What do you think?
Rate this book
Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life
Do you hunger for skills to improve the quality of your relationships, to deepen your sense of personal empowerment or to simply communicate more effectively? Unfortunately, for centuries our culture has taught us to think and speak in ways that can actually perpetuate conflict, internal pain and even violence. Nonviolent Communication partners practical skills with a powerful consciousness and vocabulary to help you get what you want peacefully.
In this internationally acclaimed text, Marshall Rosenberg offers insightful stories, anecdotes, practical exercises and role-plays that will dramatically change your approach to communication for the better. Discover how the language you use can strengthen your relationships, build trust, prevent conflicts and heal pain. Revolutionary, yet simple, Nonviolent Communication offers you the most effective tools to reduce violence and create peace in your life—one interaction at a time.
In this internationally acclaimed text, Marshall Rosenberg offers insightful stories, anecdotes, practical exercises and role-plays that will dramatically change your approach to communication for the better. Discover how the language you use can strengthen your relationships, build trust, prevent conflicts and heal pain. Revolutionary, yet simple, Nonviolent Communication offers you the most effective tools to reduce violence and create peace in your life—one interaction at a time.
220 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1999
13.9k people are currently reading
94k people want to read
About the author
Marshall B. Rosenberg
110 books981 followersMarshall Rosenberg was an American psychologist and the creator of Nonviolent Communication, a communication process that helps people to exchange the information necessary to resolve conflicts and differences peacefully. He was the founder and Director of Educational Services for the Center for Nonviolent Communication, an international non-profit organization.
In 1961, Rosenberg received his Ph.D. in clinical psychology from the University of Wisconsin–Madison and in 1966 was awarded Diplomate status in clinical psychology from the American Board of Examiners in Professional Psychology. He lived in Albuquerque, New Mexico, where the Center for Nonviolent Communication's office is located.
In 1961, Rosenberg received his Ph.D. in clinical psychology from the University of Wisconsin–Madison and in 1966 was awarded Diplomate status in clinical psychology from the American Board of Examiners in Professional Psychology. He lived in Albuquerque, New Mexico, where the Center for Nonviolent Communication's office is located.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 4,381 reviews
October 26, 2010
This is the type of book that I would never pick up in a store or library. The design (the earth inside a flower), the subtitle "a language of life," the emphasis on the "Phd" after the author's name - all cues to me of a likely unhelpful, overly cutesy "self-help" book. Blech.
But so many people have recommended this book to me that I looked past these things and recently ordered a used copy. For a moment, I thought I was about to be punished for relaxing my previous resistance. Beware: there is some exceptionally bad "poetry" in this book, most of it concentrated at the beginning.
But - even after the abhorrent sugary couplets almost made me put it down - I continued on, and am generally glad that I did. Rosenberg manages to lay out, in astonishing simplicity, an entire theory of communication in an incredibly practical form. There are surely denser, more theoretical treatments of how the language we use daily impairs not only our ability to interact peaceably with others but also to get the results we want, or how that same language steadily undermines individual autonomy and responsibility, resulting in today's excruciatingly dismal political situation. But few will set out concrete steps for transforming your language that you can begin to practice immediately to great effect. But Rosenberg's book does that, and I think its draw is giving people incredibly simple and powerful tools to deal with deeply-felt, deeply-rooted cultural and social problems.
The emphasis on the importance of changing the ways in which language and thinking are connected for us, in order to restore political power to individuals and communities, is what really sold me on the styles of communication Rosenberg lays out (that is, nonviolent communication, or NVC for short). The analysis to me seems spot-on, and also provides a tool for dealing with the tremendous cynicism, apathy, and sense of powerlessness that exists today - especially where it exists in the same people who carry out actions of which they are critical! I went into the book thinking it would mostly be good for improving some personal relationships and also in organizational work, but I think the potential for NVC is much greater.
In short, I definitely concur with all the previous recommenders of Rosenberg's work. It loses points for style and its ultra cheesy poetry, for sure. But it's definitely worth getting through that to get to the meat of the book's ideas.
But so many people have recommended this book to me that I looked past these things and recently ordered a used copy. For a moment, I thought I was about to be punished for relaxing my previous resistance. Beware: there is some exceptionally bad "poetry" in this book, most of it concentrated at the beginning.
But - even after the abhorrent sugary couplets almost made me put it down - I continued on, and am generally glad that I did. Rosenberg manages to lay out, in astonishing simplicity, an entire theory of communication in an incredibly practical form. There are surely denser, more theoretical treatments of how the language we use daily impairs not only our ability to interact peaceably with others but also to get the results we want, or how that same language steadily undermines individual autonomy and responsibility, resulting in today's excruciatingly dismal political situation. But few will set out concrete steps for transforming your language that you can begin to practice immediately to great effect. But Rosenberg's book does that, and I think its draw is giving people incredibly simple and powerful tools to deal with deeply-felt, deeply-rooted cultural and social problems.
The emphasis on the importance of changing the ways in which language and thinking are connected for us, in order to restore political power to individuals and communities, is what really sold me on the styles of communication Rosenberg lays out (that is, nonviolent communication, or NVC for short). The analysis to me seems spot-on, and also provides a tool for dealing with the tremendous cynicism, apathy, and sense of powerlessness that exists today - especially where it exists in the same people who carry out actions of which they are critical! I went into the book thinking it would mostly be good for improving some personal relationships and also in organizational work, but I think the potential for NVC is much greater.
In short, I definitely concur with all the previous recommenders of Rosenberg's work. It loses points for style and its ultra cheesy poetry, for sure. But it's definitely worth getting through that to get to the meat of the book's ideas.
May 8, 2013
I wish I had read this book a long time ago. "Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life" by Marshall B. Rosenberg, Ph.D. is full of wisdom.
The book starts off by explaining the process of Nonviolent Communication which boils down to four steps:
1. Observe what's happening - what's really going on? What is happening or being said that you either like or dislike?
2. Identify your feelings about it - anger, joy, hopeful, inspired, lonely?
3. Figure out what need you have that is driving that feeling
4. Ask for what you need (explicitly)
When you feel an emotional response to a situation, Rosenberg contends that it's always based on some unmet need. So figure out what that need is and then request (don't demand) for the other person to fulfill it. Use phrases like:
"Would you be willing to set the table?" rather than "Set the table."
So, that's the process of non-violent communication in a nutshell. He then goes on to talk about "communication that blocks compassion," such as moralistic judgements, making comparisons, communication that implies that we do not have responsibility for our own "thoughts, feels and actions," and communicating desires in the form of demands.
The next several chapters delve further into each step of the process. Using great examples from his own workshops and personal experiences, Rosenberg presents each step in a thoughtful and straightforward way with exercises at the end of each chapter to test your understanding of the subject matter.
The book then goes on to explain how to receive communication in an empathic way, which is based on those same principals, but now, your honestly trying to get to the bottom of the other person's needs to find out how you might be able to help fulfill them. He describes different ways that we prevent ourselves from being fully present for someone including: advising, one-upping, educating consoling, story-telling, shutting down, sympathizing, interrogating, explaining and correcting. And, the many benefits of empathy.
Rosenberg refers to all of this compassion and need-filling as finding ways to "enrich our lives or the lives of others." I love that. When you approach every communication with that question, "how can I enrich my life or theirs?" it's amazing how differently you think about approaching a situation!
He says that "NVC's most important use may be in developing self-compassion." One way in which we do this is to recognize that we always have choice. Even if it feels like we don't - we do. There might be ramifications for not doing something that you feel you have no choice in, but you still choose to do it. And, once you realize that there's a choice and WHY you are choosing to do what you are doing, you may actually be able to find a better way - one that makes you happier.
One of the most important chapters in the book has to do with expressing anger. Rosenberg says that NVC doesn't suggest that you can't be angry about anything. Quite the opposite. If you're experiencing anger, you need to fully express it. However, you need to accurately identify the cause of your anger, which is always your own thinking - not someone else's actions. Their actions might have been the catalyst, but the emotion is your own. Then, you basically use the same four steps to work through your anger and attempt to get your needs met.
