A presentation that helps us to better understand the other. Understanding is more important than being understood

Researcher Robin Dunbar has linked the activity of the neocortex, the main part of the cerebral cortex, to the level of social activity.

He looked at the size of community groups in different animals and the number of grooming partners (an important part of grooming, for example, hair picking in primates).

It turned out that the size of the neocortex is directly related to the number of individuals in the community and the number of those who cleaned each other (analogue of communication).

When Dunbar began researching people, he found that there were about 150 people in social groups. This means that each has about 150 acquaintances whom he can ask for help or provide them with something.

The close group is 12 people, but 150 social connections is a more significant figure. This is the maximum number of people with whom we keep in touch. If the number of yours becomes more than 150, some of the past connections go away.

You can put it another way:

These are the people with whom you will not mind having a drink at the bar if you happen to meet them there.

Writer Rick Lacks tried to challenge Dunbar's theory. He wrote about trying to do this:

“In trying to challenge Dunbar's theory, I actually confirmed it. Even if you decide to disprove Dunbar's number and try to expand your circle of acquaintances, you will be able to interact with a large number of people, but this large number is exactly 200 people or even less. "

This experience allowed Lax to draw attention to close ties:

“After my experiment, I developed respect for:

1. British anthropology.

2. To my real friends.

I realized that there are not so many of them, but now I treat them much better and appreciate them more. "

Dunbar's number is especially useful for marketers and people in the social media and branding industries. If you know that each person can only interact with 150 friends and acquaintances, it will be easier to respond to rejection.

Instead of getting angry and upset when people don't want to connect with you and support your brand, think about the fact that they only have 150 contacts. If they choose you, they have to give up someone they know. On the other hand, if people make contact, you will appreciate it more.

But what about, where do many have more than a thousand friends? But how many of them do you keep in touch with? Most likely, the number of such people is close to 150. As soon as new contacts appear, the old ones are forgotten and just hang in your friends.

Many periodically clean their list and remove those with whom they will not communicate, leaving only close people. This is not entirely correct. The fact is that it is not only strong connections that are important, that is, your immediate environment. Morten Hansen's book "Collaboration" describes how important weak social contacts are for a person (in particular, those that are made through social networks). They are the key to new opportunities.

The study showed that it is not the number of connections that is important for human development, but their diversity. Among your acquaintances there should be people who hold opposite points of view, with different experiences and knowledge. And such a contingent can be found on a social network.

Weak ties are useful because they lead us into unfamiliar areas, while strong ties exist in areas already studied.

Hanlon's Razor

Never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to stupidity.

In Hanlon's razor, instead of the word "stupidity", you can put "", that is, lack of information before making a decision or any action. And here's how it works: when it seems to you that someone treats you badly or does something in spite, first dig deeper and find out if this is due to a trivial misunderstanding.

For example, if you receive an email from an employee in which he sharply speaks out against your idea, perhaps he simply did not understand its essence. And his indignation was not directed at you, he only opposed the proposal, which seemed to him stupid or dangerous.

In addition, it often happens that acquaintances try to help a person with their own methods, and he perceives this as vile intrigues. Human beings are not by nature evil creatures, so beneath any perceived harm there may be good intentions, simply absurdly expressed.

Herzberg's motivating factors

The latter theory can help in communicating with colleagues or even friends and spouses. The concept was put forward in 1959 by Frederick Herzberg. Its essence lies in the fact that job satisfaction and dissatisfaction are measured in different ways, not being the two ends of the same straight line.

In theory, it is assumed that dissatisfaction depends on hygienic factors: working conditions, salary, relationships with superiors and colleagues. If they are not satisfied, dissatisfaction arises.

But I like my job not because of good hygienic factors. Satisfaction depends on a group of reasons (motivation), which include: pleasure from the work process, recognition and opportunities for growth.
You can deduce the following statement: while working in comfortable conditions, you can still feel lousy if, for example, serious projects do not trust you and do not notice your efforts.

And the fact that you receive recognition and realize the benefits of your actions will not compensate for the fact that you are paid pennies for it, forcing you to work in a terrible environment.

This theory is especially useful for those who are responsible for the personnel in the company. Now you will understand why people, despite good conditions, still quit.

For those who are themselves dissatisfied with the work, this theory will help to find out the cause of dissatisfaction and overcome it. And also, if your friends, family or acquaintances complain about the place of employment, you will never tell them: “But you are paid so well there! You are mad with fat, stay. " This step can be very important for their future.

