Edwina, List: The principle that no one can *make *someone else feel any particular way *does not *"imply that people are almost in a state of self-sufficient isolation." It merely implies that each of us has a measure of *self-control*, as Peirce clearly affirmed. No one else has *control *over my feelings and responses, although others' behavior can and does *influence *how I am likely to feel or respond in a given situation.
Likewise, taking responsibility for those feelings and responses *does not* "mean that whatever another person argues/says has no effect." It merely means that the Dynamic Interpretant of an utterance is not *completely dictated *by its Utterer. The Interpreter also plays a role, as evidenced by the fact that the exact same statement can have very *different *effects on different people. In Martin Luther's words, we can and should "put the best construction on everything." If someone were to tell me, "What you suggest is a ridiculous brain-dead analysis," I probably would indeed be upset initially; but how I subsequently dealt with that emotion would be *up to me*. As Alan Jacobs recommends in his recent book, *How to Think*, in such circumstances one should "take five minutes," rather than saying or doing anything right away. Then deliberately *choose *a course of action, rather than just *reacting *in the heat of the moment. In summary, what I am proposing is that List members conscientiously cultivate both specific *habits of action* (how we say things), as John S. is advocating, and specific *habits of interpretation* (how we take things), as Gary F. is advocating. Conveniently, Peirce had a lot to say about how to go about this sort of thing; as I recently posted (again), "Logic [i.e., semeiotic] may be defined as the science of the laws of the stable establishment of beliefs [i.e., habits]" (CP 3.429; 1896). Regards, Jon S. On Thu, Aug 2, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> wrote: > Jon, list > > 1] But is an assertive approach the best way to function within a > scientific research community? That is, if it's the case that " Another > principle of assertiveness is that no one can make someone else feel any > particular way, or respond in any particular way" doesn't this imply that > people are almost in a state of self-sufficient isolation? > > 2]And, if it's the case that " Instead, each of us should take full > responsibility for our own feelings and responses" - doesn't this mean that > whatever another person argues/says has no effect? > > As an example, if someone says to me: "What you suggest is a ridiculous > brain-dead analysis" - should my feeling upset about this [and I hope I > WOULD feel upset; I'm not a psychopath who is indifferent to > others]….should I really take full i.e., singular responsibility for my > upset feeling? Shouldn't the person who said it to me in the first > place, share this responsibility? That is - is it up to me alone to 'not > take offense'? > > I don't think that we, as a species, can function well without a > sensitivity to how we affect others, such that we even change our tone, our > words, our body language, when we interact with different people - because > we do want to 'make' them feel in a particular way. I treat a two-year old > quite differently from a graduate student and differently from a colleague. > > I think that John Sowa's recommendations are a constructive agenda - and > I'll try to follow them. > > Edwina > > On Thu 02/08/18 7:52 PM , Jon Alan Schmidt [email protected] sent: > > List: > > Employing "I" messages, rather than "you" messages, is a staple of > assertiveness training. It is an effective rhetorical strategy grounded in > psychology. I think that it is especially important to be careful about > attributing views, sentiments, or states to someone else that he or she did > not actually express; John's example of "you are confused" is in this > category. > > At the same time, whether a particular statement is insulting is--at least > to some extent--in the eye of the beholder. Another principle of > assertiveness is that no one can make someone else feel any particular > way, or respond in any particular way. Instead, each of us should take > full responsibility for our own feelings and responses. > > Consequently, we would all do well to heed both pieces of advice that > have been offered in this thread--avoid "you" when possible, and choose > not to take offense. I try to follow both of these practices when > posting here, but as the record shows, I am not always successful. > > Regards, > > Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA > Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman > www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt > >
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
