Many of the problems you face in life stem from conflicting relationships that you have with other people. The man who aspires to greatness avoids this absurdity because he knows the mechanics of personal relationships and manages them for his benefit.
The character of interpersonal relationships determines the way in which the human being is inscribed and develops in his social environment; Its importance is fundamental to qualify the development of people in their transit through life.
Social "skills" are not part of people's virtuosity, they are an indispensable requirement of development. The social environment is the primary environment of the human being because it even prevails over the natural environment. The ability to perform "in society" defines the quality of personal and professional life of individuals.
Interpersonal relationships can be of three types: satisfactory, inconsequential or conflicting relationships. Although there is an evident gradation in the scale, the final result has as an evaluation parameter any of these three forms.
The personal relationships satisfactory can be measured in terms of their benefit; they can only maximize the positive nature of the results. This is a type of relationship that in the worst case must be maintained and at best, develop. The differentiation between people who essentially have satisfactory interpersonal relationships lies in the quality of the result that emerges from them. Inconsequent personal relationships are a cause for alarm mainly because they are not productive and efforts must be invested to progressively place them among those that give benefit. Conflicting personal relationships, however, are a serious problem.
People can have an important set of satisfying or even inconsequential personal relationships and consider themselves as the effect of an appropriate situation, but even a small number of conflicting relationships can undermine everything. The reason for this fact is basically simple: the conflict acts profoundly on the person and destabilizes her from its foundations. And this person, who is the same person who also maintains satisfactory relationships, transfers the effects of the conflict to other dimensions of their social work.
The human being is an entity, and although he has an important capacity to process different stimuli and provide different responses, he is naturally incapable of generating "watertight compartments" that condition different types of behaviors according to the environment or the situation he faces. A man who has conflicts in a certain area of his life transfers them to another area to a greater or lesser extent. Perfect discrimination of facts does not exist in the same way that the perfect human being does not exist either. That “man in the hats” who acts with absolute property depending on the situation or the people among whom he finds himself, forms part of the ideal postulates that theory is obliged to uphold in order to generate efficient practice.And while the ideal parameters are goals that are always to be achieved, the practical results are different: the man who confronts conflicts transfers their consequences, to a lesser or greater degree, to other areas of his life.
Conflicting personal relationships affect satisfactory relationships because they condition the emotional state of the man who in both cases is its protagonist.
How is a conflicting personal relationship identified?
There are substantial differences between the latter and others that can be classified as difficult, unstable, changing, etc. Conflicting interpersonal relationships have negative effects on people, affect their emotional stability and condition responses and states of mind for significant periods of time. The person changes, her values are eroded.
On the other hand, conflictive interpersonal relationships have an additional ingredient: there is another person (or a group of them) who acts in terms of deliberately affecting the like, because ultimately these conflictive relationships are based on antagonisms. If life habitually presents adversities, in the case of these relationships they are “built” to harm the other.
And if in most cases the adversities that life presents respond to a random character, here they are planned. The protagonists of this type of relationship maintain hostile situations that openly injure.
It is of course impossible to suppose that these relationships do not occur in life, but it is important to act in such a way that the degree of conflict they cause does not reach dangerous extremes and a rapid ordering is taken to take them to controllable scenarios.
The fundamental preventive measure is one that can be practiced at the precise moment that a relationship is at risk of becoming a problem. Conflict in relationships usually has a genesis and this refers to a precise moment in the interaction between people. There is an act or a word that determines the degree that the conflict will reach later.
How this “break point” is treated in a relationship will determine the “angle” of the slope it takes: from a relatively natural process of deterioration to a dizzying collapse. The nature of the slope is established at the moment of the break.
Little can be done later and this at the cost of a lot of effort.
It is quite natural that interpersonal relationships deteriorate or end, but it is advisable to avoid reaching dramatic points, so that the task of controlling its effects or changing its state over time ends up being a simpler task.
All this depends on what happens “that” crucial and definitive moment that personal relationships face at certain junctures.
Now, “that” moment, that “breaking point” has its own peculiarities:
• It can appear unexpectedly
• It is not under anyone's control
• It incorporates high doses of emotion
This is a highly dangerous combination of elements.
On the other hand, “that” crucial moment comes two people, two human beings provided with a complex engineering of emotions and circumstances. They are two universes that meet, each complete in itself. And in the center of these two universes, two egos as driving elements, as rulers of that complex totality.