For me, an HR Lady, one of the most interesting chapters was "Expressing Appreciation in Nonviolent Communication." I've always felt like reward and recognition programs including praise and compliments in most workplaces don't usually provide the intended behavior changes. Now, I think I understand why - the intention behind these practices. Rosenberg states, "recipients of such praise do work harder, but only initially. Once they sense the manipulation behind the appreciation, their productivity drops. What is most disturbing for me, however, is that the beauty of appreciation is spoiled when people begin to notice the lurking entent to get something out of them." From my experience, I believe this is true. So, how do we provide meaningful appreciation? Rosenberg lays out three components:
1. "the actions that have contributed to our well-being."
2. "the particular needs of ours that have been fulfilled."
3. "the pleasureful feelings engendered by the fulfillment of those needs."
If the appreciation is delivered succinctly with all 3 of these components, then the receiver will be much more likely to realize that the appreciation is genuine.
Like I said in the beginning, I wish I had read this book a long time ago. I gained a lot of insight from this book and will definitely be doing more research and reading on nonviolent communication. I think I might order the workbook next.
I started this book yesterday morning and finished the last chapter of it this morning, so it's also a quick and easy read. I give it four stars out of five, only because some of the ways that he states certain questions when trying to take regular communication to the NVC process just do not sound real. I can't imagine someone saying some of the statements that he says we should use in real life and some of the things that he claims to have said to people actually sound pretty harsh to me. Perhaps they did get at the heart of an issue or reveal a "truth" but I'm not sure about the exact means used to get there. Overall a GREAT book!
The book starts off by explaining the process of Nonviolent Communication which boils down to four steps:
1. Observe what's happening - what's really going on? What is happening or being said that you either like or dislike?
2. Identify your feelings about it - anger, joy, hopeful, inspired, lonely?
3. Figure out what need you have that is driving that feeling
4. Ask for what you need (explicitly)
When you feel an emotional response to a situation, Rosenberg contends that it's always based on some unmet need. So figure out what that need is and then request (don't demand) for the other person to fulfill it. Use phrases like:
"Would you be willing to set the table?" rather than "Set the table."
So, that's the process of non-violent communication in a nutshell. He then goes on to talk about "communication that blocks compassion," such as moralistic judgements, making comparisons, communication that implies that we do not have responsibility for our own "thoughts, feels and actions," and communicating desires in the form of demands.
The next several chapters delve further into each step of the process. Using great examples from his own workshops and personal experiences, Rosenberg presents each step in a thoughtful and straightforward way with exercises at the end of each chapter to test your understanding of the subject matter.
The book then goes on to explain how to receive communication in an empathic way, which is based on those same principals, but now, your honestly trying to get to the bottom of the other person's needs to find out how you might be able to help fulfill them. He describes different ways that we prevent ourselves from being fully present for someone including: advising, one-upping, educating consoling, story-telling, shutting down, sympathizing, interrogating, explaining and correcting. And, the many benefits of empathy.
Rosenberg refers to all of this compassion and need-filling as finding ways to "enrich our lives or the lives of others." I love that. When you approach every communication with that question, "how can I enrich my life or theirs?" it's amazing how differently you think about approaching a situation!
He says that "NVC's most important use may be in developing self-compassion." One way in which we do this is to recognize that we always have choice. Even if it feels like we don't - we do. There might be ramifications for not doing something that you feel you have no choice in, but you still choose to do it. And, once you realize that there's a choice and WHY you are choosing to do what you are doing, you may actually be able to find a better way - one that makes you happier.
One of the most important chapters in the book has to do with expressing anger. Rosenberg says that NVC doesn't suggest that you can't be angry about anything. Quite the opposite. If you're experiencing anger, you need to fully express it. However, you need to accurately identify the cause of your anger, which is always your own thinking - not someone else's actions. Their actions might have been the catalyst, but the emotion is your own. Then, you basically use the same four steps to work through your anger and attempt to get your needs met.
For me, an HR Lady, one of the most interesting chapters was "Expressing Appreciation in Nonviolent Communication." I've always felt like reward and recognition programs including praise and compliments in most workplaces don't usually provide the intended behavior changes. Now, I think I understand why - the intention behind these practices. Rosenberg states, "recipients of such praise do work harder, but only initially. Once they sense the manipulation behind the appreciation, their productivity drops. What is most disturbing for me, however, is that the beauty of appreciation is spoiled when people begin to notice the lurking entent to get something out of them." From my experience, I believe this is true. So, how do we provide meaningful appreciation? Rosenberg lays out three components:
1. "the actions that have contributed to our well-being."
2. "the particular needs of ours that have been fulfilled."
3. "the pleasureful feelings engendered by the fulfillment of those needs."
If the appreciation is delivered succinctly with all 3 of these components, then the receiver will be much more likely to realize that the appreciation is genuine.
Like I said in the beginning, I wish I had read this book a long time ago. I gained a lot of insight from this book and will definitely be doing more research and reading on nonviolent communication. I think I might order the workbook next.
I started this book yesterday morning and finished the last chapter of it this morning, so it's also a quick and easy read. I give it four stars out of five, only because some of the ways that he states certain questions when trying to take regular communication to the NVC process just do not sound real. I can't imagine someone saying some of the statements that he says we should use in real life and some of the things that he claims to have said to people actually sound pretty harsh to me. Perhaps they did get at the heart of an issue or reveal a "truth" but I'm not sure about the exact means used to get there. Overall a GREAT book!
May 12, 2015
I stopped at 100 pages in. I think it is important to point out that this method of communicating is decades old. It was not based on any research at the time, it has not been updated in accord with research, and it has not had any research verifying its effectiveness. There is no consensus, there are anecdotes and there are endorsements.
As a method, the process taught inside was not enough to fill the book and the description was padded out. As literature there were lengthy quotes of poetry (of a certain 70s style) that strengthened the impression that this was a somewhat New Age self-help book rather than a book on a proven method of communicating. This impression was bolstered when I learned that Mr. Rosenberg has tied his nonviolent communication method into a sort of homebrew spiritual system (it should be said that many religious leaders endorse the work, so I'm not saying that taking a spiritual view of improving communication is wrong).
Regarding the method itself, I think it is impractical in that it ends up taking a very long time about a spoken paragraph to say what you need to say. I am skeptical of the repeated instructions that amount to refraining from analysis, judgements, or even a proper observation - observing having a limited, idiosyncratic meaning in the context of NVC. I think that using the method as described requires the speaker to frame their speech and compromise their words according to their best guess of what the listener will understand, and rests on a lot of assumptions about what s objective to both parties. I do not think any additional clarity can come of inserting two or more new attempts to pre-empt your conversation partner. In other words, I think NVC is flawed from the ground up, it's base premises, never tried by science, are cracked, not that I think that means anyone who likes it should quit it. As of now, it's as good as the next unstudied communication style, isn't it?
As a method, the process taught inside was not enough to fill the book and the description was padded out. As literature there were lengthy quotes of poetry (of a certain 70s style) that strengthened the impression that this was a somewhat New Age self-help book rather than a book on a proven method of communicating. This impression was bolstered when I learned that Mr. Rosenberg has tied his nonviolent communication method into a sort of homebrew spiritual system (it should be said that many religious leaders endorse the work, so I'm not saying that taking a spiritual view of improving communication is wrong).
Regarding the method itself, I think it is impractical in that it ends up taking a very long time about a spoken paragraph to say what you need to say. I am skeptical of the repeated instructions that amount to refraining from analysis, judgements, or even a proper observation - observing having a limited, idiosyncratic meaning in the context of NVC. I think that using the method as described requires the speaker to frame their speech and compromise their words according to their best guess of what the listener will understand, and rests on a lot of assumptions about what s objective to both parties. I do not think any additional clarity can come of inserting two or more new attempts to pre-empt your conversation partner. In other words, I think NVC is flawed from the ground up, it's base premises, never tried by science, are cracked, not that I think that means anyone who likes it should quit it. As of now, it's as good as the next unstudied communication style, isn't it?
