Submitted by Rolf F. Katzenberger on Fri, 2008-12-19 10:00.
@Naveen Thakur:
Thanks for your feedback! You’re pointing us to an important issue: when we call something an “exaggeration” or “overcompensation” (whether that perception is true or not) we’re likely to produce resistance instead of the improvement we desire; plus, we may be just plain wrong.
That’s why Friedemann Schulz von Thun emphasizes we must expressly acknowledge the good intention *behind* what we consider to be an exaggeration, instead of applying EXAGGERATION! like a stigmatic label. I’ve found this thought very helpful, because it helps a lot to reduce the feeling of being annoyed by somebody’s behavior.
And, of course, we might discover that a specific behavior was no exaggeration or overcompensation at all - and that it’s rather *our* turn to improve ourselves or at least change our perspective.
Yet another way of applying this thought tool - thanks for sharing your insight!
"Exaggeration"
@Naveen Thakur:
Thanks for your feedback! You’re pointing us to an important issue: when we call something an “exaggeration” or “overcompensation” (whether that perception is true or not) we’re likely to produce resistance instead of the improvement we desire; plus, we may be just plain wrong.
That’s why Friedemann Schulz von Thun emphasizes we must expressly acknowledge the good intention *behind* what we consider to be an exaggeration, instead of applying EXAGGERATION! like a stigmatic label. I’ve found this thought very helpful, because it helps a lot to reduce the feeling of being annoyed by somebody’s behavior.
And, of course, we might discover that a specific behavior was no exaggeration or overcompensation at all - and that it’s rather *our* turn to improve ourselves or at least change our perspective.
Yet another way of applying this thought tool - thanks for sharing your insight!