This metaphor immediately rang true to me but the article is definitely worth the whole read. There are a bunch of linked articles too which also have some very sound advice. I really like a tactic in hard situations which was saying "What I learned..." followed by "What I'll do is...". It makes someone feel heard and that you'll follow through with some action to make someone feel like you have akin in the game with their concern. I really liked a lot of other somewhat generic but still oft-ignored advice like lean in a bit, make eye-contact, and the title which is just that if someone is making you feel off, instead of just reacting like a thermometer and also potentially aggravating the weirdness, do things that help regulate and relieve those human tendencies based on feelings of fear etc. Excellent read.
You'd better follow through and do the thing you said though. If you start saying things when people are riled up and then don't do it... They're going to notice.
While the article has some good points about the importance of emotional intelligence and awareness, I'm skeptical about the idea that we can simply "choose" to be thermostats. Humans are complex and emotional creatures, and our emotions can be triggered by a multitude of factors beyond our control. The article's suggestions, while well-intentioned, feel like a form of emotional labor that can be exhausting and unsustainable. Can we really expect people to be constantly "on" and aware of their emotional impact on others?
> I'm skeptical about the idea that we can simply "choose" to be thermostats.
Well, it’s like most things, it takes practice and time to be good at it if natural talent isn’t there.
Sure, things out of our control can trigger emotions, but one incredible ability of humans is to rationalize those emotions and act in more constructive ways than to immediate react back.
It can be quite liberating and fun to understand and process these things, much like understanding code and data structures in order to recombine them into things you want to achieve.
> Can we really expect people to be constantly "on" and aware of their emotional impact on others?
Of course we can and should. Emotional regulation is a sign of maturity and being an adult. Children should be practicing emotional control.
Can you be mentally and emotionally wrung out and grace given for emotional outbursts? Sometimes. I also have punched a wall when I stubbed my toe. We should expect me to not lash out at the door and it can still be understandable why I did. I have also sat stewing in a mood and it affects those around me. I can fix my attitude or I can remove myself for a spell.
> Can we really expect people to be constantly "on" and aware of their emotional impact on others?
We can expect that of ourselves. It's a skill that can be learned and practiced.
“Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.”
-- Viktor Frankl
I've found that a meditation practice allows me to find that space more easily in real life situations. At the very least, you'll know when you're being "amygdala hijacked" (per the article).
I think you can consciously learn a skill by practicing it enough. You can choose to project positivity and like most things in life, fake it until you make it.
>feel like a form of emotional labor that can be exhausting and unsustainable
There definitely some wisdom in knowing when to draw back for your own sanity.
I read this article as intended for an HR or management audience whose job is to always be the professional in the room since your voice is interpreted as the company's voice.
"I'm skeptical about the idea that we can simply "choose" to be thermostats."
I agree. Try being thermostat to someone who is on meth or someone who is drunk.There are many reasons someone is raising he temperature in a room.
Not to mention the fact that there might be a good reason some one is angry, like low wages, discrimination, or wage theft. And you coming in being a thermostat is just prolonging everyone's nightmare.
I will tell you, when I saw people doing that BS to me I knew right away they were trying to manipulate me. We all have the right to be angry and you do not have the right to use neurological tricks to manipulate people because you are uncomfortable with "weird vibes".
> You’re being a thermometer. When they’re subtly giving off weird vibes—they’re frowning, answering your questions with fewer words than normal, etc.—you’ve noticed that their temperature is different.
And if you are doing this as a coping mechanism from having an unstable parent and you are like me (also maybe a bit of adhd): you internalize the person's chilled behavior and often assume it is your fault.
In case you need to hear it: You are not responsible for other's emotions (though you are responsible for your actions)
I know this and I have learned more than enough about it to internalize it, but it just doesn't work. I can't find a way to stop the automatic jumping to conclusion and self blame.