«. »

1. Introduction.

2. Main part.

3. Conclusion. Output.

Introduction.

Communication is the interaction of people, consisting in the exchange of information between them. Communication is included in the practical interaction of people. It also satisfies a person's special need for contact with other people. In the process of communication, the education of children and youth is also carried out. Communication is a prerequisite for personality formation. Communication between representatives of different nationalities performs informational, regulatory and emotional functions. An important role in the communication process belongs to the cognitive factor - the mutual exchange of information about the specific historical characteristics of one or another people, its latest achievements in science, technology, economy, culture, art, etc. Any manifestation of disregard for the history, culture and achievements of one or another people generates a feeling of resentment, mistrust, leads to isolation, alienation.

Each person has to live in society, and therefore social inclusion is an extremely important factor in his life. The individual development of each person begins with his gradual entry, inclusion in the world around him. This entry into the world occurs through the individual's assimilation of the required amount of knowledge, norms, values, models and skills of behavior that allows him to exist as a full member of society. The main reason for this process is that human social behavior is not programmed by nature, and therefore every time he is forced to re-learn how to understand the world around him and react to it. This process of the individual's assimilation of the norms of social life and culture is designated in various humanities by the concepts of "inculturation" and "socialization". These concepts largely coincide with each other in content, since both imply the assimilation of cultural forms of a society by people. Purpose of the work:

Work tasks:

Make a conclusion.

Object of study:

Hypothesis:

Main part.

Understanding people

There are many factors that influence the perception and understanding of other people. Among them: age, gender, profession, individual personality traits, such as "I" - the image and level of self-acceptance.

The data obtained by Soviet psychologists are instructive in this respect. Two groups of people were shown a photograph of the same man and asked for a verbal description of the person. The first group was told that the man was a hero, and the second group was presented with the same photograph as a snapshot of the perpetrator. Those who were told that this is a photograph of a hero were given the characterization "heroic". “A very strong-willed person. Unafraid eyes look sullenly. Lips are compressed, spiritual strength and firmness are felt. The expression on the face is proud. " In the same photo, the person who was called the criminal was given “criminal” characteristics. Here is one of them: “This beast wants to understand something. He looks smart and without stopping. Standard bandit chin, bags under the eyes ... "

Perception factors

"To change the world around you, you must change yourself" (Mahatma Gandhi)

A person who develops communication skills becomes wiser. He is always in better conditions, in better relations with people. Just as we keep our homes clean, we should keep the order of our thoughts, behavior, manners, and our communication. By changing ourselves, we change the world around us. If you can accept that we are all unique and that we all have differences, this will be the first step towards your personal freedom. This is not an easy task, but if you listen and try to understand people day after day, you will be on the path to a happy life. A person's idea of how others perceive him largely determines his behavior. As Nuttin noted: "In the presence of another person, we behave differently than when surrounded by objects." Apparently, not only individuals, but also entire groups, organizations or communities, attach great importance to how they are perceived and evaluated by others. Often people are willing to do a lot to look a certain way in the eyes of others, and put a lot of effort into understanding the impression they make. This phenomenon is the source and basis of the process that determines the results of mutual cognition of people. During this process, each of the partners develops ideas like "I think about what he thinks, what I think, what he thinks" and so on.

I believe that a number of characteristics associated with individual traits and personality traits are more important than gender and age. An important role is played, for example, by the image of "I" and self-esteem - they are, as it were, a psychological foundation on which various factors are based that affect relationships with people. I mean those thoughts, assessments, judgments and beliefs about oneself, which are related, as it were, to those external, visible manifestations of personality, about which a person can calmly talk.

The problem of perception and understanding of other people arises before us, as a rule, when we establish and maintain contact with them. How others understand us depends to a large extent on our behavior - we can help or hinder others to perceive us correctly. Everyone can ask themselves such questions: "Do other people know me well?", "Is it easy for them to understand me?", "Do I know and understand myself?", "Do I help others to understand me better?" The best and most direct form of help here is our own openness.

