power dynamics

[freyley]

I've been trying to figure out why the term nonviolent communication bothers me. It does -- though I'm not as much objecting to the concept. I think I'd call the concept noncompetitive communication, and I tend to agree that's important

Comments

[keturn]

I went looking for an origin and definition of the phrase "non-violent communication," and I noticed a funny thing: The introductory material at the Center for Nonviolent Communication and the other material linked to from the Wikipedia page never uses the phrase "violent communication," nor for that matter does it invoke the words "violent" or "violence" at all. The CNVC's definition begins with stating that it "nonviolent communication" is sometimes called "compassionate communication", and then just collapses it to "NVC."

The only thing I've found on the etymology so far is the sentence on Wikipedia, "The name "nonviolent communication" refers to Mohandas Gandhi's philosophy of ahimsa or nonviolence."

From skimming Anger and Domination Systems, I think that Dr. Rosenberg (the man who coined the phrase) believes that what you would recognize as violence (blatant verbal or physical attacks) is precipitated by what you term "so-called violent communication" above. (or perhaps, I suppose, by a lack of communication

[freyley]

It seems, from this, that there are at least three different definitions of nonviolent communication, and that maybe my difficulty is as much with the people who actively teach and encourage it, for creating this ambiguity.

Thanks for the links.

[vrimj]

Thank you. I had the same vauge feeling of yuck about this and I think it was for much the same reason. It honestly put me off reading much about it at all. A communication technique whose very name is something of an off-putting insult seemed like a poor thing to spend time on.

I like "Compassionate Communication" much better really, and not just because I generally prefer names that talk about what is being done rather then what is not being done.

[freyley]

Me too on liking "compassionate communication." I had a moment where I had to forget compassionate conservatism first, but...

[pmb]

"Nonviolent communication" seems to me to be a linguistic trick that attempts to imply that all non-nonviolent communication must be violent communication. I am unsure that they meant it that way - "compassionate communcation" seems both more descriptive and also more accurate.

In a geeky analogy, perhaps we can remember that Knuth claims structured programming took off in part because to not engage in "structured programming" meant you were writing an "unstructured program", and that sounds very bad.

[freyley]

That's true. I jumped to the idea of violent communication without even noticing that I was jumping to it.

[gorthx]

The reason this bothers me is simple: it seems manipulative.

Right. I have not-vague "feelings of yuck" (as

[daniel_t_miles]

A couple of points:

1) I'm with you that the word, "violent" can't really apply to words, it doesn't make sense. I'd take, "combative" or "confrontational" or even "damaging" applied to words, but "violent" doesn't do it.

2) I think there's an important distinction between "violence," the physical application of force, and "nonviolence," which is a philosophy on how to apply force without violence.

That being said, I'm nervous about nonviolent communication for that reason. I think if you're in a situation where you're applying force in your communication, you've done something wrong.

[faethverity]

I think if you're in a situation where you're applying force in your communication, you've done something wrong.

But that doesn't stop people, in my experience.