3

 Human Relations

RD

QUARTER

A. MORAL AND SPIRITUAL ASPECT OF PERSONALITY

Human Relation: The skill or ability to work effectively through and with other people. In all aspect of life, you will deal with other people. No matter what you do for a living or how well you do it, your relationship with others is the key to your success or failure (Lamberton & Minor 2010) : a study of human problems arising from organizational and interpersonal relations (as in industry) : a course, study, or program designed to develop better interpersonal and intergroup adjustments  Code of Ethics Approved by the 1996 NASW Delegate Assembly and revised by the 2008 NASW Delegate Assembly The NASW Code of Ethics is intended to serve as a guide to the everyday professional conduct of social workers. This Code includes four sections. The first Section, "Preamble," summarizes the social work profession's mission and core values. The second section, "Purpose of the NASW Code of Ethics," provides an overview of the Code's main functions and a brief guide for dealing with ethical issues or dilemmas in social work practice. The third section, "Ethical Principles," presents broad ethical principles, based on social work's core values, that inform social work practice. The final section, "Ethical Standards," includes specific ethical standards to guide social workers' conduct and to provide a basis for adjudication. A code of ethics is a set of guidelines which are designed to set out acceptable behaviors for members of a particular group, association, or profession. Many organizations govern themselves with a code of ethics, especially when they handle sensitive issues like investments, health care, or interactions with other cultures. In addition to setting a professional standard, a code of ethics can also increase confidence in an organization by showing outsiders that members of the organization are committed to following basic ethical guidelines in the course of doing their work. The format of a code of ethics can vary widely. Unlike more straightforward employee guidelines and codes, a code of ethics usually starts with a section that sets out the purpose, aspirations, and goals of the parent organization. For example, the 2002 code of ethics for the American Psychological Association (APA) begins: Psychologists are committed to increasing scientific and professional knowledge of behavior and people's understanding of themselves and others and to the use of such knowledge to improve the condition of individuals, organizations, and society. Following a general introduction to the function and goals of an organization is a section dedicated to setting out specific behavior standards for members. This section usually covers potential ethical issues such as confidentiality, partisanship, or misuse of information. In addition to addressing theoretical ethical minefields, a code of ethics often contains a section which outlines the procedures for handling grievances, both outside and inside the organization. Ads by Google

Resources in Ethics

Find global collection of ethics resources and experts. www.globethics.net/Ethics Want to Live & Work in Canada? Free evaluation of your creditials www.immigration.ca Access best practices, training, publications, and toolkits www.gcgf.org Study Ethics of Mises, Rothbard & Hoppe. Enroll Today! Academy.Mises.org

Immigrate as a Nurse Corporate Governance Libertarian Ethics

alexekenonprofitorg. Charity, non profit organization support medical mission to Africa alexekenonprofitorganization.org A well written code of ethics will be easy to follow and very clear, with sections that people can point to in order to illustrate specific issues. In the sense of organizations like the APA, members agree to support the code of ethics both because it is good practice and because it promotes their organization. A code of ethics also stands behind most scientific experimentation, ensuring that the results are valid and that the testing was carried out in an ethical way. In the business world, some companies like to use a code of ethics to ensure that their employees act in a responsible manner. A business with a code of ethics may also be viewed more favorably by members of the public, which means that a code of ethics is a sound business decision. Adherence to a code of ethics may also be required for continued employment; an employee manual may include a clearly outlined code of ethics, for example, with a note that failure to follow the code is grounds for termination. Many people also live by a personal code of ethics. Although your code of ethics may not be clearly written out, you may have some strong personal beliefs about various issues which help to guide your choices in life. Some people believe that having a strong personal ethicalcode and abiding by it is a very important tool for maintaining self integrity.

 Moral Behavior Moral behavior is action or actions that produce good outcomes for the individuals as members of a community,or society,it can be applied to the whole global society. Is it not possible for a deputy to oppose a project that was proposed by his/her party leader? Of course, they can, but only under one condition: Adopting such a stance requires honesty and moral behavior under all circumstances. Setting a trap for a party or its leader, intrigue cannot be explained with the discourse of political science. If around 20 Justice and Development Party (AK Party) deputies who first revealed the existence of intraparty opposition within the ranks of the AK Party during the launch of the Kurdish initiative last year had conveyed, either verbally or in writing, to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdo an their opposition to Article 8 in the government s constitutional reform package, on party closures, if they had revealed their opposition during their party s group meeting or at least if they had showed their opposition to this article in the first round of voting on the package, they would have acted morally. This is what they did not do, so it is immoral.

 Christian View of Morality

Christian morality are beliefs and standards of living based on Biblical teaching. These are usually basic things like charity, love to all men, abstinence, and devotion to God.

Briefly stated, Gospel morality is the study of what the New Testament teaches about Christ's expectation of His followers in the moral order. It might also be called the study of Christian revelation about human conduct.

4 QUARTER
A. INTELLECTUAL ASPECTS OF MORALITY  Rational Mind The (hopefully!) rational thoughts of someone living in an increasingly irrational world on science, technology, computing and zombies. "The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the Gift! Albert Einstein (who made that statement) was not only the most significant scientist of the twentieth century but was also an outstanding philosopher and a true mystic. His theory of relativity changed the direction of science by moving it toward a more holistic view of life and the universe.  The Basis of Intelligent Behaviour Learning involves goals and error-assessment mechanisms At its simplest level, whole organism learning requires two things: (1) a goal (or set point), usually determined in advance, and (2) an error-indicating mechanism that quantifies how close newly changed behaviour approaches that goal. For those who prefer a familiar human example with a short-term goal, learning to ride a bike is a good model. The process of learning requires a continual exchange of information and feedback from the goal to the current behaviour in order to correct current behaviour and direct future behaviour more closely towards achieving the goal. Wild plants need trial-and-error learning because the environmental circumstances in which signals arrive can be so variable. That is, the starting point can be indeterminate and rote behaviour would be insufficient to ensure successful progress towards the goal. Whereas the eventual fitness goal may always be the same, the life trajectories attempting to achieve that goal must be learnt. Indications of trial-and-error learning can be deduced from the presence of damped or even robust oscillations in behaviour as the organism continually assesses and makes further corrections to behaviour. The reason that plants respond to gravity, for example, is primarily one of nutrition (shoots to light, roots to minerals and water), leading to better growth and eventual reproduction. But roots and shoots may find themselves at any angle to the final desired position and thus must learn progressively how to approach the internally specified optimal angle if conditions allow. However, the final branch angle adopted depends on a congruence of environmental assessments with internally specified information which can be accessed as a default position when conditions are optimal.