It takes hours to get over it and that's exhausting. I am trying for years to find a way out, but it just hasn't internalized yet
> You are not responsible for other's emotions (though you are responsible for your actions)
I know you do not mean it this way, but I really dislike this saying. It is not even true, actually.
The most frequent use of this is people who are being, well, jerks, trying to argue that when people feel bad after being put down, insulted or treated with passive aggression, it is their own fault.
If people feel bad after your actions, yes in many circumstances you are responsible.
What I learned is that that last email didn’t do a good job explaining the changes, so what I plan to do is start a forum for folks to post their questions and our CEO will answer them every Tuesday.
I know it’s only an example, but hahahahahahahaha, ha. Start with something realistic if you do that. The worst thing you can do is to teach them you’re a bag of funny promises.
At a former company we once had an away day workshop where they allowed anonymous questions for the company director which would show up on a screen for everyone (it was a ~40-50 person company).
We were a management consultancy and trialling what they thought was cool new tech to use with other companies. ( This was a while ago, smart phones were newer and apps were still "cool" )
Well, they very quickly learned to never do that again. Even in a small company there were a lot of tensions unresolved between the lowest and highest rungs. It was a fairly formal hierarchical structure where the common worker didn't tend to ever interact with the big boss.
"Where's the pay rise we were promised last year?" was perhaps the mildest of the embarrassment, and it quickly devolved from there.
If this resonated with you, consider reading Nonviolent Communication by Rosenberg, the ultimate guide in thermostat-speak. You focus on stating unmet needs. Good stuff.
I haven't read NVC, but "stating unmet needs" is a strong aspect of "No more Mr. Nice Guy" and "Models". Being up front about who you are and what you want is a lot more likely to work than being nice and hoping your needs are met in the way that you expect. It's also a way to cut your losses early if the other person is not interested in providing whatever you're after.
Definitely gonna borrow this language, it’s a really important aspect of social life. I’ve always been very, very thermometer-like, with a strong tendency to mirror which allows me to connect with people 1 on 1 easy, but on the flip side I absorb vibes I don’t want. My coping mechanism is to avoid bad vibes, confrontational situations, etc. Even being in a social group for long can affect me negatively if the people there have values I don’t agree with, even if I have no desire to change them. Any tips for how to manage that better?
Therapy helps. Building a stronger sense of self and with it, more internal boundaries between your thoughts and beliefs and those of others.
I'm this way as well, and it's like your emotions are totally porous, absorbing everything from those around you. It's a blessing and a curse. Generally stems from a childhood where you had to be very in tune with the emotions of your caregiver in order to stay safe.
Wow I’ve always felt much more comfortable in 1:1 situations than group situations, but I never framed it the way you have here. Your comment really resonates, thank you!
There's an unspoken premise here and I'm going to question it. Avoiding tension, conflict, hard words and other things of the sort is not always the right choice. Sometimes letting conflicts play out gets you the best outcome with the least amount of suffering. Just like ripping off a band-aid.
There's plenty of times when wining a conflict is far better than avoiding it. And I see articles like this, books like Nonviolent Communication, ideas like "emotional intelligence" (check it out, no such thing exists) - as misguided as it always puts you in the defensive/de-escalating role even when you might be better served by letting things play out or even attacking, baiting your opponent into attacking, etc.
Violence is sometimes the right answer. When to apply it and when to avoid it is the hard question. But we didn't evolve an amygdala for nothing, and especially not for a "coach for leaders" (what the hell is that?) to tell us to always ignore it as an unquestioned premise for a promotional blog post. Because leaders should not always shy away from conflict, that much should be pretty crystal clear.
Yes, agree. This is all a continuation of the Positivity Cult. Anger is a method of communication that is greater than words, and it puts the explanation point at the end of some of the most important statements.
Awww shit that's gonna be hard for my inner Minnesotan. All that deep listening stuff needs to be done at a 135-165 degree angle, so you're both vaguely looking in the same-ish direction but can make occasional side glance eye contact
I loved the article, but something about it felt off.
