Why do people sometimes say yes when they think of one’s not?Why do we prefer to shut up and say nothing, if we are actually very clear about what we want, what are the mechanisms behind these situations?Paradoxical communication is responsible.
Day after day, we are immersed in many relationships. Therefore, the purpose of human communication is to achieve understanding with others. Is it that hard to do?
- The relationship we have with others is very determined by the way we communicate.
- Implications.
- Assumptions.
- Errors or ambiguities are not made good friends with communicative clarity.
Specifically, paradoxical communication is a contradiction resulting from a correct inference of coherent premises. While this may seem like an enigma, with this example of mother-daughter conversation you’ll understand better:
Although, of course, the mother’s will was for her daughter to stay for lunch, her words left the decision in the hands of the young woman, the mother thinks something, says otherwise, and her daughter must infer that she would like her to stay. . It will arise between giving in to the mother’s hidden intention or paying attention to the content. Everything you do will influence your mother causing a change in the relationship at that time. This is an example of paradoxical communication.
For the mother’s response to be consistent with what she wants, she should have put it this way:
There are many other cases like this that occur in our daily lives, it is clear that it is not only the content of the message that we want to convey what counts, but the intention behind that message.
Paradoxical communication is based on the diversity of ways in which we can interpret the same message, we doubt the intentions of the other person and we choose to interpret what it tells us in the way that suits us best.
The thing is, this explanation we’ve built won’t necessarily match what the other wants to convey to us. Or yes. Then there is uncertainty, confusion and disagreement.
The more accurate we are in what we want to convey, the less space we will leave for ambiguity and the greater the quality of communication we will have with others.
Paul Watzlawick was an Austrian theorist and psychologist who became a reference in the field of psychotherapy, his research explains why it is sometimes so difficult to achieve metacommunication and so easy to do the opposite: to disagree. knows its 5 axioms of human communication:
For Watzlawick, there are two types of language for expressing the same content: the analog level and the digital level.
In the example above, the mother would convey the message to her daughter in these two types of language:
Just as these two levels can match, they can also be contradicted; language and words alone don’t make double sense, we attribute it to them.
Authors such as Bateson, Jackson, Haley and Wakland continued to delve into this phenomenon and spoke of the existence of a double bond: the paradox of contradiction, and studied this type of paradoxical communication in patients with schizophrenia.
With the results of their research, they explained how the family context and communication influence the appearance and maintenance of this type of pathology, defining the double link as an unhealthy relationship that has the following properties and characteristics:
Bateson illustrated the double bond with a very revealing example: he used the case of a family in which the older brother constantly mocked the younger brother, who was also a very shy child.
The provocation comes to such an extent that the little howl of frustration and helplessness when he feels despised, the consequences are that the brother stops bothering him, but the parents punish him for shouting.
Faced with this situation, the child receives two totally contradictory messages, on the one hand, he must express his feelings to be accepted (not to be provoked), on the other hand, he does not have to do this to be accepted. also (if he screams, the consequences hurt him).
The authors concluded that dual bonding is a form of dysfunctional and unbalanced communication that confuses and confuses people, the subject does not know what to expect and this leads to a number of possible problems and difficulties in his relationship with others and with himself.
As we see, we are surrounded by paradoxical communications and dual links.
When conflicts arise in a romantic relationship, it is customary to look for the problem in the lack of mutual communication, as in the family context, we also send contradictory messages about how we feel or expect from our partner.
The way a husband responds to his wife is revealing, she not only assumes that she is indirectly asking her to keep the piece, but also does not realize that her answer is totally out of context and on the verge of rudeness.
It would be more convenient for him to ask you, “Do you want me to solve the problem?”What do you need??. However, he decides, because of his ingrained beliefs and assumptions, that his intention is not to clean the room.
This shows that both do not communicate their intentions clearly enough; In addition, paradoxical communication is generally not punctual and has a snowball effect, which tends to move from one conversation to another and can become chronic in the relationship.
In joint interviews with the therapist it is possible to observe how a couple vigorously gestculates and makes aggressive criticisms, while disguising their hostility with language that seems affectionate or vice versa.
Identifying the paradox allows, in some cases, to read to the other, to know what he thinks even if he is silent; however, at other times when there is not as much willingness to understand, this can have very detrimental consequences for the relationship. We insist that in order to communicate properly, the first thing we need to do is understand ourselves.
The day you stop making assumptions, you’ll communicate with skill and clarity, without emotional poison.