TH

There are numerous plant learning examples, and I detail a few to indicate the point. Oscillations and overshoot in the approach of seedling shoots or roots to the vertical after horizontal displacement have been reported, for example, by Johnsson and Israelsson (1968); Heathcote and Aston (1970); Shen-Miller (1973); and Ishikawa et al. (1991). Johnsson (1979) lists a further 23 earlier references that report this behaviour.Bennet-Clerk and Ball (1951) detailed the gravitropic behaviour of many individual rhizomes and report overshoot, undershoot, growth initially in the wrong direction and sustained oscillations. These authors specifically note that averaging tends to eliminate detection of individual behaviour because individuals are rarely in synchrony with each other. Clifford et al. (1982) reported that deliberate bending of Taraxacum shoots causes overcompensatory growth in the other direction upon release, again indicating error correction with a goal (or set point). Bose (1924) used continuous recording to report that the behaviour of petioles, roots, styles and leaflets of Mimosa to thermal, mechanical and light stimuli often oscillated in their approach to a new state of growth. When leaves are deprived of water, stomata reduce aperture size, but a tendency to overshoot and oscillations in the new steady state have both been reported (Stalfelt, 1929, quoted in Raschke, 1979). Raschke (1970) detected oscillations of the average stomatal aperture determined by porometry in different regions of maize leaves. Johnsson (1976) concluded that both feedback and feed-forward mechanisms are involved in error correction and optimizing stomatal aperture. Following mild water stress there is often a period of compensatory growth after rewatering, indicating an error-correction mechanism (Stocker, 1960). Trees can abscind sufficient leaves to adjust numbers to current water supplies. Some trial-and-error mechanism must determine when sufficient have been dropped (Addicott, 1982). Similar mechanisms must be present for all phenotypically plastic processes. Thus, for example, stem thickening in response to wind sway must be able to access the goal of optimal wind sway and a trial-and-error assessment of how far the individual is from that goal. Resistance to drought or cold can be enhanced by prior treatment to milder conditions of water stress or low temperature (e.g. Kramer, 1980;Kacperska and Kuleza, 1987; Griffiths and McIntyre, 1993). Such well-known behaviour (acclimation) requiring physiological and metabolic changes is analogous to animal learning. Similarities in avoidance responses by plants and animals A single stimulus in the marine snail, Aplysia, designed to produce avoidance responses (the goal in this case) may only initiate short-term memory changes lasting a few minutes (Kandel, 2001). The intracellular mechanisms involve the second messengers Ca2+ and cyclic nucleotides and a limited number of protein kinases that phosphorylate ion channels that serve as temporary memory (Greengard, 2001). Repetition of the stimulus or increasing its intensity modifies protein synthesis in neurones and the formation of new dendrites (neural connections). The transduction of these avoidance stimuli involves MAP kinases, control of gene expression by cyclic nucleotide binding elements (CREB), and the ubiquitin pathway to dispose of protein kinase A-regulatory proteins. Increasing the size of the stimulus again greatly enhances further dendrite formation and results in a strengthening and increased effectiveness of dendrites already present in the chosen pathway of communication by adhesion mechanisms that may involve integrins. Additional growth factors are now involved including EF1 (Greengard, 2001), a protein with similar functions in both animals and plants. The new dendrites in this animal represent memory and as they disappear so the memory disappears. Drought avoidance behaviour by plants is well established. Slight variations in water availability incur equally slight, but temporary, reductions only in cell growth rate, probably involving changes in second messengers, particularly cytosolic Ca2+, [Ca2+]i, and phosphorylation changes in turgor-

generating ATPases and associated ion channels (Begg, 1980; Hanson and Trewavas, 1982; Palmgren, 2001). More intense stress signals initiate changes in protein and wall synthesis, cuticle thickness, stomatal conductance and limited morphological reductions of leaf area (Hsaio et al., 1976; Kramer, 1980). Each of these processes seems to have a discrete water potential threshold at which it is initiated. Perhaps progressive reductions in plasma membrane wall adhesion are responsible, initiating transduction mechanisms and modifying plasmodesmatal functioning. The transduction mechanisms include those mentioned above and MAP kinases and other protein kinases modifying transcription factors (Hetherington, 2001; Jonak et al., 2002). With more severe water stress, the root : shoot ratio increases and, in wild plants, it can vary up to 20-fold (Chapin, 1980). In developing leaves, the internal mesophyll surface area is reduced and stomatal density modified, producing a xeromorphic-type morphology (Stocker, 1960). Increased hairiness, early flowering and a modified vascular system are induced later, indicative of memory of the initial droughting signal (Stocker, 1960; Kramer, 1980). All of the above responses, whether physiological or morphological, must be initiated and transduced by mechanisms that can assess the current supply of water against a notional optimal supply. The plant learns by trial and error when sufficient changes have taken place so that further stress and injury are minimized and some seed production can be achieved. The responses to water stress are modified by interaction and integration with other environmental variables, e.g. mineral nutrition, temperature, humidity, age, previous plant history, disease and probably with all external environmental influences; they are not therefore reflexive responses. Clearly decisions are made by the whole plant. The similarities between avoidance responses in neural circuitry and plant water stress are: (1) a graded response in both cases according to strength of stimulus; (2) similar transduction mechanisms with the different strengths of stimuli; (3) morphological changes in nerve cells and plants induced only by the stronger stimuli; (4) the result of neural learning is to coordinate the behaviour of different muscles to enable an avoidance response by movement. The result of plant learning is to coordinate the developmental behaviour of different tissues to produce an avoidance response by phenotypic plasticity. Muscles are as constrained in their behaviour as any plant tissue, there are just many of them that can be coordinated together to generate great varieties of behaviour. (5) Animal learning lays down additional pathways of communication. Plant learning increases vasculature and increased communication between cells through plasmodesmata (see below). (6) Both organisms integrate the present organismal state to modify the response to further signals. Morphological changes in plants do act like long-term memory, because they will influence subsequent behaviour by the individual plant when other environmental signals are imposed. It can be objected that long-term animal memory is reversible in the absence of further stimulation, whereas morphological changes are not. However, this is not the case. In the short term, stomata usually open again within a few days when water stress is still imposed. Xeromorphic leaves are often the first to be abscised after rewatering and new leaves are formed by bud break. There is root turnover and death (Bazzaz, 1996) enabling some recovery of root : shoot ratios.

