It’s normal for two people to have differences of opinion, and according to Adler, how well they are handled is an important indicator of emotional intelligence.
As the saying goes, “it takes two to tango”, the contradiction is bound to be the common responsibility of two people, once one party takes a cooperative way to resolve the contradiction, the problem will be easily solved.
And the most basic way to cooperate is to listen and accept.
Conflicts usually take the form of cold war and bickering. Although the form of the argument is more intense and painful, it is still a way of communication, and it is better than the cold war of mutual indifference. Unless the Cold War is a temporary cooling measure to prevent things from getting out of hand, the “three no” mode of no contact, no communication and no cooperation will have little positive effect except to make each other more and more indifferent and distant. Therefore, it is better not to use it as much as possible.
Arguments are useful for communicating information, but they are often ineffective because two people are eager to speak, two mouths are producing at the same time, and neither set of ears is being used much. As a result, there is little communication effect other than catharsis and rivalry.
In order to overwhelm each other in the momentum, the measures taken in addition to raising the volume, is to seize the loopholes of the other side, let the other side do not say, there will be, and finally can only shut up. It seems that one side wins, one side loses, in fact, the distance of two people’s hearts is just to pull further. When you apply the tactics of debate on the field to relationships like this, it’s easy to get left alone.
In view of this, when dealing with differences, both sides or one side, as long as they are willing to give full play to the listening function of their ears, will not quarrel too much, nor will they quarrel for too long.
As we know, whether it is table tennis, badminton or tennis, volleyball, if there is no return, play is not interesting. During the quarrel, if one side does not fight back, does not give the other side new attack “target”, just patiently listen, then the offensive side’s “ammunition” will reach the bottom, the attack will gradually calm down.
Of course, “ceasefire” cannot be equated with “peace”, so another measure is very important: acceptance.
The so-called acceptance, on the one hand, is to selectively pay attention to the common points of mutual agreement, selectively ignore the points of disagreement, seeking common ground while shelving differences; On the other hand, it is to accept each other’s emotions unreservedly, pay full attention to and understand the inner needs behind the emotions, and be the bosom friend of each other.
To be specific, we should try to find out what we should do and what we can do well but not enough from the information delivered by the other party. We should take the initiative to assume our responsibilities and give clear feedback to the other party. As for the other side’s responsibility, avoid it wisely and do not touch it, leaving room for the other side to feel and grow.
There is a saying in psychology that “acceptance promotes growth” because acceptance sends positive signals of safety, attention and respect. In this atmosphere, the person concerned doesn’t have to be on the warpath to fight back, but can let down their guard, open their heart and focus on self-exploration.
It is reasonable and effective social skills to help the other party vent and adjust their emotions through listening, understand their real demands, find the focus of cooperation through acceptance, set an example, take the initiative to assume their own responsibilities, and lead the situation to the direction of solving the problem. As long as both parties have the emotional basis and the willingness to cooperate, things are not difficult to deal with. As for who is the leader of the two, I believe we all have a clear idea and it speaks for itself.