April 22, 2021
While there are ideas that can be adapted to use in this book that make it worth reading, it makes a few claims that could be problematic. Full disclosure, this review is also based on my personal experiences with several NVC counselors.
First some positives.
1. It is is a good attempt at a listening tool to both interpret what others are telling you and in restating things back to someone so they know you understand them and can be worked into the BATHE technique of addressing problems.
2. It is a good way to pause and get to, "know thyself", as Socrates liked to to prescribe. Referring to the lists of feelings when needs are being met and not being met was very helpful in figuring things out about one's self by oing from the black and white feelings (positive vs. negative) to identifying specific feelings . You have to go beyond NVC though and actually think and consider things other than feelings (see below). Applying a little Stoic philosophy helps.
3. It is a way to begin to break out of your communication shell, in both listening and speaking.
4. It a great tool in creating emotional rhetoric.(see below)
A few problems I had with it.
1. NVC touts itself as a New Age/spiritual solution which is met with incredulity for those who already feel skeptical disdain for pseudoscience, which it is.
2. Referring to everything only in terms of needs removes critical thinking from the problem resolution toolbox. In fact Rosenberg refers to the expressions that come from thinking about things as "wolf" language and is to be avoided.
3. No matter how perfectly you fit it into the NVC formula of observation, feeling, needs being met/unmet, request, it is going to sound judgemental to a sensitive or hostile recipient. Even then its going to take a lot of time and effort to work through a lot of misunderstandings that quite frankly, one would hope to avoid by using NVC.
4. Counselors have asked me, "would you rather be right or happy?" This is an instance of black-or-white fallacy, aka, bifurcation, either/or fallacy, or false dilemma and a major fault in the NVC mindset, in my opinion. Ironically this particular false dilemma is also an extremely violent psychological club intended to shame a right fighting interlocutor into quiet submission. Are there no other alternatives? Whatever happened to the goal of win/win? Can't we put a little more effort into being both right and happy?
5. It is too easy to manipulate NVC into an engine of emotional rhetoric to win arguments at all costs. In short, it can be turned into a moralizing, manipulative, and violent psychological club to beat up opponents, which is the opposite of what it is intends to be. Of course rhetoric may be used for good as well as bad, but either way NVC's exclusive appeal to emotion will make any verbal combatant more forceful and coercive. Cicero would be proud.
6. NVC is susceptible to Reductio ad absurdum. Imagine Putin telling the President of the United States, "When I observe you increasing your country's military spending and making more nuclear weapons, I feel scared. I need to feel more secure so I am requesting that you please decrease your country's military spending and reduce your nuclear weapons." Its not a very realistic approach in real world situations.
7. In all crucial conversations there are consequences that need to be considered; these may be consequences to yourself, to others, to the relationship, to the organization, etc. There are also motivations, thoughts, influences, and beliefs that go into a behavior that need to be considered. The NVC discussion avoids these considerations, and not only because they cannot be directly observed and thus fit into the formula. In avoiding these considerations NVC completely removes them as a threat consequently removing any responsibility and accountability from the discussion to claim the title of "non-violent". However in avoiding these aspects of a problem, NVC results in a manipulative moral and emotional blackmail that says, "If you care about my feelings, you will process my request". This in turn creates psychologically violent and antagonistic mindsets of victim hood and blame.
8. Despite what is claimed about its new age/spiritual expectations, NVC is not magic and it is not going to resolve irreconcilable differences. There is a reason they are called irreconcilable.
9. Also, if you are with your significant other, do not tell them when you see them all dressed up to go out with you that you feel proud because it fulfills a need to be respected. Just tell them they look nice. Compliments translated into NVC are just awkward.
First some positives.
1. It is is a good attempt at a listening tool to both interpret what others are telling you and in restating things back to someone so they know you understand them and can be worked into the BATHE technique of addressing problems.
2. It is a good way to pause and get to, "know thyself", as Socrates liked to to prescribe. Referring to the lists of feelings when needs are being met and not being met was very helpful in figuring things out about one's self by oing from the black and white feelings (positive vs. negative) to identifying specific feelings . You have to go beyond NVC though and actually think and consider things other than feelings (see below). Applying a little Stoic philosophy helps.
3. It is a way to begin to break out of your communication shell, in both listening and speaking.
4. It a great tool in creating emotional rhetoric.(see below)
A few problems I had with it.
1. NVC touts itself as a New Age/spiritual solution which is met with incredulity for those who already feel skeptical disdain for pseudoscience, which it is.
2. Referring to everything only in terms of needs removes critical thinking from the problem resolution toolbox. In fact Rosenberg refers to the expressions that come from thinking about things as "wolf" language and is to be avoided.
3. No matter how perfectly you fit it into the NVC formula of observation, feeling, needs being met/unmet, request, it is going to sound judgemental to a sensitive or hostile recipient. Even then its going to take a lot of time and effort to work through a lot of misunderstandings that quite frankly, one would hope to avoid by using NVC.
4. Counselors have asked me, "would you rather be right or happy?" This is an instance of black-or-white fallacy, aka, bifurcation, either/or fallacy, or false dilemma and a major fault in the NVC mindset, in my opinion. Ironically this particular false dilemma is also an extremely violent psychological club intended to shame a right fighting interlocutor into quiet submission. Are there no other alternatives? Whatever happened to the goal of win/win? Can't we put a little more effort into being both right and happy?
5. It is too easy to manipulate NVC into an engine of emotional rhetoric to win arguments at all costs. In short, it can be turned into a moralizing, manipulative, and violent psychological club to beat up opponents, which is the opposite of what it is intends to be. Of course rhetoric may be used for good as well as bad, but either way NVC's exclusive appeal to emotion will make any verbal combatant more forceful and coercive. Cicero would be proud.
6. NVC is susceptible to Reductio ad absurdum. Imagine Putin telling the President of the United States, "When I observe you increasing your country's military spending and making more nuclear weapons, I feel scared. I need to feel more secure so I am requesting that you please decrease your country's military spending and reduce your nuclear weapons." Its not a very realistic approach in real world situations.
7. In all crucial conversations there are consequences that need to be considered; these may be consequences to yourself, to others, to the relationship, to the organization, etc. There are also motivations, thoughts, influences, and beliefs that go into a behavior that need to be considered. The NVC discussion avoids these considerations, and not only because they cannot be directly observed and thus fit into the formula. In avoiding these considerations NVC completely removes them as a threat consequently removing any responsibility and accountability from the discussion to claim the title of "non-violent". However in avoiding these aspects of a problem, NVC results in a manipulative moral and emotional blackmail that says, "If you care about my feelings, you will process my request". This in turn creates psychologically violent and antagonistic mindsets of victim hood and blame.
8. Despite what is claimed about its new age/spiritual expectations, NVC is not magic and it is not going to resolve irreconcilable differences. There is a reason they are called irreconcilable.
9. Also, if you are with your significant other, do not tell them when you see them all dressed up to go out with you that you feel proud because it fulfills a need to be respected. Just tell them they look nice. Compliments translated into NVC are just awkward.
July 25, 2021
This book is all about one of the Four Agreements: Be impeccable with your word. Mind what you say to others because you never know how your words might affect them.
I agree that it's very important to try to be as kind and understanding as possible, but the communication technique that Rosenberg encourages in this book is too steeped in psychotherapy to be of any practical use.
The Four Components of Non-Violent Communication:
1. observations
2. feelings
3. needs
4. requests
For example, a mother is frustrated that her son keeps throwing his dirty clothes on the floor. Rosenberg suggests that she say, "Felix, when I see two balls of soiled socks under the coffee table and another three next to the TV (observation), I feel irritated (feelings) because I am needing more order in the rooms that we share in common (needs). Would you be willing to put your socks in your room or in the washing machine? (request)"
What?! No.
She's his mother, for shit sake, not hotel housekeeping. How about, "Felix, please put your socks in your room or in the washing machine." She can say it just as kindly, but not so much like a doormat.