Personality problems

In total, the researchers identified 18 main problems that individuals face in the situation of intercultural interaction. Situations reflecting these problems can be grouped into three broader headings:

Examples of potentially conflict situations can be taken from ethnographic and historical literature, press, observations of the developers themselves. The method of unfinished sentences is used, where the subjects formulate the possible causes and consequences of events. Interviews are also conducted using the “critical incident” methodology: respondents are asked to recall the events in which something happened that dramatically - positively or negatively - changed their opinion as members of another culture

3. Conclusion.

The great wisdom in life is understanding that you see and perceive the world differently than others perceive it. And the great task in life is to learn to understand people. After all, it is sometimes not so easy to understand a person. Some of us go through life making decisions based on how we think - and no one else. We often act only on the basis of our ideas about how life should happen and how others should act or react to our words and deeds. And when things do not go our way, or the people around us do not act the way we think - this leads us to disappointment. Imagine what your life would be like if you could accept or understand someone else's point of view. As a rule, in most cases we consider ourselves to be right in any situation. Sometimes we can still see a different point of view, but for the most part, the last word still remains with us. Building relationships with others and understanding people is one of the toughest challenges in life. This is not easy. Look at it this way - we are all part of a big family. We are all completely different and this makes life very interesting. Would it be interesting for you to live if you were surrounded only by your doubles?

View document content
".What helps us to better understand the other" "

MUNICIPAL BUDGETARY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION "SECONDARY EDUCATIONAL SCHOOL № 43"

School research conference

«. What helps us to better understand another (a representative of another nationality, religion, other worldview positions)»

I've done the work:

Kazanovsky Kirill Viktorovich

grade 10 student

Municipal budget

educational institution

"Secondary school number 43"

Simferopol

Simferopol-2016

1. Introduction.

2. Main part.

3. Conclusion. Output.

4. List of used literature.

Introduction. Communication is the interaction of people, consisting in the exchange of information between them. Communication is included in the practical interaction of people. It also satisfies a person's special need for contact with other people. In the process of communication, the education of children and youth is also carried out. Communication is a prerequisite for personality formation. Communication between representatives of different nationalities performs informational, regulatory and emotional functions. An important role in the communication process belongs to the cognitive factor - the mutual exchange of information about the specific historical characteristics of one or another people, its latest achievements in science, technology, economy, culture, art, etc. Any manifestation of disregard for the history, culture and achievements of one or another people generates a feeling of resentment, mistrust, leads to isolation, alienation. Each person has to live in society, and therefore social inclusion is an extremely important factor in his life. The individual development of each person begins with his gradual entry, inclusion in the world around him. This entry into the world occurs through the individual's assimilation of the required amount of knowledge, norms, values, models and skills of behavior that allows him to exist as a full member of society. The main reason for this process is that human social behavior is not programmed by nature, and therefore every time he is forced to re-learn how to understand the world around him and react to it. This process of the individual's assimilation of the norms of social life and culture is designated in various humanities by the concepts of "inculturation" and "socialization". These concepts largely coincide with each other in content, since both imply the assimilation of cultural forms of a society by people. Purpose of work:

Understand the perception of people of different cultures and peoples and find out what contributes to the understanding of the goals of some by others.

Work tasks:

Find and study the relationships of people between groups of different perceptions.

Find arguments in favor of the need for understanding between people.

Compare the received data;

Make a conclusion.

Object of study:

Society, people's perception of each other, as well as their joint presence in the same system.

Hypothesis:

A person can see in the other only as much as he himself possesses, and can he understand the other only in proportion to his own mind? Arthur Schopenhauer (German philosopher)

Main part.

Understanding people

Every day we meet many people, observe their behavior, listen to what they say, think about them, try to understand them. It seems to us that we not only see what color a person's eyes and hair are, whether he is tall or not, thin or fat, but also whether he is sad or fun, smart or stupid, solid or not, and so on.

It is widely believed that the older a person is, the better they understand others. This opinion, however, was not confirmed in the pilot study. Research has also failed to confirm that women are more discerning than men. True, in the latter case, the issue has not yet been fully clarified.

Perception factors

"To change the world around you, you must change yourself" (Mahatma Gandhi)

A person who develops communication skills becomes wiser. He is always in better conditions, in better relations with people. Just as we keep our homes clean, we should keep the order of our thoughts, behavior, manners, and our communication. By changing ourselves, we change the world around us.
If you can accept that we are all unique and that we all have differences, this will be the first step towards your personal freedom. This is not an easy task, but if you listen and try to understand people day after day, you will be on the path to a happy life. A person's idea of how others perceive him largely determines his behavior. As Nuttin noted: "In the presence of another person, we behave differently than when surrounded by objects." Apparently, not only individuals, but also entire groups, organizations or communities, attach great importance to how they are perceived and evaluated by others. Often people are willing to do a lot to look a certain way in the eyes of others, and put a lot of effort into understanding the impression they make. This phenomenon is the source and basis of the process that determines the results of mutual cognition of people. During this process, each of the partners develops ideas like "I think about what he thinks, what I think, what he thinks" and so on.

