Non-Violent Communication rapidly grew into a world-spanning movement due to its remarkable ability to avert and dissolve conflict.
(Emphasis mine.)
Is this (the bold part) actually true? I read the Wikipedia page, and it says that NVC has been applied in many situations and contexts, and it also says that NVC is claimed to have a great ability to (as you say) “avert and dissolve conflict”, but also that:
While a number of studies have indicated a high degree of effectiveness, there has been limited academic research into NVC in general.[18] From an evidence-based standpoint, it does not have the same standing as practices such as cognitive-behavioral therapy.
I took a look at some of the links about applications of NVC; they seem to be mostly from NVC practitioners (Marshall Rosenberg or his disciples) talking about how great NVC is, or articles about how someone has applied / is applying NVC somewhere (but not follow-up studies of effectiveness).
If I wanted to view the best evidence for NVC actually having the effects that you allude to, where should I look?
My strongest sources of evidence are first hand, having directly seen it dissolve conflicts many times, and heard similarly from people whose judgement I trust. I’ve not gone looking for more formal assessments, similarly to how when I want to try a self help technique I try it and see if it’s a good fit rather than relying on studies, sometimes with recommendations.
If you’d like good evidence, I suggest trying the same? It’s not super complex to learn and test.
If you’d like good evidence, I suggest trying the same? It’s not super complex to learn and test.
But this would provide me with very nearly no evidence at all that NVC is useful for averting and dissolving the sort of conflict for which it has been touted, and which is usually cited in connection with NVC’s rapid growth into “a world-spanning movement”. (After all, I don’t interact with violent criminals, or refugees in war zones, or even high-level corporate executives, etc. Do you?)
That seems false to me, conflicts between humans share a similar structure across different environments, and generalization is to be expected so evidence in a mild domain is at least indicative of extreme domains. Also, as it happens, I have in fact had extensive interactions with one of the listed subgroups, and they do respond in ways that the reasonable generalizations would expect.
Reading your posts I form a story that you have a strong need to fight back against careless epistemics, which looks from my vantage point like it comes with some rigidity, unwillingness to incorporate forms of evidence that are not extremely well-founded into your models, and maybe a tinge of something that my system reads as contained hostility and superiority. It’s not that extreme here, and my priors might well be coloured by watching clashes between you and other site regulars, but engaging with it brings up some discomfort and a sense that I might end up using bandwidth unproductively.
I don’t super have an ask here, but I do think there’s something here which might be useful to some of your future engagements. I imagine it’s not super fun getting into lots of fights, and I think you can get the good you’re seeking of challenging sloppy reasoning without the downsides with a few adjustments.
(Emphasis mine.)
Is this (the bold part) actually true? I read the Wikipedia page, and it says that NVC has been applied in many situations and contexts, and it also says that NVC is claimed to have a great ability to (as you say) “avert and dissolve conflict”, but also that:
I took a look at some of the links about applications of NVC; they seem to be mostly from NVC practitioners (Marshall Rosenberg or his disciples) talking about how great NVC is, or articles about how someone has applied / is applying NVC somewhere (but not follow-up studies of effectiveness).
If I wanted to view the best evidence for NVC actually having the effects that you allude to, where should I look?
My strongest sources of evidence are first hand, having directly seen it dissolve conflicts many times, and heard similarly from people whose judgement I trust. I’ve not gone looking for more formal assessments, similarly to how when I want to try a self help technique I try it and see if it’s a good fit rather than relying on studies, sometimes with recommendations.
If you’d like good evidence, I suggest trying the same? It’s not super complex to learn and test.
But this would provide me with very nearly no evidence at all that NVC is useful for averting and dissolving the sort of conflict for which it has been touted, and which is usually cited in connection with NVC’s rapid growth into “a world-spanning movement”. (After all, I don’t interact with violent criminals, or refugees in war zones, or even high-level corporate executives, etc. Do you?)
That seems false to me, conflicts between humans share a similar structure across different environments, and generalization is to be expected so evidence in a mild domain is at least indicative of extreme domains. Also, as it happens, I have in fact had extensive interactions with one of the listed subgroups, and they do respond in ways that the reasonable generalizations would expect.
Reading your posts I form a story that you have a strong need to fight back against careless epistemics, which looks from my vantage point like it comes with some rigidity, unwillingness to incorporate forms of evidence that are not extremely well-founded into your models, and maybe a tinge of something that my system reads as contained hostility and superiority. It’s not that extreme here, and my priors might well be coloured by watching clashes between you and other site regulars, but engaging with it brings up some discomfort and a sense that I might end up using bandwidth unproductively.
I don’t super have an ask here, but I do think there’s something here which might be useful to some of your future engagements. I imagine it’s not super fun getting into lots of fights, and I think you can get the good you’re seeking of challenging sloppy reasoning without the downsides with a few adjustments.