When responding to someone's expression of frustration, Rosenberg suggests we acknowledge them by saying something like this:
So you're furious and would appreciate some support.
Sounds like you're feeling very desperate.
I hear how painful it is for you.
...which is all well and good, but it doesn't solve anything. "I hear that you're frustrated" doesn't do anything to alleviate the frustration. Instead it creates the sense of aloofness and distance, when the person is actually seeking a connection, empathy.
Rosenberg gives an example of a man in a rush to catch his flight. He's on the shuttle that takes you between terminals. He turns to his wife and says, "I have never seen a train go so slow in all my life!" The author says that his wife's best response is, "It sounds like you're scared we might miss our plane, and disgusted because you'd like a faster train running between these terminals."
OMG. How frustrating would that response be?! At best it's detached and noncommittal, and perhaps a little condescending because his wife hasn't shown any empathy, which is what the man is really looking for. A much better response would be, "Yes, it does seem to be going at a snail's pace." Even though neither response makes the train go faster, at least the second one shows the man that he is not alone.
When I read books like this (observation), I feel exasperated (feelings) because they don't give practical solutions to real life problems (needs). I would like to stop reading this book now (request).
It sounds like you're frustrated because you hoped this book would be better...
I agree that it's very important to try to be as kind and understanding as possible, but the communication technique that Rosenberg encourages in this book is too steeped in psychotherapy to be of any practical use.
The Four Components of Non-Violent Communication:
1. observations
2. feelings
3. needs
4. requests
For example, a mother is frustrated that her son keeps throwing his dirty clothes on the floor. Rosenberg suggests that she say, "Felix, when I see two balls of soiled socks under the coffee table and another three next to the TV (observation), I feel irritated (feelings) because I am needing more order in the rooms that we share in common (needs). Would you be willing to put your socks in your room or in the washing machine? (request)"
What?! No.
She's his mother, for shit sake, not hotel housekeeping. How about, "Felix, please put your socks in your room or in the washing machine." She can say it just as kindly, but not so much like a doormat.
When responding to someone's expression of frustration, Rosenberg suggests we acknowledge them by saying something like this:
So you're furious and would appreciate some support.
Sounds like you're feeling very desperate.
I hear how painful it is for you.
...which is all well and good, but it doesn't solve anything. "I hear that you're frustrated" doesn't do anything to alleviate the frustration. Instead it creates the sense of aloofness and distance, when the person is actually seeking a connection, empathy.
Rosenberg gives an example of a man in a rush to catch his flight. He's on the shuttle that takes you between terminals. He turns to his wife and says, "I have never seen a train go so slow in all my life!" The author says that his wife's best response is, "It sounds like you're scared we might miss our plane, and disgusted because you'd like a faster train running between these terminals."
OMG. How frustrating would that response be?! At best it's detached and noncommittal, and perhaps a little condescending because his wife hasn't shown any empathy, which is what the man is really looking for. A much better response would be, "Yes, it does seem to be going at a snail's pace." Even though neither response makes the train go faster, at least the second one shows the man that he is not alone.
When I read books like this (observation), I feel exasperated (feelings) because they don't give practical solutions to real life problems (needs). I would like to stop reading this book now (request).
It sounds like you're frustrated because you hoped this book would be better...
June 29, 2012
I've read this book before, years ago and was enormously impressed with the ideas in it. However, I found it difficult to put the ideas into practice. Am now currently taking a course in Rosenberg's Nonviolent Communication theory and have renewed hope about my ability to put the ideas into practice. I figure if I can learn to communicate with compassion it will be the first step towards being a wise person! :)
A warning about this book: If you'd rather remain blissfully ignorant of your own emotional baggage and related personal issues then don't open this book!
A warning about this book: If you'd rather remain blissfully ignorant of your own emotional baggage and related personal issues then don't open this book!
December 15, 2017
Essential reading even if I am like 2 decades too late to reading this. I've already started using it and though I probably sound like a moron, I'm confident I'll get better at talking through my needs. Everyone just wants to be loved and we just keep asking for it the wrong way.
March 26, 2018
The best book I've read about communication, interpersonal relationships, and resolving conflicts. I have a strong feeling that this will be the best I've ever read about the subjects.
September 20, 2019
This book was hugely useful, and I'm really grateful for these communication strategies. So why then would my review be mostly criticism? If Marshall B. Rosenberg were here he'd get to the root of it. He'd ask me an empathetic question like "Are you feeling _____ because _____ and needing _____?" And I'd say yes Marshall I am. I totally am.
Rosenberg is right that words are powerful. But I'm not sure they carry ALL the power. I don't believe you can always make something right just by knowing the right words. For instance, you can't just name your chapter "Expressing Anger Fully" when the chapter is, let's be real, about no longer having anger because you are enlightened (or repressed? Always hard to distinguish between the two). The words alone can't make it so.
Or say you need to tell someone something that they're not going to like. Rosenberg suggests you can word it in a way that will 'invite compassion.' If you say it right, you'll get compassion; say it wrong, you are instead inviting anger and violence. I spent my 20s thinking that any time someone was upset with me it was because I worded things wrong. Often they would push this analysis, saying I should have told them at a better time or in a different manner. I would beat myself up over being so bad at communication. The best gift of my 30s is to learn that sometimes it has nothing to do with HOW I phrase something -- it's the content itself that people dislike. When they blame their reaction on my wording they're sometimes just scapegoating.
With so much weight put on the words, I fear it risks victim-blaming. Well of course he responded with anger and violence, since you said it that way!
I'm not sure words are so powerful that speaking the right way will resolve every conflict. Rosenberg says that true "emotional liberation" comes with the realization that "we can never meet our own needs at the expense of others." His examples of proper communication are always of people who both get what they want. I admire that he's moving beyond the 'scarcity thinking' that assumes only one person can 'win' in a conflict. I think this is often useful and true! But is it always? In Rosenberg's examples, the couples in crisis always live happily ever after once they figure out NVC. But couldn't there be a case where someone needed out of a relationship, even though they both practiced NVC? Would getting out be a failure -- 'meeting your own needs at the expense of others'?
I also don't trust that words can undo power hierarchies. Rosenberg gives admirable examples of school kids eventually doing what he wants them to do. He thinks this is solely because he's expressing and inviting empathy. But what about the power imbalance here? Because of his role, he still has the ability to punish these children, even if he doesn't believe in punishment. As long as a structural power imbalance exists, you can't undo it with the right sentence. And if he did succeed in undoing it, would the kids actually sit and listen like he wants them to? Maybe they would, I don't know.
But this leads to the big questions of power imbalance: structural injustice. I feel really uncomfortable about the claim that NVC alone can solve issues of structural injustice and environmental damage.
The forward to this book was written by Deepak Chopra. His second paragraph begins: "The contorted faces of protestors on the streets that make such disturbing images on the evening news..." Those contorted faces, those disturbing images. Does he mean the faces of the Black Lives Matter movement, the faces of Standing Rock, the faces of MeToo, the faces of Never Again is Now? Are those the faces he means? Because yes, these people are angry, and it does show on their faces. And at least while they're protesting they they aren't listening empathetically to the killer cops / polluters / rapists / concentration camp builders. And of course in these movements there is also togetherness and joy and prayer and peace, but the anger remains, and images of it might, I fear, disturb you, Deepak.
I applaud Rosenberg for spending an entire chapter of his book on the evil done without emotion, as with Eichmann. But he also insists that 'righteous indignation' always "contributes tangibly to violence on the planet." His only solution to injustice is a conversation, where you express what you personally are needing.
I've seen this kind of thinking being used to police very mild and reasonable expressions of anger at demonstrations. Instead of mass protest or direct action, we are reprimanded that we need to 'continue engaging in talks' with the side that is killing kids or the planet. We just need to figure out how to say it, and they're sure to come around, right?
I've become so snarky writing this review, but that's not the full truth of it either. These skills are so useful, I got a lot out of this book, and Rosenberg isn't personally responsible if people use his ideas in awful ways. I just want my community to be able to critique these ideas when they're being used in their own, ahem, 'life-alienating' ways.