The degree of openness cannot be random; it depends on the current situation and the characteristics of the developing contact. It is desirable that it be connected with what is happening at the moment in partners and between them.

Some people at such moments suspect another of treachery, and, unfortunately, this is sometimes justified. This is one of the greatest adversities that can befall a person. I mean the misfortune of losing trust in others. It usually manifests itself in total and blind suspicion. It can be difficult to overcome the barrier of such suspicion and get close to such a person. Very often, a global distrust of others is combined with distrust of oneself.

Naturally, it is difficult to meet such a person who would not be deceived at least once in his life. Once we are deceived, we try to avoid such situations and the disappointments associated with them in the future. We try to be careful, attentive, suspicious, we decide that "we will never trust anyone again." But all this is an imaginary guarantee of security, because as a result we find ourselves in loneliness and isolation. I am talking about imaginary guarantees, because, although we no longer risk trusting others, we also do not get rid of the feelings of anxiety and inner tension, which, moreover, are reinforced by our memories. At the same time, we are tormented by terrible ideas about what could happen if we suddenly opened up to someone or allowed others to behave more openly with us.

We can help each other get rid of suspicion by trying to be more open and trusting in our partner. However, all this is very difficult, requires effort and effort, and, unfortunately, there are no ready-made recipes for how to help in such a situation. After all, when we try to change something for the better, we have no guarantees that everything will be really good.

Each of us has a more or less diverse repertoire of roles, positions and situations that we can imagine in our imaginations, and it is clear that two different people cannot have two identical repertoires. All these ideas about possible forms of behavior, thoughts and feelings of others seem to be hiding behind the curtains of our consciousness. But then there comes a moment when we need to imagine what is happening in the inner world of a person, and we turn to ready-made images, trying to choose among them those that seem suitable to us for a given person.

Although this inner representation of the world of others is part of our personality, sometimes it feels like we are really penetrating the inner world of another person. This feeling is accompanied by confidence: "I know for sure what is happening to him." Of course, such confidence is illusory, since you can never be sure that you can absolutely accurately imagine the state of feelings and thoughts of another. We do not know exactly what is the mechanism for the formation of such perceptions. It is known, however, that their choice is based not on systematic and ordered mental activity, but through intuition. Intuition can be developed by improving the skills of an adequate understanding of what is happening in the inner world of others. The best criterion for assessing the correctness of our ideas about the experiences of another person is his reaction to our assumptions, confirming or refuting their validity.

Personality problems

In total, the researchers identified 18 main problems that individuals face in the situation of intercultural interaction.
Situations reflecting these problems can be grouped into three broader headings:

Intense emotional reactions (anxiety, unfulfilled expectations, a feeling of lack of emotional support from local residents, the uncertainty of relations, remove the struggle with one's own prejudices and ethnocentrism);

The sphere of knowledge important for understanding intercultural differences (social attitudes towards work and property; spatio-temporal organization of communication; attitude to foreign cinema languages; role structures; individualism / collectivism; rituals and superstition; hierarchical structures - class and status; personal and social values) ;

Cognitive psychological processes and manifestations underlying intergroup differences (categorization, differentiation, ethnocentrism, attribution, style of acquiring knowledge).

Examples of potentially conflict situations can be taken from ethnographic and historical literature, press, observations of the developers themselves. The method of unfinished sentences is used, where the subjects formulate the possible causes and consequences of events.
Interviews are also conducted using the “critical incident” methodology: respondents are asked to recall the events in which something happened that dramatically - positively or negatively - changed their opinion as members of another culture

3. Conclusion.

List of used literature

Hedgehog Melibrude "I-You-we" Translation: E.V. Novikova

Sigmund Freud "The Psychopathology of Everyday Life"

"The Psychology of Influence" by Robert Cialdini

http://psylib.org.ua/books/melib01/txt10.htm

Researcher Robin Dunbar has linked the activity of the neocortex, the main part of the cerebral cortex, to the level of social activity.

He looked at the size of community groups in different animals and the number of grooming partners (an important part of grooming, for example, hair picking in primates).