Intelligence has been defined in different ways, including the abilities for abstract thought,understanding, communication, reasoning, learning, retaining, planning, and problem solving. Intelligence is most widely studied in humans, but has also been observed in animals and plants. Artificial intelligence is the intelligence of machines or the simulation of intelligence in machines.

Numerous definitions of and hypotheses about intelligence have been proposed since before the twentieth century, with no consensus reached by scholars. Within the discipline of psychology, various approaches to human intelligence have been adopted. The psychometric approach is especially familiar to the general public, as well as being the most researched and by far the most widely used in practical settings. History Intelligence derives from the Latin verb intelligere which derives from inter-legere meaning to "pick out" or discern. A form of this verb,intellectus, became the medieval technical term for understanding, and a translation for the Greek philosophical term nous. This term was however strongly linked to the metaphysical and cosmological theories of teleological scholasticism, including theories of the immortality of the soul, and the concept of the Active Intellect (also known as the Active Intelligence). This entire approach to the study of nature was strongly rejected by the early modern philosophers such as Francis Bacon, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and David Hume, all of whom preferred the word "understanding" in their English philosophical works. Hobbes for example, in his Latin De Corpore, used "intellectus intelligit" (translated in the English version as "the understanding understandeth") as a typical example of a logical absurdity. The term "intelligence" has therefore become less common in English language philosophy, but it has later been taken up (without the scholastic theories which it once implied) in more contemporary psychology. How to define intelligence is controversial. Groups of scientists have stated the following: 1. from "Mainstream Science on Intelligence" (1994), an editorial statement by fifty-two researchers: A very general mental capability that, among other things, involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience. It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic skill, or test-taking smarts. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capability for comprehending our surroundings "catching on," "making sense" of things, or "figuring out" what to do.[5] 2. from "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns" (1995), a report published by the Board of Scientific Affairs of the American Psychological Association: Individuals differ from one another in their ability to understand complex ideas, to adapt effectively to the environment, to learn from experience, to engage in various forms of reasoning, to overcome obstacles by taking thought. Although these individual differences can be substantial, they are never entirely consistent: a given person's intellectual performance will vary on different occasions, in different domains, as judged by different criteria. Concepts of "intelligence" are attempts to clarify and organize this complex set of phenomena. Although considerable clarity has been achieved in some areas, no such conceptualization has yet answered all the important questions, and none commands universal assent. Indeed, when two dozen prominent theorists were recently asked to define intelligence, they gave two dozen, somewhat different, definitions. Besides the foregoing definitions, these psychology and learning researchers also have defined intelligence as: Researcher Quotation

Alfred Binet

Judgment, otherwise called "good sense," "practical sense," "initiative," the faculty of adapting one's self to circumstances ... auto-critique.

David Wechsler

The aggregate or global capacity of the individual to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment.

Lloyd Humphreys

"...the resultant of the process of acquiring, storing in memory, retrieving, combining, comparing, and using in new contexts information and conceptual skills."

Cyril Burt

Innate general cognitive ability

Howard Gardner

To my mind, a human intellectual competence must entail a set of skills of problem solving enabling the individual to resolve genuine problems or difficulties that he or she encounters and, when appropriate, to create an effective product and must also entail the potential for finding or creating problems and thereby laying the groundwork for the acquisition of new knowledge.

Linda Gottfredson

The ability to deal with cognitive complexity.

Sternberg & Salter

Goal-directed adaptive behavior.

Reuven Feuerstein

The theory of Structural Cognitive Modifiability describes intelligence as "the unique propensity of human beings to change or modify the structure of their cognitive functioning to adapt to the changing demands of a life situation."

What is considered intelligent varies with culture. For example, when asked to sort, the Kpelle people take a functional approach. A Kpelleparticipant stated "the knife goes with the orange because it cuts it." When asked how a fool would sort, they sorted linguistically, putting the knife with other implements and the orange with other foods, which is the style considered intelligent in other cultures. Human intelligence The approach to understanding intelligence with the most supporters and published research over the longest period of time is based on psychometric testing. It is also by far the most widely used in practical settings. Intelligence quotient (IQ) tests include the Stanford-Binet, Raven's Progressive Matrices, the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale and theKaufman Assessment Battery for Children. There are also psychometric tests that are not intended to measure intelligence itself but some closely related construct such as scholastic aptitude. In the United States examples include the SSAT, the SAT, the ACT, the GRE, the MCAT, theLSAT, and the GMAT. Intelligence tests are widely used in educational, business, and military settings due to their efficacy in predicting behavior. IQ and g (discussed in the next section) are correlated with many important social outcomes individuals with low IQs are more likely to be divorced, have a child out of marriage, be incarcerated, and need long-term welfare support, while individuals with high

