The Language of Peace: Exploring Nonviolent Communication
Oct 01, 2024 06:00AM ● By Clarice L. Belcher
But wars are not just between nations; they can be between family members, colleagues, friends and even within individuals.
How, then, can these wars be prevented?
For many, it may be by the conscious use of language—by the words people say to themselves and to others. For many, the words that lead to war are words that lead to hurt and pain—and hurt and pain are life-alienating. Such a language is violent and alienates people from the best in themselves.
For psychologist Marshall Rosenberg, author of the seminal work, Nonviolent Communication, words are crucial. They can either increase or decrease connection. Rosenberg felt that each individual is a compassionate being at heart and that those who hit, scream, yell and curse are disconnected from their essential compassion. They are disconnected because of the way they think and express themselves. In other words, they use words that separate rather than connect.
Many have been carefully trained, educated and enculturated to do so. They were taught at an early age to deny their feelings and needs. In Nonviolent Communication, Rosenberg shares his experience from elementary school when, distraught and in tears over a school incident, the teacher told him, “Big boys don’t get frightened.”
From this early enculturation, supported by family systems, schools and work, people move further and further away from what is real in them—their feelings and needs—until they no longer have the vocabulary for expressing their feelings or needs. Instead, they express strategies—but strategies are not the same as feelings and needs.
A Language of Compassion
In fact, many consider strategies to be the most important part of communicating with others, so they focus their attention on actions without first acknowledging their feelings and needs or the feelings and needs of others. Often, others hear strategies as demands. Unfortunately, though, when people hear a demand, they can perceive it as an attack. Then, defenses appear, and an opening for war begins.
According to Rosenberg, the most important components of communication are feelings and needs—not strategies. Building on the work of the eminent 20th-century psychologist Carl Rogers, Rosenberg developed a new structure for language—a language of compassion. It is based on four components: observation, feelings, needs and requests, sometimes referred to as strategies.
These four components invite connection—not just into what one thinks but into what one feels and experiences. To move from a life-alienating language to a language of compassion, then, calls for clarity about what one observes, feels, needs and requests for meeting their needs.
Without the crucial data offered by our feelings and needs, individuals just exist as talking heads. They might seem to have a lot to say, but very little is actually said. They focus their attention on what to do without considering the feelings and needs of others or themselves. As a result, they often miss the mark, and the deeper connection they often yearn for is lost. But it doesn’t have to be that way.
Needs vs. Strategies
Individuals can choose peace by acknowledging their feelings and needs. Rosenberg’s website, cnvc.org, provides lists of feelings and needs that can be used to help differentiate between the two.
That’s helpful because there is a distinct difference. For example, someone might say “I need,” but they don’t name the need, as in:
I need you to go to the store.
I need a new car.
I need more money.
I need to get a better job.
More specifically, needs answer the question “What?” and are often defined as qualities that sustain a life of well-being. Strategies, on the other hand, usually answer the question “How?”
Rosenberg lists 84 needs on his website. Some of them are socially oriented, and they include connection, affection, belonging, communication, companionship, empathy, intimacy, mutuality and respect.
Some are physical, such as physical well-being, air, food, rest/sleep, safety, shelter and touch.
And some are spiritual, such as honesty, authenticity, integrity, presence, meaning, celebration of life, purpose, to matter, autonomy and choice.
For years, many have been taught that there are only three needs: food, air and shelter. With such a limited set of needs, they are stuck with a very narrow vocabulary to express what is alive in them. The language of compassion not only broadens their vocabulary of needs, it also broadens lives and widens the band of experience. When individuals express their needs, they show up in their lives and the lives of others. They make clear what is truly meaningful to them. When needs are met, people are happy.
Unmet Needs
Many are familiar with the phrase: “Hurt people hurt people.” Why do they hurt people? Because their needs are not met. Rosenburg called the resulting behavior—whether it’s screaming, yelling, cursing, hitting or kicking—“a tragic expression of unmet needs.” He felt it was tragic because it is so difficult to see the need behind the behavior. Choosing to see the pain and unmet needs beyond angry words or actions can make a dramatic difference in helping people stay connected to the best in themselves and others.