It turned out that the size of the neocortex is directly related to the number of individuals in the community and the number of those who cleaned each other (analogue of communication).

You can put it another way:

These are the people with whom you will not mind having a drink at the bar if you happen to meet them there.

Writer Rick Lacks tried to challenge Dunbar's theory. He wrote about trying to do this:

This experience allowed Lax to draw attention to close ties:

“After my experiment, I developed respect for:

1. British anthropology.

2. To my real friends.

I realized that there are not so many of them, but now I treat them much better and appreciate them more. "

Weak ties are useful because they lead us into unfamiliar areas, while strong ties exist in areas already studied.

Hanlon's Razor

Never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to stupidity.

Herzberg's motivating factors

In theory, it is assumed that dissatisfaction depends on hygienic factors: working conditions, salary, relationships with superiors and colleagues. If they are not satisfied, dissatisfaction arises.

And the fact that you receive recognition and realize the benefits of your actions will not compensate for the fact that you are paid pennies for it, forcing you to work in a terrible environment.

This theory is especially useful for those who are responsible for the personnel in the company. Now you will understand why people, despite good conditions, still quit.

With long-term communication, people gradually get to know each other better and begin to understand their partner deeper and more objectively. What helps to understand the interlocutor? Experience, knowledge ... What else?

It is easier to know people in general than one person in particular.
F. La Rochefoucauld

Experience is the son of difficult mistakes ...

With long-term communication, people gradually get to know each other better and begin to understand their partner deeper and more objectively. And although the influence is so strong that it continues to operate even when people communicate for a long time, it gradually weakens.

We receive a lot of information about a person, his experiences and states not only and not so much from verbal (verbal) sources. At the same time, we do not always understand how we managed to extract this or that information.

Many people believe that communication experience helps. But is it?

A lot of people have lived to gray hair, and have not yet learned to understand what is happening with the interlocutor. Meanwhile, there are young people who seem to intuitively feel the one with whom they communicate. And the thinnest "antennas", perhaps, are in children: they not only correctly pick up the signals that adults send them, but also immediately adjust to them.

Experience, however, often "substitutes" us, pulling outdated attitudes, dogmas and subjective assumptions from the subconscious.

It turns out that experience does not always become the best helper during communication. What helps then?

Does knowledge always help out?

Psychological studies show that information about the emotional states of a person, about the attitude towards others, as well as about the attitude towards oneself is carried by almost all the details of the external appearance. Gestures, facial expressions, general style of behavior are important. dressing style, gait, habitual postures, spatial orientation in relation to partners ...

The main source of information about a person is face. No wonder they say: "everything is written on the face."

Gloomy, funny, spiritualized, enlightened ... All emotions are primarily reflected on the face. There are seven basic emotions: happiness, interest, surprise, suffering, anger, disgust (or contempt), fear. We read them very quickly and accurately.

The direction of gaze plays an important role when reading information "from the face". It is unpleasant to communicate with someone who often averts his eyes, does not look at the interlocutor. What does a person hide from us? But looking too closely cannot be called comfortable: you feel yourself under investigation.

And what does the direction of the gaze express?

Foreign psychologists believe that the gaze is directly related to the process of forming an utterance. When a person only formulates a thought, he often looks to the side ("into space"). If the thought has already been formulated, the person looks at the interlocutor. When talking about difficult things, they look at the interlocutor less, but as soon as the difficulty is overcome, the duration of eye contact increases.

Usually, the one who speaks looks at the partner less: he glances only in order to check the reaction and interest of the interlocutor. The listening side looks more towards the speaker and "sends" him feedback signals.

But there are situations when the face becomes not very informative: when a person controls his facial expressions. For example, during the observance of rituals, the rules of etiquette, when we deliberately try not to show the interlocutor our true feelings.

Then the main source of information becomes body... It is more difficult to control it, and it becomes a "place of information leakage" about true states of mind.

For example, gait. She is recognizable, individual and gives an emotional state. A “heavy” gait tends to betray anger. The longest stride is when the person is proud. In suffering, a person almost does not wave his hands, they "hang". In a state of happiness, a person seems to "fly": his steps are light, frequent.

But, again, knowledge of non-verbal skills helps, but can fail at the right time. What won't let you down?

By the way, you can learn more about non-verbal human behavior here:

Assistants - empathy

It is capable of helping to deeply understand a person empathy- a special attitude towards a partner, a special focus on him. No matter how sophisticated experience and knowledge we are, in order to understand a person, you need to really want it.