IQs are associated with more years of education, higher status jobs and higher income. Intelligence is significantly correlated with successful training and performance outcomes, and IQ/g is the single best predictor of successful job performance. General intelligence factor or g There are many different kinds of IQ tests using a wide variety of test tasks. Some tests consist of a single type of task, others rely on a broad collection of tasks with different contents (visual-spatial, verbal, numerical) and asking for different cognitive processes (e.g., reasoning, memory, rapid decisions, visual comparisons, spatial imagery, reading, and retrieval of general knowledge). The psychologist Charles Spearman early in the 20th century carried out the first formal factor analysis of correlations between various test tasks. He found a trend for all such tests to correlate positively with each other, which is called a positive manifold. Spearman found that a single common factor explained the positive correlations among test. Spearman named it g for "general intelligence factor". He interpreted it as the core of human intelligence that, to a larger or smaller degree, influences success in all cognitive tasks and thereby creates the positive manifold. This interpretation of g as a common cause of test performance is still dominant in psychometrics. An alternative interpretation was recently advanced by van der Maas and colleagues. Their mutualism model assumes that intelligence depends on several independent mechanisms, none of which influences performance on all cognitive tests. These mechanisms support each other so that efficient operation of one of them makes efficient operation of the others more likely, thereby creating the positive manifold. IQ tasks and tests can be ranked by how highly they load on the g factor. Tests with high gloadings are those that correlate highly with most other tests. One comprehensive study investigating the correlations between a large collection of tests and tasks has found that theRaven's Progressive Matrices have a particularly high correlation with most other tests and tasks. The Raven's is a test of inductive reasoning with abstract visual material. It consists of a series of problems, sorted approximately by increasing difficulty. Each problem presents a 3 x 3 matrix of abstract designs with one empty cell; the matrix is constructed according to a rule, and the person must find out the rule to determine which of 8 alternatives fits into the empty cell. Because of its high correlation with other tests, the Raven's Progressive Matrices are generally acknowledged as a good indicator of general intelligence. This is problematic, however, because there are substantial gender differences on the Raven's, which are not found when g is measured directly by computing the general factor from a broad collection of tests. IQ tests generally normalize or average over a sample population. This is the reason the normal distribution looks like what is commonly called a bell-curve. The IQ testing and structure of the normal distribution come about to make a score of 100 to be average intelligence. Any scores below or above this average are what slope down to the left and right of the graph of a normal distribution. Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory Many of the broad, recent IQ tests have been greatly influenced by the Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory. It is argued to reflect much of what is known about intelligence from research. A hierarchy of factors is used. g is at the top. Under it there are 10 broad abilities that in turn are subdivided into 70 narrow abilities. The broad abilities are:
 

Fluid Intelligence (Gf): includes the broad ability to reason, form concepts, and solve problems using unfamiliar information or novel procedures. Crystallized Intelligence (Gc): includes the breadth and depth of a person's acquired knowledge, the ability to communicate one's knowledge, and the ability to reason using previously learned experiences or procedures.

     

Quantitative Reasoning (Gq): the ability to comprehend quantitative concepts and relationships and to manipulate numerical symbols. Reading & Writing Ability (Grw): includes basic reading and writing skills. Short-Term Memory (Gsm): is the ability to apprehend and hold information in immediate awareness and then use it within a few seconds. Long-Term Storage and Retrieval (Glr): is the ability to store information and fluently retrieve it later in the process of thinking. Visual Processing (Gv): is the ability to perceive, analyze, synthesize, and think with visual patterns, including the ability to store and recall visual representations. Auditory Processing (Ga): is the ability to analyze, synthesize, and discriminate auditory stimuli, including the ability to process and discriminate speech sounds that may be presented under distorted conditions. Processing Speed (Gs): is the ability to perform automatic cognitive tasks, particularly when measured under pressure to maintain focused attention. Decision/Reaction Time/Speed (Gt): reflect the immediacy with which an individual can react to stimuli or a task (typically measured in seconds or fractions of seconds; not to be confused with Gs, which typically is measured in intervals of 2 3 minutes). See Mental chronometry.

 

Modern tests do not necessarily measure of all of these broad abilities. For example, Gq and Grw may be seen as measures of school achievement and not IQ. Gt may be difficult to measure without special equipment. g was earlier often subdivided into only Gf and Gc which were though to correspond to the Nonverbal or Performance subtests and Verbal subtests in earlier versions of the popular Wechsler IQ test. More recent research has shown the situation to be more complex. Other theories There are critics of IQ, who do not dispute the stability of IQ test scores or the fact that they predict certain forms of achievement rather effectively. They do argue, however, that to base a concept of intelligence on IQ test scores alone is to ignore many important aspects of mental ability.[1] On the other hand, Linda S. Gottfredson (2006) has argued that the results of thousands of studies support the importance of IQ for school and job performance (see also the work of Schmidt & Hunter, 2004). IQ also predicts or correlates with numerous other life outcomes. In contrast, empirical support for non-g intelligences is lacking or very poor. She argued that despite this the ideas of multiple non-gintelligences are very attractive to many due to the suggestion that everyone can be smart in some way. Multiple intelligences Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences is based on studies not only of normal children and adults but also by studies of gifted individuals (including so-called "savants"), of persons who have suffered brain damage, of experts and virtuosos, and of individuals from diverse cultures. This led Gardner to break intelligence down into at least eight different components: logical, linguistic, spatial, musical,kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalist and existential intelligences. He argues that psychometric tests address only linguistic and logical plus some aspects of spatial intelligence. A major criticism of Gardner's theory is that it has never been tested, or subjected to peer review, by Gardner or anyone else, and indeed that it is unfalsifiable. Others (e.g. Locke, 2005) have suggested that recognizing many specific forms of intelligence (specific aptitude theory) implies a political rather than scientific agenda, intended to appreciate the uniqueness in all individuals, rather than recognizing potentially true and meaningful differences in individual capacities. Schmidt and Hunter (2004) suggest that the

