|
The issues swirling around the NBN-ZTE Senate investigations make
for very interesting if not controversial discussions. I can’t
attend a meeting in my organization or outside without colleagues
stating very strong opinions about the case. Responding to the
Church’s call for communal action, I usually start my MBA classes
by asking students to share their views on what they know about the
case or what they’ve picked up from others or the media.
Having listened to as many views as I can,
I’ve observed that, first, these are very complex and emotional
issues and, second, people reason very differently. What this means
is that quite reasonable people can come to very different
conclusions on whether the President should resign and whether the
Church should ask for it, whether Rodolfo Lozada was kidnapped,
whether protesters should have ever bigger rallies, whether the
Senate should end the investigation and throw the matter to the
courts, etc.
Because of the complexity of the issues and
emotions involved, I find it prudent to listen carefully as claims
are made in favor of or against my own viewpoint. Not only can this
give me fresh information or insight, I am also able to avoid the
strained relations that contentious disagreements tend to bring
about. A colleague of mine whom I respect a great deal always has
something interesting to say about the current issues. While I
rarely agree with his conclusions (a fact that always frustrates
him), I always assure him that I respect his point of view.
I learn a great deal from people whose views are
different from my own, especially when I can muster the discipline
to listen instead of arguing. Communication experts refer to the
practice of listening to understand (as against listening in order
to refute) as empathic listening. This involves capturing the
content and feeling of what the speaker is saying, paraphrasing
these in one’s own words and saying these to the speaker for
confirmation. It’s a more complex generalization of the
repeat-back that we do when a person dictates his telephone number
to us.
As in the case of phone numbers, empathic
listening ensures better understanding between the speaker and the
listener. The listener begins to see the issue as the speaker sees
it while reserving the option to agree or disagree with the
speaker’s view. The resulting empathy between the discussants
tends to promote better communication between them.
As the listener begins to understand the
speaker’s view, it becomes possible to see the reasoning the
latter is using. Reasoning is little more than premises leading to
conclusions. Disagreements arise when people have different
premises, different facts about the premises or draw conclusions
from these premises differently. For example, when I asked a friend
what he thought of Atty. Manuel Gaite’s “loaning” of money to
Lozada, he claimed that it was a bribe from the administration
because the amount was quite large and Gaite did not know Lozada
previously. So to my friend, generosity to a virtual stranger is
highly unlikely. Further, he reasons that since it cannot be
generosity, then it must be a bribe.
(Disclosure: I know Atty. Gaite personally,
having worked with him as a volunteer for an artists’ cooperative
he organized. His wife, Mabel, is my colleague in the faculty. The
couple is among the most decent and God-fearing people I know.) 
(Continued next week.)
____
Dr. Ben Teehankee is the Sen. Benigno Aquino,
Jr. associate professor of corporate social responsibility and
governance of De La Salle Professional Schools Ramon V. del Rosario
Sr. Graduate School of Business. He may be e-mailed at teehankeeb@yahoo.com.
|