It is important to want to understand why a person is worried, what he thinks, his point of view and way of thinking.

Have you noticed? In relationships with loved ones, with friends, everything seems to happen by itself, without much effort and effort. This is because we really want to understand the other, we are afraid of offending or doing something wrong.

Empathy is based on the desire and ability to put oneself in the place of another, to look at everything through his eyes, to feel his state, to take all this into account in his behavior. You can read more about empathy here:

P.S. What, in your opinion, most of all helps to understand the interlocutor? What can make communication successful?

UNDERSTANDING AND UNDERSTANDING

For a person as a person, it is more important to love and just as important to understand than to be understood. The labor of understanding another person (the search for those personal properties, features of the worldview and values that contribute to understanding) is much more important than the desire to understand you.

* In science and culture, the problem of understanding exists in a narrow and broad sense. Narrow - a cognitive approach, an attempt to scientifically study what understanding is. From the middle of the 20th century, understanding began to take on an existential character, it began to be viewed not as one of the procedures of human thinking, but as something more, as a universal psychic ability and even as a way of being a person in the world. Major thinkers (Heidegger, Gadamer, Ricoeur, etc.) began to argue that understanding is generally the main thing that a person needs in the world. From the point of view of the psychology of being, understanding always turns out to be something more than an act of cognition, it is always a "being reaction", and during the transition from the cognitive analysis to the existential one, new facets, hitherto unknown to psychologists, are revealed in the phenomenon of understanding.

* What is needed for a person to understand something? It is necessary to single out, first of all, the two most general conditions of understanding that must be realized. The first is the mnemonic (from the Greek word memory) condition for understanding: a person can understand only what resonates in his memory. If we do not have any knowledge about the subject, we will not be able to understand it in principle. If now a person enters this room and says something in African dialect, then at least I will not understand anything. The absolutely unknown cannot be understood.

* It is about what the person understands. Man never understands knowledge. Knowledge is something like glasses that sit on his nose and through which he sees the world. By understanding, I mean how a person understands the world. This world is either natural or social, connected with other people. Therefore, speaking about the mnemonic condition of understanding, I mean that stock of knowledge on a topic that allows us to understand both natural phenomena and another person. For example, we are talking about the psychological phenomenon of understanding. But if you had never heard this phrase before, we would not have been able to communicate. Prior knowledge is the basis on which understanding arises. This is the first, mnemonic condition. If it is not there, problems arise. The second general condition for understanding is target. It can be formulated as follows: usually a person understands only what corresponds to his internal attitudes, forecasts, hypotheses ... if something does not correspond to his expectations, then usually the first reaction is misunderstanding. The human psyche is arranged in such a way that there is something like the principle of saving psychic energy. We focus on the most believable events. The more unusual, unexpected an event, the more effort is required to understand it, and if we expect one person from a person, and he speaks on a completely different topic, we do not immediately understand it.

* You can understand this, we are talking about something that is not clear at the first moment. It is important to understand what understanding refers to. Can we say that this is an independent and very specific mental process? Research shows that it is not, because understanding is always a component of thinking. But which component is it? Why does a person need thinking? Briefly, almost banal - in order to get to know the world around. But if we reformulate, we can say that a person needs thinking in order to gain new knowledge about the world. Every time we think about something, we get new knowledge about the world. Does understanding have a direct bearing on the acquisition of new knowledge about the world? Understanding is a component of thinking that is not aimed at obtaining new knowledge, but at comprehending it. The key word for understanding is the word meaning. We understand only those actions that acquire some meaning for us. The result of thinking is understanding.

* If we talk about understanding a person by a person, about mutual understanding, then two more basic conditions of understanding (mnemonic and target) need to be added in a communication situation. One of them is empathic. You cannot understand another person without entering into some kind of personal relationship with him. This does not necessarily mean personal communication, but our affective-emotional relationship to the object of understanding. And the last, fourth, this is the so-called value-normative condition, because understanding is always based on our idea of what should be. This is very important for characterizing understanding. We always correlate the current situation with what we think it should be. Personal perception is always subjective, therefore, different people perceive the same event, fact in different ways, depending on the context of personal knowledge in which they include the understood subject. This explains why sometimes one person does not understand the other: because the statements and actions of the partner do not coincide with the subject's ideas about what they should be in accordance with the norms of behavior, that is, how, in his opinion, it should be. By the way, this was known in the past. V.F. Odoevsky wrote: "Two works befits a person in this world: to understand what is and what should be." This expression is the essence of understanding, which always includes the juxtaposition of the present and the ought. This is subjectivity, that for understanding it is not at all necessary to correspond to truth, reality, correctness. Nothing like this! It is necessary to correspond only to personal ideas. Studies show that it is not necessary to establish truth for understanding. First, we understand things that are obviously not true, for example, we understand what a mermaid is, we understand what the dispute about Atlantis is about, although no one knows for sure whether such a state existed or not. Secondly, we understand a lot of things about the truth of which we know nothing at the moment. For example, if I say that while we are sitting here with you, there is a hailstorm in the center of Moscow, you can understand this statement, but it is impossible to establish at the moment whether this is so or not.