And while difficult or conflicting circumstances make up the explosive material, people's ego is the ultimate trigger. The ego is the most sensitive factor in the equation. People understand each other in terms of the "I", and when they calculate that it is threatened, they react on an instinctive level that is very difficult to control. When it comes to a hypothetically hurt ego, man more easily "disconnects" from his sources of reasoning and acts on impulse, activating that basic feeling of "self-protection" or "survival" that brings us so close to the most elemental animals. People's deep ego hardly gives anything, usually wants to dominate,when feeling hurt or threatened, he reacts compulsively and since he is usually “entrenched” among the “relatively controlled” elements of his environment, this reaction is disproportionate in relation to its causes.
The ego can become a ruthless enemy of oneself, usually it is the reason for a significant amount of the difficulties and problems that we face in life, mainly those related to our social development. Big men have triumphed first and foremost over their "I", so they have a small ego, essentially humble and tending to offer themselves to others. However the "little man" is subject to a big ego like a castaway on the high seas to his lifeline. The Big man has a firm but elastic ego, he knows who IS beyond his circumstances. Faced with adversity or attack, his ego becomes flexible to withstand the blow and then gradually returns to its original state, without having broken anything of its own and nothing of another's.
Life is not a competition of "egos", life is like a tournament in which the competencies of people are precisely measured, the fruits of each determine the situation and position of each person. The interaction between egos must never be considered a battle, it is only part of an inexorable dynamic that presents the social life of the human being. The self-assured person never considers her ego to be threatened as a product of difficult interpersonal relationships; the "I" is something internal and is perfectly isolated from any external element, nothing can reach it "from the outside" unless the person himself passes through the entrance.
Faced with the most difficult and extreme situations that we can imagine, the Great men have kept an "I" intact, they have done so in the face of the wildest humiliations, before grotesque torture and on the very threshold of their death caused by other people.
Why should we be so sensitive to our egos? Where is our greatness found?
The "breaking point" in interpersonal relationships is often reached through the effect of egos that feel hurt. Therein are repeatedly the most serious effects.
The appropriate response to the situation must be established at that precise moment, right there, at the genesis of the affected interpersonal relationship, at the vital moment in which the turning point emerges. This appropriate reaction protects the ego itself and leads to a less acute slope in the outcome of the conflict. This reaction also makes it possible that at a later time it is the reason that governs the relationship and from there it is possible, at least, to transform a conflictive relationship into an inconsequential relationship. And most importantly: the permanent exercise of this type of reaction builds a flexible ego, perfectly equipped to face life with greater property.
The answer that must be given at the most critical moment of the conflict that exists with another person consists in establishing a deep and prolonged PAUSE in the interaction. A decisive PAUSE, a total silence, a complete “do nothing”. The essential thing is NOT TO REACT, in any way (right or wrong), just stop everything. This moment is vital, in the same way that a breath of fresh air is vital for those who are in thick smoke. A Mental PAUSE, a Physical PAUSE, a moment of "suspension" and absolute lightness.
This moment will condition the character that the relationship takes forward. This moment is what puts "brand and seal" on the conflict. PAUSE takes fuel from the bonfire, reduces the momentum of adverse energies, but above all it gives reason a chance. And this is all that the intelligent man needs: the possibility of making prevail the reason to treat a conflict.
This PAUSE is not a sign of weakness because it then activates a solid response, one that emerges from the brain and not from the stomach. This PAUSE does not grant anything, does not yield anything, does not weaken anything, quite the contrary! It allows to strengthen a later response, a future argument. The ego itself, between which elastic and flexible, withstands the blow and withdraws, but at the same time it takes energy to return with advantage to the starting point, in the same way that the elastic of a wave does, contracting to take energy and eject the projectile. There is nothing more solid than a flexible body.
The nature and dynamics of conflicts (much more between people) is obviously more complex, but the simple exercise of this recommendation greatly simplifies it. It's just a matter of checking it out!
In a conflict with another person, NEVER REACT without the possibility of having basically pondered the answer, even less if the attack is strong. Set the PAUSE (in the best way you can think of) and then play the game with control and mastery of movements.
This PAUSE is a representation of Power, mechanically identical to the one we have on the remote control of a television: with it we establish the course of events, at our discretion, in our time. This PAUSE allows us to be masters of our future and not puppets of circumstances and others.
In the face of other people's or own anger: PAUSE.
Before provocation: PAUSE.
In the face of insult or insult: PAUSE.
In the face of aggression: PAUSE.
PAUSE is a way of managing Time and it must always be an ally, not an additional damage. Conflicts are like a rushing river, a rushing stream, and in trying to cross them amidst their violent momentum we will only be swept away by the current. Let us imagine, on the other hand, that we have the power to stop the waters and wade through them with ease, absolutely safe: that is achieved with the PAUSE.
After the PAUSE, when reason takes control of the circumstances, the response will be evaluated. And whatever it was, it is already born with an incomparable advantage, because it starts from a position of victory since exercising and sustaining the PAUSE is already a victory that few know.