The content (good) didn't match what I would expect from the style. The writing style reminde me of a mix off business advice and aggrandizing self-help. My expectation with that is sweeping generalizations, just-so annecdotes, and not saying very much, whilst not backing up what you are saying with sound reasoning either.
Somehow this article had that writing style, without those problems. It made it a rather dissonant experience, because I was looking for the catch, what I was being sold, the anecdote that is almost certainly a lie, and the overly strong conclusion. But that never came, and instead I find myself believing.
And yet, the dissonance remains. I have a little worry that the swindle was just better this time. It's a weird feeling, and not one I had before.
If the author reads this, I'd like to suggest a change in font. At certain scales, the website's font puts emphasis on the cross-bar in the letter 'e', and the letter 'g'. It's incredibly distracting, and only seems to happen at certain scales, as I could 'fix' it by increasing/decreasing the font size.
I'd message this directly, but she doesn't provide a method of contact on the site (reasonable).
Find a warm sunny spot or cozy nook and go there. If the location gets uncomfortable, leave. Not terrible advice, all considered. Of course you can't always do that in say, a work setting.
I just hate this kind of stuff. Good for you if you can create a consulting business out of stating the obvious I suppose. It is a drain on the economy however.
I am going to be downvoted to hell for this, but... After reading halfway through the article, I had to check the gender of the author. Because, I feel, this is a rather female POV. A lot of what she says feels touchy-feely to me and doesnt resonate with me at all. Maybe because I am way more inerested in the topic of the meeting then the personal feelings and emotions of the participants. To the point where I might noticed them, but I they mostly dont concern me at all.
I too noticed pretty quickly that this must be female POV.
You can generally tell even just by the word choices ("spidey senses" American women seem to love that phrase for some reason, "super <adjective>", "awry", "weird vibes", ...)
Another instant give-away was "now we've got a compounding situation" - quite a feminine phrasing. Not judging, I mean it sounds almost cute even.
Finally, her idea of "facing each other squarely": a total no-no for men (way too much potenial energy, like two massive electron beams opposing each other), but OK for women.
Back in the days of slatestarcodex, the comment policy [1] was you can comment if your post is at least two of these three things: true, necessary, or kind.
This post is all three: what they're describing is true (these dynamics in meetings do exist, very often), it is kind (in the sense they're giving you a skill to help both yourself and others), and I'll give it necessary in the sense it's used in the original definition (if you want to get ahead in an organization with a nontrivial amount of internal politics - which is most places - you need to have at least some of this skill).
And yet, something about this post gives me "weird vibes".
Basically, with a bit of sarcasm you could sum it up as "DON'T BE AUTISTIC", and if you are then at least get therapy until you can act normal.
When the author says "We [humans] are wired to spidey sense this [vibes] stuff", it turns out some humans are above and some below the mean in this skill distribution. [2]
And sometimes, in a meeting to decide about how you're going to set up your database sharding, it helps the business' bottom line if you pay more attention to the database specialist than the soft-eye-contact specialist.
(Don't you want to hire people who are good at both? Yes, but unless you're really, really lucky, you're going to hit Berkson's paradox [3]. And then if you want your databases to run smoothly, you're going to have to compromise.)
I support the goals of the article and I understand that social interaction doesn't come natural to all people, but if someone would lean in an nod to me like described in the second part I would freak out because that feels like sociopathic behavior.
[+] [-] gleenn|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] 8n4vidtmkvmk|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] deisteve|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] bfung|1 year ago|reply
Well, it’s like most things, it takes practice and time to be good at it if natural talent isn’t there.
Sure, things out of our control can trigger emotions, but one incredible ability of humans is to rationalize those emotions and act in more constructive ways than to immediate react back.
It can be quite liberating and fun to understand and process these things, much like understanding code and data structures in order to recombine them into things you want to achieve.
[+] [-] sethammons|1 year ago|reply
Of course we can and should. Emotional regulation is a sign of maturity and being an adult. Children should be practicing emotional control.