predictive validity of specific aptitudes over and above that of general mental ability, or "g", has not received empirical support. Howard Gardner mentions in his Multiple Intelligences The Theory in Practice book, briefly about his main seven intelligences he introduced. In his book, he starts off describing Linguistic and Logical Intelligence because he believed that in society, we have put these two intelligences on a pedestal. However, Gardner believes all of the intelligences he found are equal. Note: At the time of the publication of Gardner's book Multiple Intelligences The Theory in Practice, naturalist and existential intelligences were not mentioned. Linguistic Intelligence: The kind of ability exhibited in its fullest form, perhaps, by poets. Logical-Mathematics Intelligence: Is logical and mathematical ability, as well as scientific ability. Howard Gardner believed Jean Piaget may have thought he was studying all intelligence, but in truth, Piaget was really only focusing on the logical mathematical intelligence. Spatial Intelligence: The ability to form a mental model of a spatial world and to be able to maneuver and operate using that model. Musical Intelligence: Leonard Bernstein had lots of it; Mozart, presumably, had even more. Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence: The ability to solve problems or to fashion products using one's whole body, or parts of the body. For example, dancers, athletes, surgeons, craftspeople, etc. Interpersonal Intelligence: The ability to understand people. People who are well in interpersonal are most likely teachers, politicians, clinicians, religious leaders, etc. Intrapersonal Intelligence: A correlative ability, turned inward. It is a capacity to form an accurate, veridical model of oneself and to be able to use that model to operate effectively in life. Triarchic theory of intelligence Robert Sternberg proposed the triarchic theory of intelligence to provide a more comprehensive description of intellectual competence than traditional differential or cognitive theories of human ability. The triarchic theory describes three fundamental aspects of intelligence. Analytic intelligence comprises the mental processes through which intelligence is expressed. Creative intelligence is necessary when an individual is confronted with a challenge that is nearly, but not entirely, novel or when an individual is engaged in automatizing the performance of a task. Practical intelligence is bound in a sociocultural milieu and involves adaptation to, selection of, and shaping of the environment to maximize fit in the context. The triarchic theory does not argue against the validity of a general intelligence factor; instead, the theory posits that general intelligence is part of analytic intelligence, and only by considering all three aspects of intelligence can the full range of intellectual functioning be fully understood. More recently, the triarchic theory has been updated and renamed the Theory of Successful Intelligence by Sternberg. Intelligence is defined as an individual's assessment of success in life by the individual's own (idiographic) standards and within the individual's sociocultural context. Success is achieved by using combinations of analytical, creative, and practical intelligence. The three aspects of intelligence are referred to as processing skills. The processing skills are applied to the pursuit of success through what were the three elements of practical intelligence: adapting to, shaping of, and selecting of one's environments. The mechanisms that employ the processing skills to achieve success include utilizing one's strengths and compensating or correcting for one's weaknesses. Sternberg's theories and research on intelligence remain contentious within the scientific community.

PASS Theory of Intelligence Based on A. R. Luria s (1966) seminal work on the modularization of brain function, and supported by decades of neuroimaging research, the PASS Theory of Intelligence proposes that cognition is organized in three systems and four processes. The first is the Planning, which involves executive functions responsible for controlling and organizing behavior, selecting and constructing strategies, and monitoring performance. The second is the Attention process, which is responsible for maintaining arousal levels and alertness, and ensuring focus on relevant stimuli. The next comprise two processes ,Simultaneous and Successive processing to encode, transform, and retain information. Simultaneous processing is engaged when the relationship between items and their integration into whole units of information is required. Examples of this include recognizing figures, such as a triangle within a circle vs. a circle within a triangle, or the difference between he had a shower before breakfast and he had breakfast before a shower. Successive processing is required for organizing separate items in a sequence such as remembering a sequence of words or actions exactly in the order in which they had just been presented. These four processes are functions of four areas of the brain. Planning is broadly located in the front part of our brains, the frontal lobe. Attention and arousal are combined functions of the frontal lobe and the lower parts of the cortex, although the parietal lobes are also involved in attention as well. Simultaneous processing and Successive processing occur in the posterior region or the back of the brain. Simultaneous processing is broadly associated with the occipital and the parietal lobes while Successive processing is broadly associated with the frontal-temporal lobes. The PASS (Planning/Attention/Simultaneous/Successive) theory is heavily indebted to both Luria (1966, 1973), and studies in cognitive psychology involved in promoting a better look at intelligence. Piaget's theory and Neo-Piagetian theories In Piaget's theory of cognitive development the focus is not on mental abilities but rather on a child's mental models of the world. As a child develops, increasingly more accurate models of the world are developed which enable the child to interact with the world better. One example being object permanence where the child develops a model where objects continue to exist even when they cannot be seen, heard, or touched. Piaget's theory described four main stages and many sub-stages in the development. Degree of progress through these is correlated with but is not identical with psychometric IQ. Neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development expand Piaget's theory in various ways such as also considering psychometric-like factors such as processing speed and working memory, "hypercognitive" factors like self-monitoring, more stages, and more consideration on how progress may vary in different domains such as spatial or social. Piaget's theory has been criticized for the age of appearance of a new model of the world, such as object permanence, being dependent on how the testing is done (see the article on object permanence). More generally, the theory may be very difficult to test empirically due to the difficulty of proving or not proving that a mental model is the explanation for the results of the testing. Emotional intelligence Emotional intelligence is an argued ability, capacity, skill or, a self-perceived ability to identify, assess, and control the emotions of oneself, of others, and of groups. Different models have been proposed for the definition of emotional intelligence and there is disagreement about how the term should be used. The concept is controversial (Locke, 2005), with some seeing it as a skill or form of personality rather than intelligence, and its predicative ability, especially after controlling for the effects of IQ and the Big Five personality traits, is disputed.