* The experiments revealed three main forms of understanding: understanding-recognition, understanding-hypothesis and understanding-unification, or construction of a whole from parts. The psychological specificity of understanding always depends on two circumstances: on the situation in which we find ourselves, and on the problem that we are solving. When it comes to understanding-recognition, a person finds himself in a new situation for him, but sets himself the task of simply finding out what it is, and this is limited. For example, passing by two women discussing "Santa Barbara", I understand what it is about, but I pass by without thinking about this topic, because I am not interested. This understanding is at a generalized, superficial level. The second case is when understanding is based on a hypothesis, an assumption. For example, an investigative version, building a chain of events in accordance with it. This form of understanding has both advantages and disadvantages. Some details of what is understood are highlighted well, but quite often they are "shaded" and cover the whole of others. In this case, the likelihood of inadequate understanding is high enough. However, whether correct or not, it never ceases to be understanding. When it comes to understanding-hypothesis, a person proves to himself and to others that his understanding is correct, even if there are many contradictions in the chain of his reasoning. And the third form is associated with understanding-design - this is a situation when individual details are clear, but the most important thing is to understand how they are combined. For example, a traffic police inspector who arrived at the scene of an accident, by interviewing witnesses, measuring the stopping distance, breakdowns, makes up a picture of what happened. And gradually he develops an understanding of why the accident happened. This is an example of understanding-unification. And there is also a form of understanding-explanation. This is an understanding that arises in a dialogue between two people who themselves do not fully understand what they want to say. For example, when discussing a scientific problem in the process of dialogue, when its participants are forced to verbalize their thought and explain it to the interlocutor, understanding arises at the point of contact between two different positions (this became especially clear after Bakhtin). This form of understanding-explanation in dialogue has been studied to a lesser extent. Western psychologists view this form of understanding as a mutual process of defining each other's goals in dialogue.

* Understanding is a universal category that refers to the being of a person as a whole. He needs it in order to realize that he is, what place he occupies in the world. V. Frankl in his works, based on the unique experience of being in a fascist concentration camp, says that the main thing for a person is to find the meaning of life. And the search process leads to the fact that a person understands himself, life and those around him. My experimental experience shows that cognitive methods have limited capabilities, that there is always something that cannot be comprehended by such methods, and this is nothing more than the spiritual "I" of the subject. Spiritual "I" is something that arises in the most creative moments of understanding, something that is not described by some kind of cognitive procedures, etc. This is something connected with illumination, insight, an elevated state of mind, when a person rises above his material essence.

* Mutual understanding between believers and non-believers is possible if you show respect for each other. I believe that many problems will be eliminated if we initially recognize that the religious and scientific directions are two fundamentally different, albeit inextricably linked, ways of understanding the phenomenon of spirituality. This is manifested in the search for the sources of the origin of the spirit: science is looking for it in man, and religion in divine revelation. An example of this is our religious philosophers, their contribution to science and culture, which is appreciated by both secular and religious scientists. Another thing is that huge differences exist between scientific and religious knowledge, and especially between religious faith and scientific faith - they are simply fundamental. Scientific faith is built on the concept of plausibility, on the principle of saving psychic energy, which we talked about. We are used to focusing on the most likely situations. S.L. Frank distinguishes between the concepts of "faith-trust" and "faith-certainty." The latter is described by the following example. We all believe that tomorrow we will wake up and the sun will rise, although this is not a fact. But the likelihood that this will not happen is very small, since we have woken up thousands of times and the sun has risen. But the belief that Christ walked on water or fed thousands of the hungry with seven loaves is fundamentally different. It cannot be based on reliability, there are other grounds for faith. After all, these actions of Christ were not repeated a thousand times, so you can believe in them or not believe in them.

