Written by Niek | 24 October 2011

Daily papers, news agencies on internet or by satellites (television) and others, are daily informing us about what happens in our world. That is great. Because it promotes our idea, that we participate in the big world, as well as – more or less - in our local community. Doing so it is wise to realise, that some sources are more reliable than others. For sure. As they are political as well as commercial or otherwise influenced.

Nowadays it is almost impossible, thanks also to the huge amount of sources (twitter, facebook, google and others) on internet etc., to give a true image that represents what is observed as the reality in our world. As they said in the 'old days', that newspapers/ journalists, mirror the reality of the days, is not true any more. If it ever was... We know now better. All what is written or told, is nothing more than a personal impression, worded or quoted by the author. And it is the more wise to realize that some sources are more reliable than others.

The development of these especially international and interpersonal communication possibilities in the last twenty years is still amazing. We explored and still explore new ways of being informed. And we are now already long beyond the time that we were warned for computer break downs, because of the millennium change!

Still it is important to realise, that the wording of what is happening in our world is a personal expression of others. What we accept as reality, and what we decide not to accept of it, is our personal responsibility. The CCI approach supports highly these personal capacities. By realizing this, we are already back at the level of a personal human size!

understanding and wording

Understanding and wording are two total different activities. In my opinion is all what we hear and see, so all our personal observations, are mirrored by ourselves in a split second, by our own inner reflection of past experiences. What we do not recognise as earlier experience, we even do not react on. In that case we do not 'hear' it, neither exactly understand, what the other one is (trying) to say. And does, what we say, always represents exactly what is happening inside us? Or are we just trying to find words to become, also by ourselves, more conscious about what in reality is happening to us?

Realizing this by both sides, as well the sender as the receiver, seems to me to be a matter of respect. Not only for the other one, but also for ourselves. And maybe here roots also our habit that we, hearing what the other one (tries) to say, want to tell our own experiences. Just to check. But in the chaos of words and emotions, there is no interest in such a conversation. And mostly we keep silent and try to find some other supportive reaction.

The question is, if any reaction really is needed. In other words, and in my opinion, is it possibly only the need itself to share, what is needed. This opinion roots in the most powerful reaction within CCI co-counselling: offering free attention. No commend, no judging, not reacting by telling own experiences or whatever. Practising by offering only this free attention - is for me, and visibly also for others – exceptionally healing. The effect is in my opinion decisive; how it works is of another order.

how it works

Healing is a result of offering free attention. Free attention in CCI is not only effective by emotional reactions. It is far more powerful in my experience. It creates a kind of safety. To (try) to word what is going on inside. It also accepts rewording of what has just been mentioned. Because while saying that, the speaker realises, that the feeling or emotion needs another wording. In a rational discussion this is not at all acceptable. It is blameworthy.

When it is accepted to be on a way of discovering, what really is the case that needs to be worded, it contributes to personal consciousness and building new personal insights. In my experience is this an immense human capacity. In CCI, where we 'work' in this field together with a partner who has practised the same way of accepting, we use a contract for working each for a certain and even amount of time. Part of that contract is, that the one who works, is in charge for her or his own work time. The other one is just supportive (keeping time, supporting that the other one does not hurt him/her self or the environment etc.)

new ways

In discussions in our rational society we want to hear worded opinions. Or better, suggestions how to overcome the (economical western) world depression of to day. Being part of that society, there is no room for personally discovering, possible new views or approaches. We 'need' to be aware of facts and part of that dogma in our (western) society is, that we need economically to grow. In that world of facts politicians, governmental leaders and others (scientists as well!) try to find ways how to tackle the problems they have or face and fear.

Others, especially representing the protesting part of our society to day, are looking for other ways out. As far as news agencies and journalists are informing us about this, it is only about the absence of proposals and or goals by them. Not where day are looking for. They are 'vague' and so far tolerated. And that impresses anyway!

That there are new ways in exploration is not communicated. Possibly also because they do not support the standing dogma's and go back – in my personal view – to their 'human size'. And it is in my view clear, that the capacities we each of us have as human beings, allow us to organise and create a kind of society that suits us all. If we are honest!

< Prev		Next >