Latent inhibition Latent inhibition has been related to elements of intelligence, namely creativity and genius. Evolution of intelligence The ancestors of modern humans evolved large and complex brains exhibiting an ever-increasing intelligence through a long evolutionary process (see Homininae). Different explanations have been proposed. Improving intelligence Eugenics is a social philosophy which advocates the improvement of human hereditary traits through various forms of intervention. Conscious efforts to influence intelligence raise ethical issues. Eugenics has variously been regarded as meritorious or deplorable in different periods of history, falling greatly into disrepute after the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War II. Neuroethics considers the ethical, legal and social implications of neuroscience, and deals with issues such as the difference between treating a human neurological disease and enhancing the human brain, and how wealth impacts access to neurotechnology. Neuroethical issues interact with the ethics of human genetic engineering. Because intelligence appears to be at least partly dependent on brain structure and the genes shaping brain development, it has been proposed that genetic engineering could be used to enhance the intelligence, a process sometimes called biological uplift in science fiction. Experiments on mice have demonstrated superior ability in learning and memory in various behavioral tasks. Transhumanist theorists study the possibilities and consequences of developing and using techniques to enhance human abilities and aptitudes, and individuals ameliorating what they regard as undesirable and unnecessary aspects of the human condition. According to Rosemary Hopcroft, a sociologist at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Intelligence is negatively linked with sexual frequency (people with higher levels of education often have lower numbers of sexual partners). Animal and plant intelligence Although humans have been the primary focus of intelligence researchers, scientists have also attempted to investigate animal intelligence, or more broadly, animal cognition. These researchers are interested in studying both mental ability in a particular species, and comparing abilities between species. They study various measures of problem solving, as well as mathematical and language abilities. Some challenges in this area are defining intelligence so that it means the same thing across species (e.g. comparing intelligence between literate humans and illiterate animals), and then operationalizing a measure that accurately compares mental ability across different species and contexts. Wolfgang Khler's pioneering research on the intelligence of apes is a classic example of research in this area. Stanley Coren's book, The Intelligence of Dogs is a notable popular book on the topic. Nonhuman animals particularly noted and studied for their intelligence include chimpanzees, bonobos (notably the language-using Kanzi) and other great apes, dolphins, elephants and to some extent parrots and ravens. Controversy exists over the extent to which these judgments of intelligence are accurate. Cephalopod intelligence also provides important comparative study. Cephalopods appear to exhibit characteristics of significant intelligence, yet their nervous systems differ radically from those of most other notably intelligent life-forms (mammals and birds).

It has been argued that plants should also be classified as being intelligent based on their ability to sense the environment and adjust theirmorphology, physiology and phenotype accordingly. Artificial intelligence Artificial intelligence (or AI) is both the intelligence of machines and the branch of computer science which aims to create it, through "the study and design of intelligent agents" or "rational agents", where an intelligent agent is a system that perceives its environment and takes actions which maximize its chances of success. Achievements in artificial intelligence include constrained and well-defined problems such as games, crossword-solving and optical character recognition. General intelligence or strong AI has not yet been achieved and is a long-term goal of AI research. Among the traits that researchers hope machines will exhibit are reasoning, knowledge, planning, learning, communication, perception, and the ability to move and manipulate objects. In the field of artificial intelligence there is no consensus on how closely the brain should besimulated.

B.COMMUNICATION Intrapersonal communication is language use or thought internal to the communicator. It can be useful to envision intrapersonal communication occurring in the mind of the individual in a model which contains a sender, receiver, and feedback loop. Intrapersonal communication is the act of having an internal dialogue with yourself; or in other words, self-talk! Some examples of this include: "Asking yourself what you want for dinner tonight"; or "Asking yourself if you should have or shouldn't have done something?" Intrapersonal Communication is the most basic of the communication contexts or levels. It occurs when an individual sends and receives messages internally. We spend most of our time thinking. And our thought process is nothing but intrapersonal communication where one person is sending messages and the same person receives them. Here we use the central nervous system (CNS) and peripheral nervous system (PNS) for generation, transmission and receiving of messages. We react to both external and internal stimuli this way. In addition to our thought process, many times we also talk aloud with ourselves. Intrapersonal communication involves our intellect as well as our physical and emotional sensations. The way we communicate with ourselves reflects the various aspects the self-physical, emotional, intellectual and social. It also reflects our habits, roles, attitudes, beliefs and values. Intrapersonal communication is not just a level of communication; it is in fact the very basis of all communication. While participating in the higher levels of communication like interpersonal communication, group communication, and mass communication, we also indulge intrapersonal communication. And it takes place every moment that we are alive. To understand intrapersonal communication, we need to understand ourselves. At the physical or physiological level or what is called the physical self , we have our bodily parts, the various systems that perform the bodily functions like digestion, breathing, circulation, elimination of bodily wastes, etc. also there are the five senses that help us receive external stimuli. Then there is processing of stimuli-both external and internal. Next there is the emotional self which prompts our emotional responses-as in case of our responses to stimuli like fright, flight and fight, etc. our intellectual self involves mental actions or behavior like word and sentence formation, use of comparison, use of logic and reasoning, problem solving, and decision making, etc. Though we think that we know everything about ourselves, but there is more to the self-concept. This is because we maintain separate private and public selves. These have been illustrated by the

social scientists Joseph Luft and Harrington Ingham. They created a model called the Johari Window. This model compares various aspects of open (public) and closed (private) communication relationships. Brief Theory of Communication Expressing our wants, feelings, thoughts and opinions clearly and effectively is only half of the communication process needed for interpersonal effectiveness. The other half is listening and understanding what others communicate to us. When a person decides to communicate with another person, he/she does so to fulfill a need. The person wants something, feels discomfort, and/or has feelings or thoughts about something. In deciding to communicate, the person selects the method or code which he/she believes will effectively deliver the message to the other person. The code used to send the message can be either verbal or nonverbal. When the other person receives the coded message, they go through the process of decoding or interpreting it into understanding and meaning. Effective communication exists between two people when the receiver interprets and understands the sender s message in the same way the sender intended it. Sources of Difficulty by the Speaker Voice volume too low to be heard. Making the message too complex, either by including too many unnecessary details or too many issues. Getting lost, forgetting your point or the purpose of the interaction. Body language or nonverbal elements contradicting or interfering with the verbal message, such as smiling when anger or hurt is being expressed. Paying too much attention to how the other person is taking the message, or how the person might react. Using a very unique code or unconventional method for delivering the message.