* Self-knowledge and self-understanding. These terms should not be confused. This topic has been little studied so far. We usually do both. When we are engaged in self-knowledge, we learn some new traits in ourselves, we open up unexpected opportunities. And self-understanding is the answer to the question why? Why did I do this, why did I answer this way and not otherwise? There is scientific evidence that women are more capable of self-understanding, because they have better developed personal reflection. For example, in experiments, they give more self-definitions purely quantitatively than men. It seems to me that educated people are more capable of self-understanding, who are inclined to think about the qualities of their own character, their own actions, etc. And for people with a low level of education, this need arises less often. But nevertheless, the main reason for self-understanding is the motive, the urge ... The motive is most often our relationships with other people and the incentive, as a rule, there are cases of two types. You said something with good intentions and met with a lack of understanding. You begin to delve into yourself with amazement and try to understand why they did not understand you. Another case, even more significant for Russian culture, with its inherent sense of guilt and shame, when the incentive is that in communication with others you have done something that you would not have done another time under similar circumstances, would not have repeated. And this becomes an incentive to self-understanding (I would call it personal reflection).

* Mother Teresa's daily prayer contains the following words: "May I work to understand my neighbor, and not seek understanding from him ..." loving is more important than being loved.

* For a person, as a person, it is more important to love and in the same way it is more important to understand than to be understood. The labor of understanding another person (the search for those personal properties, features of the worldview and values that contribute to understanding) is much more important than the desire to understand you. It also includes the reverse process: when communicating with a person, you understand him, you turn to those strings of his soul that help him to understand you. Here the limiting case is important, when the question: to understand yourself or to understand you, the former is more important for the development of a person as a person. It is truly work, conscious work, to improve the ability to understand without requiring gratitude for it. As in love ...

* The concept of "meaning" is a very subtle, I would say, the main concept. And always misunderstanding between people arises due to the fact that they put different meanings in the same words. Any word has many meanings, but the meaning for a person has one of the meanings that he chooses, which he is not indifferent to and to which he actively relates. I cannot agree that if people put the same meaning in words, then they may not understand each other. It should be borne in mind that their ethical principles are of great importance for understanding each other. For example, when discussing a topic, they put the same meaning in the meaning of the word, but in addition to this, ethics, ethical ideas have a great influence on the formation of meaning (I have already said that understanding always includes the idea of what is due): how can I or how I can not act in relation to another. Misunderstanding here may be due to the fact that value assessments depend on individual knowledge, the value-semantic sphere of the individual and may be caused, for example, by resentment that you have been misunderstood, etc. Therefore, misunderstanding is always different meanings. But why they arise is another question.

* Human understanding is based not only on reliable forms of knowledge, but also on knowledge that decreases with awareness: conviction, opinion, faith, that which is associated with intuition, etc. Further (the American scientist Paul Ekman devoted almost all of his scientific works to this) it is proved that in understanding, not the verbal factor, but the empathic factor plays an important role. Eyes, smile, facial expressions, gestures, sympathy - everything is of great importance. It is not what the person says that plays a role, but how he behaves at the same time. If a person is antipathetic to you in some way, irritates you in some way, negative emotions, then there can be no feeling of understanding.

* Having empathy plays a major role in creating a sense of understanding, but it is nothing more than a sense of understanding, I will emphasize this. And then, when communicating more closely, understanding can really arise ... But here it is necessary to distinguish between interpersonal understanding and mutual understanding. Mutual understanding is the understanding of people on some specific issues, it is situationally conditioned and is less connected with the understanding of another person. For example, mutual understanding on the issue of disarmament. The two presidents understand each other on this issue, but this does not mean that they understand each other in everything. Understanding of another person is an interpersonal understanding, it is not situationally conditioned, it is the fruit of a long mutual communication, which makes it possible to predict, understand what to expect from a person, know how he thinks, how he will behave. And this is due to the conscious work of understanding another person, and not just simply with the duration of communication.

A presentation that helps us to better understand the other. Understanding is more important than being understood

Hanlon's Razor

Herzberg's motivating factors

View document content ".What helps us to better understand the other" "

Hanlon's Razor

Herzberg's motivating factors

Experience is the son of difficult mistakes ...

Does knowledge always help out?

Assistants - empathy

Read also on the topic:

View document content
".What helps us to better understand the other" "