Rosenberg is right that words are powerful. But I'm not sure they carry ALL the power. I don't believe you can always make something right just by knowing the right words. For instance, you can't just name your chapter "Expressing Anger Fully" when the chapter is, let's be real, about no longer having anger because you are enlightened (or repressed? Always hard to distinguish between the two). The words alone can't make it so.
Or say you need to tell someone something that they're not going to like. Rosenberg suggests you can word it in a way that will 'invite compassion.' If you say it right, you'll get compassion; say it wrong, you are instead inviting anger and violence. I spent my 20s thinking that any time someone was upset with me it was because I worded things wrong. Often they would push this analysis, saying I should have told them at a better time or in a different manner. I would beat myself up over being so bad at communication. The best gift of my 30s is to learn that sometimes it has nothing to do with HOW I phrase something -- it's the content itself that people dislike. When they blame their reaction on my wording they're sometimes just scapegoating.
With so much weight put on the words, I fear it risks victim-blaming. Well of course he responded with anger and violence, since you said it that way!
I'm not sure words are so powerful that speaking the right way will resolve every conflict. Rosenberg says that true "emotional liberation" comes with the realization that "we can never meet our own needs at the expense of others." His examples of proper communication are always of people who both get what they want. I admire that he's moving beyond the 'scarcity thinking' that assumes only one person can 'win' in a conflict. I think this is often useful and true! But is it always? In Rosenberg's examples, the couples in crisis always live happily ever after once they figure out NVC. But couldn't there be a case where someone needed out of a relationship, even though they both practiced NVC? Would getting out be a failure -- 'meeting your own needs at the expense of others'?
I also don't trust that words can undo power hierarchies. Rosenberg gives admirable examples of school kids eventually doing what he wants them to do. He thinks this is solely because he's expressing and inviting empathy. But what about the power imbalance here? Because of his role, he still has the ability to punish these children, even if he doesn't believe in punishment. As long as a structural power imbalance exists, you can't undo it with the right sentence. And if he did succeed in undoing it, would the kids actually sit and listen like he wants them to? Maybe they would, I don't know.
But this leads to the big questions of power imbalance: structural injustice. I feel really uncomfortable about the claim that NVC alone can solve issues of structural injustice and environmental damage.
The forward to this book was written by Deepak Chopra. His second paragraph begins: "The contorted faces of protestors on the streets that make such disturbing images on the evening news..." Those contorted faces, those disturbing images. Does he mean the faces of the Black Lives Matter movement, the faces of Standing Rock, the faces of MeToo, the faces of Never Again is Now? Are those the faces he means? Because yes, these people are angry, and it does show on their faces. And at least while they're protesting they they aren't listening empathetically to the killer cops / polluters / rapists / concentration camp builders. And of course in these movements there is also togetherness and joy and prayer and peace, but the anger remains, and images of it might, I fear, disturb you, Deepak.
I applaud Rosenberg for spending an entire chapter of his book on the evil done without emotion, as with Eichmann. But he also insists that 'righteous indignation' always "contributes tangibly to violence on the planet." His only solution to injustice is a conversation, where you express what you personally are needing.
I've seen this kind of thinking being used to police very mild and reasonable expressions of anger at demonstrations. Instead of mass protest or direct action, we are reprimanded that we need to 'continue engaging in talks' with the side that is killing kids or the planet. We just need to figure out how to say it, and they're sure to come around, right?
I've become so snarky writing this review, but that's not the full truth of it either. These skills are so useful, I got a lot out of this book, and Rosenberg isn't personally responsible if people use his ideas in awful ways. I just want my community to be able to critique these ideas when they're being used in their own, ahem, 'life-alienating' ways.
September 10, 2013
I listened to (i.e., did not read) this book in the car. Without any doubt, the concepts contained in it should be taught to the young in this country. And the old. And all over the world.
I'm not sure this was the best presentation of it, and the book is dated. The audiobook, in particular, was quite a struggle to get through. One of my pet peeves is when an author makes up stories and then claims them to be true when he tells them, pointing out how the story just so naturally fits in with his theories. Here, Rosenberg claims to have discussions where he (or, worse, the other person), says things like, "So I asked him, it seems to me that you are expressing some discomfort..." Well, Marshall, you never said that. If you did, any normal person would look at you like you were from outer space because human beings do not interact like that. Again, the concepts are spot-on, the delivery lacks.
I'm not sure this was the best presentation of it, and the book is dated. The audiobook, in particular, was quite a struggle to get through. One of my pet peeves is when an author makes up stories and then claims them to be true when he tells them, pointing out how the story just so naturally fits in with his theories. Here, Rosenberg claims to have discussions where he (or, worse, the other person), says things like, "So I asked him, it seems to me that you are expressing some discomfort..." Well, Marshall, you never said that. If you did, any normal person would look at you like you were from outer space because human beings do not interact like that. Again, the concepts are spot-on, the delivery lacks.
October 15, 2024
So so good
November 28, 2023
این کتاب واقعا فوقالعاده بود. یه چیزی بهتر از خوب. برای من، واقعا کمککننده و روشنکننده بود. ✨
نوری تابوند به شیوهٔ ارتباطم با آدمها.
دلم میخواد تکتک کسایی که میشناسم رو مجبور کنم بخوننش. گرچه با توجه به جلد بینهایت زشتش، و فضایی که کتابهای روانشناسی درست کردن، گارد خیلی زیادی وجود داره براش، و خب سخت میشه کار آدم. :)) ولی…
نمیدونم چطور بهتون بگم که چطوریه. چقدر ساده، واقعی، و درست چیزها رو توضیح میده و ذهنش رو روی واقعیتهای تلخ جهان نبسته. یا دنیا رو برای خودش کوچیک نکرده. یا حتی نمیتونم بگم چیزی بهتون میگه که خارقالعادهست و شما قبل از این نمیدونستید. نه! اینطور نیست. ولی به نکات کوچک و ظریفی توجه میکنه که در همهٔ زندگی کاربرد داره. تفاوتهای زبانی خیلی ریزی که باعث تفاوتهای بزرگ میشن.
——
در مدتی که داشتم کتاب رو میخوندم سعی میکردم از چیزهایی که گفته استفاده کنم، و به طرز عجیبی مؤثر بود. مخصوصا روی رابطهم با مامانم. خیلی جاهاش گریه کردم. چون احساس میکردم یکی درکم کرده. واقعا همراهش احساس همدلی میکردم. انگار یکی نازم میکرد و میگفت میفهمم رعنا.
—
خلاصه که توروخدا بهش گارد نداشته باشید. و جلدش رو که یه نماد بینالمللی هم هست مثکه، تحمل کنید و بخونیدش. امیدوارم برای شما هم تجربه خوبی باشه. 💙
نوری تابوند به شیوهٔ ارتباطم با آدمها.
دلم میخواد تکتک کسایی که میشناسم رو مجبور کنم بخوننش. گرچه با توجه به جلد بینهایت زشتش، و فضایی که کتابهای روانشناسی درست کردن، گارد خیلی زیادی وجود داره براش، و خب سخت میشه کار آدم. :)) ولی…
نمیدونم چطور بهتون بگم که چطوریه. چقدر ساده، واقعی، و درست چیزها رو توضیح میده و ذهنش رو روی واقعیتهای تلخ جهان نبسته. یا دنیا رو برای خودش کوچیک نکرده. یا حتی نمیتونم بگم چیزی بهتون میگه که خارقالعادهست و شما قبل از این نمیدونستید. نه! اینطور نیست. ولی به نکات کوچک و ظریفی توجه میکنه که در همهٔ زندگی کاربرد داره. تفاوتهای زبانی خیلی ریزی که باعث تفاوتهای بزرگ میشن.
——
در مدتی که داشتم کتاب رو میخوندم سعی میکردم از چیزهایی که گفته استفاده کنم، و به طرز عجیبی مؤثر بود. مخصوصا روی رابطهم با مامانم. خیلی جاهاش گریه کردم. چون احساس میکردم یکی درکم کرده. واقعا همراهش احساس همدلی میکردم. انگار یکی نازم میکرد و میگفت میفهمم رعنا.