Can you be mentally and emotionally wrung out and grace given for emotional outbursts? Sometimes. I also have punched a wall when I stubbed my toe. We should expect me to not lash out at the door and it can still be understandable why I did. I have also sat stewing in a mood and it affects those around me. I can fix my attitude or I can remove myself for a spell.
[+] [-] theultdev|1 year ago|reply
You can recognize the stimuli and rationalize it before becoming upset.
The more you do it, the easier it becomes and the less stressed you become.
[+] [-] patrickmay|1 year ago|reply
We can expect that of ourselves. It's a skill that can be learned and practiced.
“Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.” -- Viktor Frankl
I've found that a meditation practice allows me to find that space more easily in real life situations. At the very least, you'll know when you're being "amygdala hijacked" (per the article).
[+] [-] unknown|1 year ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] Suppafly|1 year ago|reply
>feel like a form of emotional labor that can be exhausting and unsustainable
There definitely some wisdom in knowing when to draw back for your own sanity.
[+] [-] downWidOutaFite|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] FollowingTheDao|1 year ago|reply
I agree. Try being thermostat to someone who is on meth or someone who is drunk.There are many reasons someone is raising he temperature in a room.
Not to mention the fact that there might be a good reason some one is angry, like low wages, discrimination, or wage theft. And you coming in being a thermostat is just prolonging everyone's nightmare.
I will tell you, when I saw people doing that BS to me I knew right away they were trying to manipulate me. We all have the right to be angry and you do not have the right to use neurological tricks to manipulate people because you are uncomfortable with "weird vibes".
[+] [-] brigandish|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] sethammons|1 year ago|reply
And if you are doing this as a coping mechanism from having an unstable parent and you are like me (also maybe a bit of adhd): you internalize the person's chilled behavior and often assume it is your fault.
In case you need to hear it: You are not responsible for other's emotions (though you are responsible for your actions)
[+] [-] dailykoder|1 year ago|reply
It takes hours to get over it and that's exhausting. I am trying for years to find a way out, but it just hasn't internalized yet
[+] [-] watwut|1 year ago|reply
I know you do not mean it this way, but I really dislike this saying. It is not even true, actually.
The most frequent use of this is people who are being, well, jerks, trying to argue that when people feel bad after being put down, insulted or treated with passive aggression, it is their own fault.
If people feel bad after your actions, yes in many circumstances you are responsible.
[+] [-] maroonblazer|1 year ago|reply
"What you say, and what you do, says nothing about me, and everything about you."
[+] [-] ddmf|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] wruza|1 year ago|reply
I know it’s only an example, but hahahahahahahaha, ha. Start with something realistic if you do that. The worst thing you can do is to teach them you’re a bag of funny promises.
[+] [-] xnorswap|1 year ago|reply
We were a management consultancy and trialling what they thought was cool new tech to use with other companies. ( This was a while ago, smart phones were newer and apps were still "cool" )
Well, they very quickly learned to never do that again. Even in a small company there were a lot of tensions unresolved between the lowest and highest rungs. It was a fairly formal hierarchical structure where the common worker didn't tend to ever interact with the big boss.
"Where's the pay rise we were promised last year?" was perhaps the mildest of the embarrassment, and it quickly devolved from there.
[+] [-] sethammons|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] nicbou|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] FollowingTheDao|1 year ago|reply
Sometimes communication needs to be violent.
[+] [-] klabb3|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] Trasmatta|1 year ago|reply
I'm this way as well, and it's like your emotions are totally porous, absorbing everything from those around you. It's a blessing and a curse. Generally stems from a childhood where you had to be very in tune with the emotions of your caregiver in order to stay safe.
[+] [-] jjj123|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] trabant00|1 year ago|reply
There's plenty of times when wining a conflict is far better than avoiding it. And I see articles like this, books like Nonviolent Communication, ideas like "emotional intelligence" (check it out, no such thing exists) - as misguided as it always puts you in the defensive/de-escalating role even when you might be better served by letting things play out or even attacking, baiting your opponent into attacking, etc.