The word “need” is a bit frightening to some since some people often confuse need with neediness. They fear that they will be seen as weak if they state their needs explicitly. But it’s simply a matter of confusion about the wording. To clearly express a need—whether it’s a need for support, to be understood, to matter or to be heard—is a show of strength.
Those who want their needs met express those needs out loud. They’ll say, “I need support” or “I need cooperation,” for example. They are clear and specific. No one is hurt by expressing their needs. But, those who are reluctant to state their needs often want others to meet their needs. In this way, they are needy.
When someone becomes interested in meeting everyone’s needs—everyone’s—then trust and connection are enhanced. It is not about “power over” but about “power with.” In this way, language succeeds, and there is no war. Instead, there’s curiosity: “How do we meet our needs?” When individuals are genuinely and sincerely interested in meeting needs, lives are enriched.
There are far more strategies for meeting needs than there are needs themselves. As Rosenberg saw it, there is no competition between needs, nor is there conflict in needs. Suppose one individual is tired and needs rest and another individual is excited and needs play. In that case, there is the opportunity for mutual creativity as individuals explore how to meet their needs together. For example, the first person might take a 20-minute power nap and later join the second person in a 20-minute walk.
Implied and Explicit Feelings
As needs get expressed explicitly, strategies often arise organically. To put strategies first and needs second places the cart before the horse, making it difficult for the horse to move. It is better to acknowledge needs first, then strategies.
Not only is it important to make needs explicit, it is important to make feelings explicit as well. Rosenberg reported that feelings make up 10% of one’s connection to oneself, while needs make up 90%. Feelings, simply put, tell us how well we are meeting our needs. Being precise and specific when naming feelings is also important.
Unfortunately, many of us are trained, educated and enculturated to express our feelings in this way:
I feel that you were unfair.
I feel like everything is hard.
I feel I was wrong to say what I did.
I feel rejected.
Even though the phrase “I feel” appears, none of these examples state a feeling explicitly. What follows “I feel” is a judgment or an interpretation—and that’s not a feeling.
A feeling is the body’s reaction to needs; the information comes from our bodies, not our brains. If a person thinks that someone is being unfair, that individual may well have strong feelings about the unfairness. They might feel enraged, afraid, discouraged or shocked, for example. Then they could say, “I feel enraged” or “I feel shocked.”
The table below shows the difference between implied and explicit feelings:
If an individual feels happy in the moment, the chances are good that their needs are being met. If someone feels anguish, alarm or resentful, then chances are good that their needs are not being met. When someone realizes their needs are not being met, they can choose curiosity over condemnation, blame or shame and ask, “What is the need?” By stating their feelings explicitly, people connect to what is alive in them in the moment.
Observation without Judgment
When observing without judgment, simply leave judgments and interpretations aside and do not let them bias what shows up. When making a judgment—for example, “they are an idiot and a moron”—unpack the judgment and focus on what was seen or heard the moment before the judgment appeared. This can empower people to move beyond judgment into reflecting on feelings and needs, asking: “How do I feel about what I observed?” and “What are my needs around my feelings?”
With clarity around observations, feelings, and needs, strategies are offered last and speak to specific behaviors or actions that would meet a need. Rosenberg recommended that strategies be preceded with the words, “Would you be willing to —?” These words suggest choice rather than demand. Thus, the speaker increases their chance of being heard in the way they want to be heard.
With the perspective that all behavior comes in the service of needs, when we see people’s behaviors through the lenses of feelings and needs, their behaviors are not only less confusing, they invite compassion in the hearts of those around them. War can end, and peace can prevail. ❧
Clarice L. Belcher first learned of Marshall Rosenberg’s seminal work, Nonviolent Communication, in 2001. She currently offers workshops and practice groups on the topic. Contact her at [email protected] or visit AtlantaCompassion.com.
