. 1st person (â€Å"I†) usage is appropriate| 10| | Total:| 100| | Instructor’s comments:

Evaluate Arlie Hoshschilds Social Therory of Human Emotions essays

Evaluate Arlie Hoshschild's Social Therory of Human Emotions essays Evaluate Arlie Hochschild ¡s social theory of human emotions. The study of emotion is relatively new to the sociological arena. Writers have, in the past touched on the subject in relation to their particular theories. Marx for example uses the concept of alienation as a key part to his meta-theory of society. However, it was not until recently, that a 'sociology of emotion ¡ had been studied as an isolated concept. The American writer and social theorist, Arlie Hochschild is seen as one of the key writers to address the social aspects of emotion in a more direct way than previous writers. Hochschild ¡s work raises a number of important points that go towards a social study of emotions. 'Emotion management ¡, 'feeling rules ¡ and 'emotional labour ¡ are just some of the concepts Hochschild has brought to the debate. This paper will attempt to provide a critique of Hochschild ¡s social theory of human emotions. Firstly, the paper will highlight the key concepts and ideas that Hochschild raises in her theory. The second part of the paper will draw on a number of key writers on the subject, in an attempt to bring to light the main problems in her work. These criticisms will be centred on the idea that Hochschild ¡s work is, over-simplistic and ahistorical. It will also attempt to show that 'emotion management ¡ is nothing new to human society that has always, to some degree, relied on the management of emotion. Many writers see Hochschild ¡s work as foundational to the development of a 'sociology of emotions ¡. Stemming from the writings of Goffman and other 'symbolic interactionists ¡, her work has managed to clarify many of the problems social theory has encountered when seeking a social, as opposed to psychological explanation for our emotions. There is also a Marxist element to her work, which rejuvenates his theory of Alienation, this time with reference to 'emotional ¡ labour. In her analysis of flight attendants she bel...

Boston Consulting Group on Strategy Conformity

Today, management of various organizations are obligated to ensure success is achieved despite the plexity and dynamism of the current business environment. It thus largely depends on the organization structure as well as the appropriateness of the strategies formulated by the management. Apparently, the business strategies need planning gurus who can align business projections with short term and long term objectives. Besides, group influence plays a critical role in one’s ability to formulate decisions. In most cases, an individual may decide to take a particular decision just to conform to group norms. This discussion, therefore, has addressed Yves Morieux contributions on organization strategy and Asch conformity experiment to examine individual conformity to group thinking. Yves Monrieux assertion concerning structure and strategy conforms to the current management imperatives (Yves & Peter, 2014). Today, the success of business greatly relies on the ability of the management to establish effective operational and strategic aims. These goals are supposed to be timely instituted, and affirmative action is taken to ensure they have implemented accordingly. The success needs an administration structure that is flexible and making new decisions based on the situation. There should be smooth coordination and understanding within the departments to enhance a mon focus on the organizational objectives. Thus, it is notable that the blog presents the following ideas: Soundness of the management to the success of the business. The importance of the enactment of effective goals. The relevance of flexibility in the administrative structure. The management levels matter most in determining the responsible authorities in handling various issues. A good administration structure should be the one that roles are clearly assigned and everyone better knows the power to report to (Carl and Michael, 2006, p. 162-190). The ever-changing business environment requires sound business strategies to maintain a petitive edge.   With the consumers varying needs, measures need to be established to ensure the pany is fully satisfying their needs. To remain petitive, businesses are investing in technology, and further encouraging creativity and innovation among staffs to ensure profit is maximized. Notably, a good organization structure enacts operational strategies based on the research and findings. The support of such initiatives is only experienced in an organization where individuals work as a team towards a mon purpose (Lim, et al. 2010).   People hold positions based on the qualifications and capability. And it significantly helps the management understands plans that are relevant to the business, set aside appropriate financial resources and further monitor and evaluate the plans accordingly. Good administrative structures empower employees through training programs, coaching and more to make them relevant to organization needs. Good strategies borrow from the management tools such as SWOT and PESTLE. A thorough understanding both internal and external business environment aids in the formulation of the right business plan (Butler, 2000, p. 39-43). Therefore, it is imperative for the current managers to ensure that the administration structure put in place facilitates the achievement of the business goals and objectives. The structure should facilitate faster decision making, support productive activities intended to propel the organization towards prosperity and that gives the pany petitive edge (Haslam, et al. 2011, p. 23-67). Usually, human beings have various characters and behave differently based on the situation. Getting a plete understanding of an individual regarding how he/she will respond to different scenarios is quite difficult (Griggs, 2015, p. 137). Based on the blog, the following ideas can be extracted: People are influenced by circumstances in making decisions. Personal decisions can also be influenced by individuals around us. One should remain objective in formulating decisions while holding management positions. Group conformity is real and can be avoided if one is required to disclose a solution via writing and further if the matter is a subject of personal accountability. People are however, influenced by various factors in making a personal decision. For example, the student can respond to a perceptual question posed by the instructor, based on the other bright student suggestion even if he know the answer is wrong (Aronson, et al. 2010, p. 99-120). Therefore, personal decision making depends on the circumstances facing the individuals and the people around. Before I discovered my capabilities, I used to make decisions based on views from my friends and individuals around. Even if I knew they were wrong, I just planned according to their suggestions to conform and fit the group. This group conformity justifies Asch Conformity Experiment regarding the power of the group. In most cases, the primary forces that determined my decision making when I was in a group were normative and informational factors (Eysenck, 2004, p. 345-370). The primary reason why I conformed to group norms was to avert punishments, rejection and further gain from social rewards associated with the members. Also, lack of information due to unfocused minds in class used to affect my conscience in answering perceptual questions. Thus, I could just stick on what a group member’s opinion. Currently, I make a decision based on the objective. The knowledge I have gained in the university is significant to allow me stand alone but stick to the truth. The present organization's requirements need leaders who understand themselves and have abilities to align the business goals with strategic plans. Therefore, buying groups’ suggestions just to be accepted at the expense of the firm can lead to business failure (Breckler, et al. 2006, p. 126). Usually, some people who lack leadership qualities and cannot stand alone from a group are susceptible to conformity to group norms. This conformity should not be the case. If we realize the relevance of staying objective to every matter in the organization set up, elements like creativity and innovation will be natured.   As a result, individuals can grow and always feel free to contribute to the organizational management. However, a group can force an individual to conform to its norms because of the following factors: Difficulty of the task, ambiguous situation, lack of information and identification purposes. First, when a group discovers that the job is tough, it can force a knowledgeable member to take the groups’ stand so that they cannot be judged as failures (Turner, 2005, p. 1-22). Secondly, an ambiguous situation may make a group to require its members to behave in the same way. Further, when a group lacks adequate information about a subject, it may force members to adopt one stand. Finally, a group can force a member to conform to the norms for identification purposes. Appearing different may portray a wrong image of the group. To sum up, organization strategy is a roadmap that guides the management about the organization priorities. The establishment of the right strategies and strict implementation increases the chances of business success. However, the effectiveness of the strategies depends on the administration structure and the support it has regarding the organization objectives. Besides, group conformity is real, and members conform because of various reason. Managers should thus, always focus on organization needs than following workers thought just to be accepted. Aronson, T. D.,Wilson, R. M., Akert, E. (2010). Social Psychology (7 ed.). Pearson.p. 99-120 Butler Jr., J.K. (2000). A global view of informal organization: Academy of Management Journal, 51, 3, 39-43. Breckler, S. J., Olson, J. M., & Wiggins, E. C. (2006). Social Psychology Alive. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning, p.126 Carl W. Stern and Michael S. Deimler. (2006). The Boston Consulting Group on Strategy: A collection of articles on strategy and management, p. 162-190 Eysenck, M. W. (2004). Psychology: An International Perspective. New York: Psychology Press, LTD, p.345-370 Griggs, R. A. (2015). "The Disappearance of Independence in Textbook Coverage of Asch's Social Pressure Experiments":   Teaching of Psychology, 42 (2): 137. Haslam, S., Reicher, S.D., Platow, M. J. (2011). The new psychology of leadership: Identity, influence and power. New York, NY: Psychology Press, 23-67 Lim, M., G. Griffiths, and S. Sambrook. (2010). Organizational structure for the twenty-first century: Presented the annual meeting of The Institute for Operations Research and The Management Sciences, Austin. Turner, J. C. (2005). "Explaining the nature of power: A three-process theory": European Journal of Social Psychology. 35: 1–22. Yves Morieux & Peter T. (2014). Six Simple Rules: How to Manage plexity without Getting plicated, 87-100.