Violence is sometimes the right answer. When to apply it and when to avoid it is the hard question. But we didn't evolve an amygdala for nothing, and especially not for a "coach for leaders" (what the hell is that?) to tell us to always ignore it as an unquestioned premise for a promotional blog post. Because leaders should not always shy away from conflict, that much should be pretty crystal clear.
[+] [-] FollowingTheDao|1 year ago|reply
Just read this:
I need help.
I need help!
[+] [-] unknown|1 year ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] eimrine|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] dmoy|1 year ago|reply
Awww shit that's gonna be hard for my inner Minnesotan. All that deep listening stuff needs to be done at a 135-165 degree angle, so you're both vaguely looking in the same-ish direction but can make occasional side glance eye contact
[+] [-] vvanders|1 year ago|reply
[edit] 10:50! https://www.tptoriginals.org/how-to-talk-minnesotan/
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Talk_Minnesotan
[+] [-] 01HNNWZ0MV43FF|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] rocqua|1 year ago|reply
The content (good) didn't match what I would expect from the style. The writing style reminde me of a mix off business advice and aggrandizing self-help. My expectation with that is sweeping generalizations, just-so annecdotes, and not saying very much, whilst not backing up what you are saying with sound reasoning either.
Somehow this article had that writing style, without those problems. It made it a rather dissonant experience, because I was looking for the catch, what I was being sold, the anecdote that is almost certainly a lie, and the overly strong conclusion. But that never came, and instead I find myself believing.
And yet, the dissonance remains. I have a little worry that the swindle was just better this time. It's a weird feeling, and not one I had before.
[+] [-] patch_collector|1 year ago|reply
I'd message this directly, but she doesn't provide a method of contact on the site (reasonable).
[+] [-] roshankhan28|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] Night_Thastus|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] FollowingTheDao|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|1 year ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] osigurdson|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|1 year ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] lynx23|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] jdthedisciple|1 year ago|reply
I too noticed pretty quickly that this must be female POV.
You can generally tell even just by the word choices ("spidey senses" American women seem to love that phrase for some reason, "super <adjective>", "awry", "weird vibes", ...)
Another instant give-away was "now we've got a compounding situation" - quite a feminine phrasing. Not judging, I mean it sounds almost cute even.
Finally, her idea of "facing each other squarely": a total no-no for men (way too much potenial energy, like two massive electron beams opposing each other), but OK for women.
[+] [-] fnord77|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] red_admiral|1 year ago|reply
This post is all three: what they're describing is true (these dynamics in meetings do exist, very often), it is kind (in the sense they're giving you a skill to help both yourself and others), and I'll give it necessary in the sense it's used in the original definition (if you want to get ahead in an organization with a nontrivial amount of internal politics - which is most places - you need to have at least some of this skill).
And yet, something about this post gives me "weird vibes".
Basically, with a bit of sarcasm you could sum it up as "DON'T BE AUTISTIC", and if you are then at least get therapy until you can act normal.
When the author says "We [humans] are wired to spidey sense this [vibes] stuff", it turns out some humans are above and some below the mean in this skill distribution. [2]
And sometimes, in a meeting to decide about how you're going to set up your database sharding, it helps the business' bottom line if you pay more attention to the database specialist than the soft-eye-contact specialist.
(Don't you want to hire people who are good at both? Yes, but unless you're really, really lucky, you're going to hit Berkson's paradox [3]. And then if you want your databases to run smoothly, you're going to have to compromise.)
[1] https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/03/02/the-comment-policy-is-... [2] However, the latest research suggest that autistic people are perfectly wired to read the room and sense vibes if the room is full of other autistic people. It's just one autist in a room of neurotypicals, or vice versa, that doesn't go too well. [3] https://www.allendowney.com/blog/2021/04/07/berkson-goes-to-...
[+] [-] Manfred|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] mightyhacker658|1 year ago|reply
[deleted]