—
خلاصه که توروخدا بهش گارد نداشته باشید. و جلدش رو که یه نماد بینالمللی هم هست مثکه، تحمل کنید و بخونیدش. امیدوارم برای شما هم تجربه خوبی باشه. 💙
February 19, 2011
In some of the circles I move, this book (or rather NVC in general) frequently gets a bad rap for being focused on communication and how sometimes it feels manipulative and stilted for those on the receiving end of someone practicing it. About 2/3rds of the content of the book is dedicated to the how's of the communication, so I think its easy to see why folks feel this way and to then dismiss it as a specialized form of talking. But focusing on the remaining 1/3rd of the book (which is spread out among the other how points), that addresses the why's, it becomes apparent why this is such a hugely significant work. It provides a framework for understanding the dynamics in all relationships that is based on compassion not a self centered world view (including the chapter on compassion for the self).
January 29, 2010
While many of the techniques presented in this slim volume are entirely worthwhile and of great value in making oneself clear and defusing potentially tense communications, I still disagree with some of the author's fundamental categorization of "needs." While it may be useful, or even necessary under certain circumstances, to address the desires of another person in addition to, or even perhaps prior to, their needs, I continue to maintain that there is an important distinction to be made between genuine human needs and mere desires, and that kowtowing excessively to the desires of others, while entirely likely to smooth out an otherwise difficult conversation, is of limited value in the long-term. Reinforcing the legitimacy, to say nothing of the primacy, of such desires can go quite a way toward reifying them in the minds of their holders, and thence to create an increased sense of entitlement. All that said, I still find the techniques described to be extremely useful, especially in such cases as "arguing about the toothpaste" when there is clearly a deeper and more important issue underlying a given conflict. What flaws there are, in many instances, are more the flaws of novice to intermediate practitioners of NVC rather than of the author himself, as is shown in many of the included examples.
May 29, 2023
How do you write a review for a book that literally changes one's life?
I went through this training several years ago not so much to be a mediator, but to add to my experience as a communicator, and to continue my journey at becoming the best I could be as an effective college instructor and director.
I wanted to always connect with people. With my students. To be a better listener.
This training with this book as the main "textbook" was at the core. And this book through stories, examples and role plays, provided a deeper understanding of the core components of the non-violent communication process.
For me, it wasn't about non-violence in communication. I just wanted people to listen to each other. So, many people aren't available to hear what another person is saying. Typically they are just ready with their own retort. And if it is an anger moment, usually no-one hears the other. But what this process is wanting us to know is...
The language of life...
Empathy.
Collaboration.
Authenticity.
Freedom.
Words matter.
The way we think matters.
If we want to live with connection we want to be empathetic with self and others.
This isn't really a review of a book. It is how this book affected me.
It was a change of life for me.
I hear you. I see you. I feel you. You matter. I matter. Let's listen to one another.
To put it simply...
Here is the only "math" equation I ever taught my students:
E + R = O
E is the Event
R is your Reaction to the Event
O is the Outcome
What do you want the outcome to be in this discussion? You always have choice.
I went through this training several years ago not so much to be a mediator, but to add to my experience as a communicator, and to continue my journey at becoming the best I could be as an effective college instructor and director.
I wanted to always connect with people. With my students. To be a better listener.
This training with this book as the main "textbook" was at the core. And this book through stories, examples and role plays, provided a deeper understanding of the core components of the non-violent communication process.
For me, it wasn't about non-violence in communication. I just wanted people to listen to each other. So, many people aren't available to hear what another person is saying. Typically they are just ready with their own retort. And if it is an anger moment, usually no-one hears the other. But what this process is wanting us to know is...
The language of life...
Empathy.
Collaboration.
Authenticity.
Freedom.
Words matter.
The way we think matters.
If we want to live with connection we want to be empathetic with self and others.
This isn't really a review of a book. It is how this book affected me.
It was a change of life for me.
I hear you. I see you. I feel you. You matter. I matter. Let's listen to one another.
To put it simply...
Here is the only "math" equation I ever taught my students:
E + R = O
E is the Event
R is your Reaction to the Event
O is the Outcome
What do you want the outcome to be in this discussion? You always have choice.
February 5, 2014
Life-changing. Everyone should read this. Rosenberg has well over three decades of experience and stories, and delivers it well.
My key takeaways:
* Using "I feel" for everything is a good start but doesn't go far enough. Still need to connect to self needs and specific actions of others.
* Use needs to find common human ground, especially when you disagree strongly with someone.
* Not everything needs to be "fixed". People want to be heard / listened to / empathised with.
My key takeaways:
* Using "I feel" for everything is a good start but doesn't go far enough. Still need to connect to self needs and specific actions of others.
* Use needs to find common human ground, especially when you disagree strongly with someone.
* Not everything needs to be "fixed". People want to be heard / listened to / empathised with.
May 22, 2019
Un ghid de conversatie om-om. Fiecare om, cu nevoile sale - implinite sau nu. Cu sentimentele sale - exprimate sau nu.
Un ghid care ne invata sa ne folosim de cuvinte pentru a vedea ce se afla dincolo de ele. Recomand!
Un ghid care ne invata sa ne folosim de cuvinte pentru a vedea ce se afla dincolo de ele. Recomand!
October 9, 2019
"Nonviolent Communication" might be a bit eyeroll-inducing, the concept of "When you X, I feel Y" statements are a cliche at this point. But push through it, this book is invaluable in improving communication skills.
I'm not sure any book has had as much of an impact on my ability to communicate effectively with other people. True, it's not "in my nature" but I'm hoping to fake it until I make it with this stuff, because I've noticed a marked difference with how coworkers seem to view interactions with me after employing the skills this book teaches, not to mention improved communication with my wife and even better parenting with my children.
It really is a game-changer, it takes work to think and operate this way but the payoff is huge. Hopefully with time this will become second nature to me (fingers crossed) but until then even being slow and deliberate with how I talk to people (including myself) to make sure I'm following the steps in this book is worth the payoff, everyone seems to really enjoy this manner of communicating, but I don't feel like a pushover. Even though my wife hasn't read the book, I can guide her through the feelings-based thinking when she's struggling with other people and it winds up really being useful.
The book itself is a little long-winded, it takes a bit too long to get to the point at times and you can feel things being repeated over and over. This may be to ensure that all readers have a chance to understand everything but it can be slightly frustrating when you feel like you get the material and want to keep moving on. Nonetheless this book is essential reading, I can't think of anyone I wouldn't recommend it to. Approach with an open mind and you'll be better for the experience.
I'm not sure any book has had as much of an impact on my ability to communicate effectively with other people. True, it's not "in my nature" but I'm hoping to fake it until I make it with this stuff, because I've noticed a marked difference with how coworkers seem to view interactions with me after employing the skills this book teaches, not to mention improved communication with my wife and even better parenting with my children.
It really is a game-changer, it takes work to think and operate this way but the payoff is huge. Hopefully with time this will become second nature to me (fingers crossed) but until then even being slow and deliberate with how I talk to people (including myself) to make sure I'm following the steps in this book is worth the payoff, everyone seems to really enjoy this manner of communicating, but I don't feel like a pushover. Even though my wife hasn't read the book, I can guide her through the feelings-based thinking when she's struggling with other people and it winds up really being useful.
The book itself is a little long-winded, it takes a bit too long to get to the point at times and you can feel things being repeated over and over. This may be to ensure that all readers have a chance to understand everything but it can be slightly frustrating when you feel like you get the material and want to keep moving on. Nonetheless this book is essential reading, I can't think of anyone I wouldn't recommend it to. Approach with an open mind and you'll be better for the experience.
August 16, 2013
It's a difficult read (for me - because it's not a story) but well worth the time. I needed help speaking with both my son and students in a way that respects and empathizes with their own "stuff" instead of taking things personally. Honestly, I'm just sick of being defensive all the time. I don't have enough practice yet, but I plan to attend some seminars and read all his other books. A world without war. holla.