Euthyphro (Platos Early Dialogues) Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Euthyphro (Platos Early Dialogues) - Essay Example Does God call something right or moral because it is right or moral or does is something right or moral because God calls it moral? Therefore, if God calls an act moral because it is moral, then morality or goodness will be seen as priori to Gods Command and thus, it is independent of God. On the other hand, if an act is moral because God says it is moral or right, then it implies that whatever God says it is right (Hamilton and Cairns 37). In addition, this also implies that Gods command of what is moral is arbitrary since the same God could have willed contrary commands. The dialogue presents the challenge that was intended to make us think about the nature of morality. Therefore, when Socrates asks Euthyphro about his definition of the word piety, Euthyphro was required to identify the nature of virtue or morality by establishing on what ground does morality or virtue stand on. It is difficult for an atheist to discover the ground on which morality stands on because they claim tha t they can have ethics or morals without God. Certainly, an atheist can behave in a way that people perceive moral or good but it is really hard to define what the term ultimately means (Plato 10a). It may imply complying with objective standard of morality or good, a policy or law given by legitimate authority without involving a transcendent law maker-the gods. This means that there can be no transcendent law maker and no corresponding duty to be good. Most Christians oppose the argument that there is an arbitrary role of God’s power and rejects the idea that there is no law or policy over God. Then, where does morality stands? Morality can be said to be grounded in the divine and immutable character of God who is perfectly good in that his commands are not whims but planted in his holiness. Christians argue that any bad things that happen are not commanded by God because his character is that he is holy and merciful. For Christians, morality is rooted in God’s chara cter which expresses itself in the commands of God and it is not above him. In sum, whatever is good is always commanded by God not that it is good so that God commands it to be good (Cooper 41). Christians argue that God ultimately determines the pious or morality and that the commands of God are expression of his desires and will for what human beings ought to do. This is because such argument presents a metaphysical foundation of piety or morality. Human beings need to be committed to the existence of moral truths in order for them to live in accordance with the will of God. This means the existence of moral truths for people since they have moral obligation to obey what God commands. This is so because Christians believe that their moral obligation comes from God in form of commands. Thus, people ought to be moral because they are morally accountable to God in that those people who do not obey him will be punished and good people will receive rewards (Plato 10b). Plato’s dialogue regarding the nature of morality or goodness is still being raised even today as a challenge to Christianity in that many Christians ask themselves is an action or act good or right because God says it is right or does god say it is good or right because the act is right. The Euthyphro dilemma is traced in