Sources of Difficulty by the Listener Being preoccupied and not listening. Being so interested in what you have to say that you listen mainly to find an opening to get the floor. Formulating and listening to your own rebuttal to what the speaker is saying. Listening to your own personal beliefs about what is being said. Evaluating and making judgments about the speaker or the message. Not asking for clarification when you know that you do not understand.

The Three Basic Listening Modes 1. Competitive or Combative Listening happens when we are more interested in promoting our own point of view than in understanding or exploring someone

else s view. We either listen for openings to take the floor, or for flaws or weak points we can attack. As we pretend to pay attention we are impatiently waiting for an opening, or internally formulating our rebuttal and planning our devastating comeback that will destroy their argument and make us the victor. 2. In Passive or Attentive Listening we are genuinely interested in hearing and understanding the other person s point of view. We are attentive and passively listen. We assume that we heard and understand correctly. but stay passive and do not verify it. 3. Active or Reflective Listening is the single most useful and important listening skill. In active listening we are also genuinely interested in understanding what the other person is thinking, feeling, wanting or what the message means, and we are active in checking out our understanding before we respond with our own new message. We restate or paraphrase our understanding of their message and reflect it back to the sender for verification. This verification or feedback process is what distinguishes active listening and makes it effective. Levels of Communication Listening effectively is difficult because people vary in their communication skills and in how clearly they express themselves, and often have different needs, wants and purposes for interacting. The different types of interaction or levels of communication also adds to the difficulty. The four different types or levels are. 1. 2. 3. 4. Clichs. Facts. Thoughts and beliefs. Feelings and emotions.

As a listener we attend to the level that we think is most important. Failing to recognize the level most relevant and important to the speaker can lead to a kind of crossed wires where the two people are not on the same wavelength. The purpose of the contact and the nature of our relationship with the person will usually determine what level or levels are appropriate and important for the particular interaction. Note the different requirements in the following situations: You re lost, and you ask a stranger for directions. Your child comes to you crying. You are in trouble and someone offers to help. Your spouse is being affectionate and playful. Opposing council is cross-examining you in court.

If we don t address the appropriate elements we will not be very effective, and can actually make the situation worse. For example: If your wife is telling you about her hurt feelings and you focus on the facts of the situation and don t acknowledge her feelings, she will likely become even more upset. There is a real distinction between merely hearing the words and reallylistening for the

message. When we listen effectively we understand what the person is thinking and/or feeling from the other person s own perspective. It is as if we were standing in the other person s shoes, seeing through his/her eyes and listening through the person's ears. Our own viewpoint may be different and we may not necessarily agree with the person, but as we listen, we understand from the other's perspective. To listen effectively, we must be actively involved in the communication process, and not just listening passively. We all act and respond on the basis of our understanding, and too often there is a misunderstanding that neither of us is aware of. With active listening, if a misunderstanding has occurred, it will be known immediately, and the communication can be clarified before any further misunderstanding occurs. Several other possible benefits occur with active listening: Sometimes a person just needs to be heard and acknowledged before the person is willing to consider an alternative or soften his /her position. It is often easier for a person to listen to and consider the other s position when that person knows the other is listening and considering his/her position. It helps people to spot the flaws in their reasoning when they hear it played back without criticism. It also helps identify areas of agreement so the areas of disagreement are put in perspective and are diminished rather than magnified. Reflecting back what we hear each other say helps give each a chance to become aware of the different levels that are going on below the surface. This helps to bring things into the open where they can be more readily resolved. If we accurately understand the other person s view, we can be more effective in helping the person see the flaws in his/her position. If we listen so we can accurately understand the other s view, we can also be more effective in discovering the flaws in our own position.

Listening Tips Usually it is important to paraphrase and use your own words in verbalizing your understanding of the message. Parroting back the words verbatim is annoying and does not ensure accurate understanding of the message. Depending on the purpose of the interaction and your understanding of what is relevant, you could reflect back the other persons: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Account of the facts. Thoughts and beliefs. Feelings and emotions. Wants, needs or motivation. Hopes and expectations.

Don t respond to just the meaning of the words, look for the feelings or intent beyond the words. The dictionary or surface meaning of the words or code used by the sender is not

the message. Inhibit your impulse to immediately answer questions. The code may be in the form of a question. Sometimes people ask questions when they really want to express themselves and are not open to hearing an answer. Know when to quit using active listening. Once you accurately understand the sender s message, it may be appropriate to respond with your own message. Don t use active listening to hide and avoid revealing your own position. If you are confused and know you do not understand, either tell the person you don t understand and ask him/her to say it another way, or use your best guess. If you are incorrect, the person will realize it and will likely attempt to correct your misunderstanding. Active listening is a very effective first response when the other person is angry, hurt or expressing difficult feelings toward you, especially in relationships that are important to you. Use eye contact and listening body language. Avoid looking at your watch or at other people or activities around the room. Face and lean toward the speaker and nod your head, as it is appropriate. Be careful about crossing your arms and appearing closed or critical.

