Dialog found on the Internet.
Two women are chatting in office.
Woman 1: I had a lovely evening, and you?
Woman 2: It was a disaster. My husband came home, ate his dinner in 3 minutes and fell asleep in 2 minutes. And how was your evening?
Woman 1: Oh, it was fantastic! My husband came home and took me for a romantic dinner. After that we went home on foot and walked through the night streets for hours. When we came home he lit candles around the house. It was like a fairytale!
At the same time their husbands are talking at work.
Husband 1: How was your evening?
Husband 2: Excellent. I came home, dinner was on the table, I ate and went to bed. How about you?
Husband 1: It was awful. I came home, no dinner, they cut off the electricity because I forgot to pay the bill. So I took the wife out to dinner which was so expensive that I didn't have money for a taxi. We walked home which took about an hour and when we got home, I remembered that we have no electricity, so I still had to light candles all over the house!
the above dialogues of women and men illustrate how different people describe the same event. And that's fine, because different forms description of the diversity of life, on the one hand. On the other hand, is a polar view of the situation can lead to misunderstanding and conflict. Version of husbands and wives in both cases are different, partly because the focus of attention of the narrator is only 1 person: either the partner or himself. If you put these versions together, you get a fuller story, in which there will be odnomomentnoe events. Person difficult to overcome the linearity of language, we try to tell our interlocutor the story more consistently, building causal relationships between events. All people in varying degrees, resorted to a similar strategy describe what is happening and it is normal, the explanation and the reasons for the search makes the world more understandable, predictable, reducing our concerns. Not easy would live in ancient Egypt, for example, without explaining the sunrise and sunset with the Sun God RA, who daily on the Golden boat rode across the sky from East to West. But the communication process to describe more complex than natural phenomena. Describing a linear communication, especially if this interaction was conflictual or difficult, we turn to the idea of determining guilt, which is even more supported the conflict.
What happens when we all stop seeing odnomomentnoe of events, when put the reason for his behavior outside, explaining their actions solely by the need to respond to... (words, tone, thoughts, actions, etc. of another person), cease to see themselves as active member of interaction, which also affects the process of communication as our partner. "I said (a) because she (he), I don't want to, because she (he), I had to do...., even though I didn't like (a), but she (he) made me(a)...". On the one hand, it essentially removes the responsibility for the relationship, for your own well-being, reaction, if not to blame me, then I can't do anything. On the other hand, similar way of describing the situation immobilizes a man in his desire to improve relations, to make them more acceptable and satisfactory.
There is another extreme when the person puts the reason for a failed relationship or conflict inside yourself: "here it was necessary not to talk of this and that, she (he) won't talk to me because I...., I have something (- ) to make to remedy the situation." Then the person takes responsibility not only for relationships but also for feelings and emotional well being of another. In the first and in the second case, people not taking responsibility for yourself!
What to do in addition to see your contribution to the relationship and bear responsibility for it, to get away from the idea of someone's guilt, to stop looking for the cause of the conflict and tune in search of solutions? You need to be aware that I will now use a particular strategy. To be aware means to act consciously and voluntarily and not automatically and impulsively.