January 15, 2020
What an unbelievably helpful and practical book!
I really wish I'd read this 10-15 years ago. I'm sure it would've helped better navigate relationships, professionals challenges, and the process of growing up.
Even so, the nonviolent communication framework is an incredibly powerful mental tool to have at any age. The examples in the book have shown me the potential to build stronger relationships and have more profound, more helpful conversations with both others and myself.
I've already started practicing it and will invest more time and resources this year into internalizing this approach.
What I loved about the book is how approachable it is and how much clarity it brings to difficult and highly nuanced situations.
I really wish I'd read this 10-15 years ago. I'm sure it would've helped better navigate relationships, professionals challenges, and the process of growing up.
Even so, the nonviolent communication framework is an incredibly powerful mental tool to have at any age. The examples in the book have shown me the potential to build stronger relationships and have more profound, more helpful conversations with both others and myself.
I've already started practicing it and will invest more time and resources this year into internalizing this approach.
What I loved about the book is how approachable it is and how much clarity it brings to difficult and highly nuanced situations.
February 15, 2025
✒️ Marshall Rosenberg presenta en "Comunicación no violenta" cómo conectar con las emociones propias y de terceros para lograr una comunicación más sincera, respetuosa y empática con la que resolver conflictos de pareja/grupo, aprender a expresarte (familia, pareja, trabajo, amigos,...) encajar mejor las negativas, dejar de hacer cosas por obligación, no buscar agradar a todo el mundo, superar sentimientos como la ira, la culpa, la tristeza y tener un diálogo interior más equilibrado, entre otros consejos.
🔝 Puntos fuertes:
- Lenguaje claro y sencillo.
- Lectura amena y fácil.
- Multitud de ejemplos de la vida cotidiana y varios ejercicios para aprender técnicas para comunicarte de manera más eficaz contigo mismo y con tu entorno.
🔝 Puntos fuertes:
- Lenguaje claro y sencillo.
- Lectura amena y fácil.
- Multitud de ejemplos de la vida cotidiana y varios ejercicios para aprender técnicas para comunicarte de manera más eficaz contigo mismo y con tu entorno.
April 23, 2014
I highly recommend this life-changing book. It revolutionized my thinking. It's such an excellent guide to communicating, that I wish I had been taught this stuff in Kindergarten, and again in middle school and high school. The book emphasizes personal responsibility. It empowers one to fully experience one's emotions without being controlled by them. It gives you permission to experience the full spectrum of human emotions, not just the "good" ones like happiness. It integrates human rationality and emotionality more thoroughly than any text I've ever read, by showing how our emotions are RATIONAL responses to observations of met or unmet needs. It differentiates between observations and one's thoughts and judgments about those observations, and shows us thoroughly that it is the latter to which we react. The only problem with this book is, it makes you wish every human being alive had read it! That, however, is not necessary in order to use non-violent communication techniques effectively.
June 1, 2011
A brilliant handbook for how to talk to people without judging them, alienating them, or really pissing them off. The book is enlivened with a number of transcripts of conversations in which the author and his acquaintances get it right sometimes and fail at other times. The basic idea will be familiar to anyone who has had a little therapy or knows a therapist: you talk about your feelings, not what the other person is doing wrong. Of course, that is difficult to do under the best of circumstances, and well-nigh impossible when everyone present is stressed out or furious or violent. But with lots of practice, you can get better at the art of communication and learn to avoid saying things like, "Why did you do that? That's really stupid."
September 26, 2021
امتیازم به کتاب ۶ هست! بخاطر بعضی نارسایی های ترجمه یک ستاره کم کردم:)
گذشته از شوخی فوقالعادهس این کتاب و این روش.
"به راستی هرکسی صحبت میکند میتواند از خواندن این کتاب سود ببرد. این روش به ما کمک می کند نه تنها به قدرت کلمات پی ببریم بلکه چگونه از انتخاب بهتر کلماتمان استفاده کنیم تا در نهایت روابط فردی و اجتماعی خود را بهبود بخشید. به شدت توصیه می شود!"
بعد از خوندن این کتاب فهمیدم چقدر برای همدلی کردن، قدردانی کردن، حرف زدن با خودم، تقاضا کردن و حتی حمایت کردن بیراهه میرفتم. در یک کلام امکان نداره از خوندنش پشیمون بشید.
گذشته از شوخی فوقالعادهس این کتاب و این روش.
"به راستی هرکسی صحبت میکند میتواند از خواندن این کتاب سود ببرد. این روش به ما کمک می کند نه تنها به قدرت کلمات پی ببریم بلکه چگونه از انتخاب بهتر کلماتمان استفاده کنیم تا در نهایت روابط فردی و اجتماعی خود را بهبود بخشید. به شدت توصیه می شود!"
بعد از خوندن این کتاب فهمیدم چقدر برای همدلی کردن، قدردانی کردن، حرف زدن با خودم، تقاضا کردن و حتی حمایت کردن بیراهه میرفتم. در یک کلام امکان نداره از خوندنش پشیمون بشید.
March 23, 2023
The core ideas in this book are sound, and it does seem likely that someone striving to implement
them in the way they communicate, especially how they communicate when in conflict, will see some of their relationships improve and some conflicts resolved.
This review is for the BOOK not for NVC as such. The actual core ideas of this book I'd give 4 stars, it's the presentation in this book that I think is severly enough flawed to deserve a couple stars less.
On a positive note, the writing is clear, and the book is an easy and fairly short read, mostly because the core ideas are compact ones.
In fact the core ideas are so compact that you get 90% of the value of this book by reading the first 6 chapters -- or even just by writing the first one chapter. That has obvious utility when it comes to teaching the core principles, but it does feel like oversimplifying much of the time, the real world is a bit of a mess, and human conflicts are even more so, I don't believe any "one size fits all" strategy for solving conflicts exists, and this book would have benefited from a bit more humility, it has a lot of strong claims and anecdotes about the near-magic properties of NVC, and damn near nothing about the limitations and exceptions; it's almost as if the author genuinely believes those do not exist. (the closest the book ever comes is to admit that occasions exist where physical violence in defence of self-or others is justified; the book does however never admit that verbal violence might in certain situations also be justified for pretty similar reasons.
The book talks a lot about language which makes sense for a book about communication, but it often does so with a low degree of reflection about the language the book itself uses, and sometimes the author insists that a big and significant difference exists where a reasonable person would interpret two statements to be pretty equivalent.
Examples of clunky and weird language that the author is fond of includes "I am needing X" being used consistently when a more natural (and in my opinion equivalent) way of expressing the same thing is to say: "I need X", and "I'd like you to tell me if you would be willing to ..." instead of simply: "Would you be willing to ....?" or even just "Are you willing to ...?"
Another example is when the author (seriously!) argues that saying: "It was kind of you to offer
me a ride home last evening." is violent life-alienating communication. And then goes on to explain that the NVC way to express praise is to: 1) Describe the action that contributed to our well-being. 2) Describe the needs of ours that have been fulfilled. and 3) Describe the pleasureful feelings engendered by the fulfillment of those needs. (if you think 3 here sounds particularly clunky, then I agree entirely, yet those are the authors words) But the example the author choose *does* describe the action that "contributed to our well-being" (offering us a ride home last evening), and sure, it doesn't make explicit what needs that fulfills, but we're human beings, we have a shared context, and even if we're not explicitly spelling everything out all the time, calling that "violent" and "life-alienating" seems like a huge stretch. (It may have been raining, but do I *really* need to spell out that: "I have a need to be warm and comfortable, and by offering to drive me you prevented me from getting cold and wet, this engendered feelings of happiness in me." ? If someone offered me a ride home since it was raining, isn't it already implied that they (correctly!) guesstimated that I had that need?
The book is also fairly heavy on eastern philosophy and anti-intellectualism and you'll have to appreciate, or at least be willing to overlook that in order to be able to enjoy this book. In the universe of this book, "Intellectual understanding blocks empathy." (45%), and nobody can be "enlightened" that has any stake in the world. There are several paragraphs that describe understanding, analysis, knowledge and so on as negatives in strong words (and sometimes they can be!), but as far as I could see not even a single sentence that mentions ANY benefit to understanding, analysis or knowledge. And that's weird. Pretty clearly there's many situations where communication will be aided rather than hurt by understanding and knowledge, but the book never acknowledge that.
them in the way they communicate, especially how they communicate when in conflict, will see some of their relationships improve and some conflicts resolved.
This review is for the BOOK not for NVC as such. The actual core ideas of this book I'd give 4 stars, it's the presentation in this book that I think is severly enough flawed to deserve a couple stars less.
On a positive note, the writing is clear, and the book is an easy and fairly short read, mostly because the core ideas are compact ones.
In fact the core ideas are so compact that you get 90% of the value of this book by reading the first 6 chapters -- or even just by writing the first one chapter. That has obvious utility when it comes to teaching the core principles, but it does feel like oversimplifying much of the time, the real world is a bit of a mess, and human conflicts are even more so, I don't believe any "one size fits all" strategy for solving conflicts exists, and this book would have benefited from a bit more humility, it has a lot of strong claims and anecdotes about the near-magic properties of NVC, and damn near nothing about the limitations and exceptions; it's almost as if the author genuinely believes those do not exist. (the closest the book ever comes is to admit that occasions exist where physical violence in defence of self-or others is justified; the book does however never admit that verbal violence might in certain situations also be justified for pretty similar reasons.
The book talks a lot about language which makes sense for a book about communication, but it often does so with a low degree of reflection about the language the book itself uses, and sometimes the author insists that a big and significant difference exists where a reasonable person would interpret two statements to be pretty equivalent.
Examples of clunky and weird language that the author is fond of includes "I am needing X" being used consistently when a more natural (and in my opinion equivalent) way of expressing the same thing is to say: "I need X", and "I'd like you to tell me if you would be willing to ..." instead of simply: "Would you be willing to ....?" or even just "Are you willing to ...?"
Another example is when the author (seriously!) argues that saying: "It was kind of you to offer
me a ride home last evening." is violent life-alienating communication. And then goes on to explain that the NVC way to express praise is to: 1) Describe the action that contributed to our well-being. 2) Describe the needs of ours that have been fulfilled. and 3) Describe the pleasureful feelings engendered by the fulfillment of those needs. (if you think 3 here sounds particularly clunky, then I agree entirely, yet those are the authors words) But the example the author choose *does* describe the action that "contributed to our well-being" (offering us a ride home last evening), and sure, it doesn't make explicit what needs that fulfills, but we're human beings, we have a shared context, and even if we're not explicitly spelling everything out all the time, calling that "violent" and "life-alienating" seems like a huge stretch. (It may have been raining, but do I *really* need to spell out that: "I have a need to be warm and comfortable, and by offering to drive me you prevented me from getting cold and wet, this engendered feelings of happiness in me." ? If someone offered me a ride home since it was raining, isn't it already implied that they (correctly!) guesstimated that I had that need?
The book is also fairly heavy on eastern philosophy and anti-intellectualism and you'll have to appreciate, or at least be willing to overlook that in order to be able to enjoy this book. In the universe of this book, "Intellectual understanding blocks empathy." (45%), and nobody can be "enlightened" that has any stake in the world. There are several paragraphs that describe understanding, analysis, knowledge and so on as negatives in strong words (and sometimes they can be!), but as far as I could see not even a single sentence that mentions ANY benefit to understanding, analysis or knowledge. And that's weird. Pretty clearly there's many situations where communication will be aided rather than hurt by understanding and knowledge, but the book never acknowledge that.
March 8, 2021
اگر آدمی هستید که در مواقع تعارض با دیگران دچار مشکل در بیان نارضایتیتون میشید، یا از مطرح کردنش فرار میکنید و فکر میکنید با انکار مشکل، مشکل حل میشه، یا مشکل رو مطرح میکنید ولی به جای حلش، عصبانی میشید و طرف مقابل رو به موضع دفاعی میفرستید، این کتاب برای شماست.
همچنین:
اگر زبان بیان احساساتتون رو ندارید و اگر کسی ازتون بپرسه چه حسی داری؟ با جملات مبهم مثل «حس خوبی دارم» یا «حس بدی دارم» و یا جملات بیمعنی مثل «حس میکنم کسی درکم نمیکنه» یا «حس میکنم در حقم بیانصافی شده» بهش پاسخ میدید، باز هم این کتاب برای شماست.
این کتاب برای من بسیار راهگشا بود تا بفهمم مشکلم چیه که هربار در تعارضات مشکلات ساده رو تبدیل به گرههای کور میکنم.
اون یک ستارهای که ازش کم کردم به خاطر اینه که ساختار کتاب و اینکه وسطش پر از شعر بود رو دوست نداشتم و به نظرم کتاب رو شبیه کتابهای روانشناسی زرد میکرد در حالی که نبود.
همچنین:
اگر زبان بیان احساساتتون رو ندارید و اگر کسی ازتون بپرسه چه حسی داری؟ با جملات مبهم مثل «حس خوبی دارم» یا «حس بدی دارم» و یا جملات بیمعنی مثل «حس میکنم کسی درکم نمیکنه» یا «حس میکنم در حقم بیانصافی شده» بهش پاسخ میدید، باز هم این کتاب برای شماست.
این کتاب برای من بسیار راهگشا بود تا بفهمم مشکلم چیه که هربار در تعارضات مشکلات ساده رو تبدیل به گرههای کور میکنم.
اون یک ستارهای که ازش کم کردم به خاطر اینه که ساختار کتاب و اینکه وسطش پر از شعر بود رو دوست نداشتم و به نظرم کتاب رو شبیه کتابهای روانشناسی زرد میکرد در حالی که نبود.
Read
August 6, 2016 ارتباط بدون خشونت زبان زندگی رو از بهترین نسخه هایی می دونم که توسط برنامه حال خوب معرفی شد. من هرگز کتاب روانشناسی زرد رو توصیه نمی کنم. انهایی که توسط این برنامه معرفی می شه کتاب به معنای واقعی هستند.علاوه بر اموزش کنترل خشونت و اینکه ما در خشونت چه نیازهایی داریم انواع نمونه ها رو با مثال هایی که همه ما در زندگی مان داریم ارائه می ده. چگونی همدردی با فرد عصبی و درک او و استفاده از جمله بندی ارامش دهنده و فن بیان می تونید به شخص عصبی کمک کنید تا نیازش رو با ارامش بیان کنه. مخصوصا وقت هایی که انسان در تنگناهای عاطفی قرار می گیره و با خشونت باعث می شه طرف مقابل هر رفتار نادرستی که داشته رو منطقی جلوه بده و به خودش حق طرد کردن شما رو بده. بخش هایی از متن رو در کانال تلگرام میزارم امیدوارم با خواندنش ارامش روانی که دنبالش هستید با تمرین در موقع عصبانیت بدست اورید.
@nellynevesht
@nellynevesht
June 25, 2019
I listened to this on audio book and the experience was very similar to learning a language with a great teacher such as Michel Thomas. I think this is a book I will return to several times in order to absorb the skills. Non violent communication seems to be a great deal about listening, keeping cool and using very specific language. This wouldn't necessarily be straight forward in dangerous situations so some way to practice it with repetition would be of enormous value.
The skills taught apply from any situation from family to a violent encounter with a stranger to international diplomacy. This is essential reading.
The skills taught apply from any situation from family to a violent encounter with a stranger to international diplomacy. This is essential reading.
April 11, 2018
A great system for thoughtful engagement with conflict and also self-reflection, but falls into the self-help trap where everything is just a matter of a certain kind of positive thinking in a vacuum with no power dynamics/oppression-privilege insight (weirdly uses an example of someone being "racist" against a white person??). Also some questionable psychotheraputic recommendations, about sharing personal feelings during sessions and not diagnosing because diagnosing is a form of judgement. Some really great stuff to take with a hunk of salt.
February 12, 2013
For me, life-changing.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 4,381 reviews