Ten Golden Rules of Communication You say, "I am talking, are you listening?" Maybe not. Maybe, there were other things that were competing for my attention at the time you were talking. Listen to this one, "Had you paid closer attention to what I said, I'm sure you would've understood what I meant." Don't be so sure. It depends how clear your communication is. It is possible that because the listener really paid close attention to what you said, he or she ended up more confused. We take communication for granted based on our simplistic assumptions, such as, "If I say something you must pay close attention," or, "You must understand what I say. If you don't understand then you are either not listening or you must be dumb." Furthermore, if you are a person in an authority position such as, a parent at home, or a boss at work, this becomes more of an issue. You then expect that when you talk, your child or your subordinate must pay close attention, understand the whole content of your speech and remember for ever and at all times what you told them. This highlights the point that, when it comes to communicating our ideas to others, we tend towards self-centered. Communication is not completed until the message is received by the other person. Delivering the message is the easy part. The hard part is to make sure that the message is received by the intended party. We tend to be communication lazy. A majority of us only pay attention to delivering the message, the easy part, and then overlook the recievability of the message, the hard part. Communication is hard work. These ten golden rules of communication may help to keep you on your communication toes: 1. There are many slips between the other person's ears and your lips. The message you want to convey may be garbled, distorted, camouflaged or completely lost by more dominant messages.

This happens because the recipient interprets your message by his or her brain, not by your brain. To avoid this, think about the possible ways in which your message can be misunderstood or distorted by a recipient who is not on the same wave length or of the same orientation that you are. 2. People are not mind readers. They can't read your mind. They don't know what is really bothering you or what you really want from them. Ask clearly and precisely what you want. High achievers are good in letting others know what they want. Some speakers deliver the whole speech without spelling out even once what they want from their audience. Then they feel unhappy when they don't get the results they expected from their speech. 3. Feel a genuinely liking for the people with whom you are communicating. Remember the saying, "Nobody cares how much you know, unless they know how much you care." When they feel you really like them, they make an extra effort to understand what you want. 4. The rule of listening. There are two ears and one tongue, spend twice more time in listening than in speaking. The more closely you listen to others, the more effective you would be in communicating your ideas to them according to their frame of reference. It is by listening close to them, that you will know how they think, what their favorite expressions are and how you can arouse their interest. 5. The spoken word is but a small component of communication. The spoken word constitutes of only 7 percent of the message, the other 93% is non-verbal. If you say the words, "You are fine," but, your face, body and your voice is conveying, "I can't stand you," which one do you think will get conveyed? Match your body language, voice tone, and other non-verbal behavior with your words. 6. Keep your communication pure and simple. Do not contaminate it with sarcasm, witticisms, or put downs. When you do that, people stop listening to what you say and get flooded with emotions and thoughts regarding how you are treating them. 7. The rule of repetition. Tell them first what you are going to tell them, then tell them, and then tell them what you just told them. 8. Check. Ensure the accuracy and comprehension of your message. For example, when you leave a message for someone, ask the person who has taken your message to repeat it so you can check it for its accuracy and comprehension. Do the same when you instruct your staff to perform a task for you. 9. Review. Leave a review document for the recipient to take home. Give them something to review later and correct themselves, for example, a written summary of steps 10. Walk your talk. Match your actions with your words. If you say something and then do another, your action will be received as the real message and not your spoken words.

Key Communication Pointers I truly believe that how we choose to communicate something is as important (or more important) than what we choose to communicate. Therefore, it is very important before speaking to be mindful of what our intention is, and what our ultimate goal is, in order to present our thoughts and feelings in such a way that we create a win/win scenario for both ourselves, and the person we're talking to. By win/win, I mean the person talking wants to make him or herself understood, without imposing his thoughts and feelings onto the listener. His ultimate goal is the following: "UNDERSTAND ME"!! Before speaking, it is important to ask ourselves the following question: "What am I hoping to achieve by sharing my thoughts and feelings in the first place?" "What is my intention?" Am I intending to shame, ridicule, intimidate, mock, judge, or malign someone else? Am I hoping to debate that person, and ultimately prove that I am right and that he or she is wrong? Am I looking to incite that person, in the hopes of engaging him or her in a war of words? If these are our intentions before entering into a conversation with someone else, chances are we will only say things that we will regret, and make matters worse for ourselves and for our relationship. I believe that good, effective communicators know to keep their mouths shut when they are feeling tempted to lash out at others with bad intentions, and say things that they will later regret. These self-disciplined individuals wait until they are feeling more calm and rational before choosing to speak their minds. And when they finally do communicate with someone else, they enter into the conversation intending to relatetheir thoughts and feelings in a way that is intended to be constructive. The root word in "Relationships" is "Relate", and this is likely because "relationships" thrive or die based on how we relate to others. And how we choose to relate to others is entirely up to us. For example, if two people disagree, than they can choose to agree to disagree!! They can choose to remember that another person's subjective reality, or subjective worldview, need not threaten their own. The can also keep in mind that differing world views, perceptions, and/or opinions need not be mutually exclusive. They can coexist in harmony with the other, can't they?!! This does not mean that the listener must also agree with what we are saying. The listener need not inherit our point of view. Consequently, the listener need not feel threatened by our opposing point of view either!! Just because I insist the world is black doesn't negate or wash away your conviction that the world is white!! Therefore, you can welcome my different point of view with an open mind, and open heart. We must remember that our perceptions, points of view, and beliefs are our very own. No one has the power to take our perceptions away from us. What's mine is mine, and what's yours is yours!! I can have my reality, you can have yours, and we can still chat away, openly sharing our thoughts, feelings, and ideas. Chances are that I'll learn something from you, and perhaps you'll learn something from me.

Additional Communication pointers: 1) Avoid black and white words like "always" and "never." More often than not there are shades of gray, and when we use words like "always" and "never", we sound absolutist, and/or rigid in our thinking. And this type of thinking sets us up to feel resentment towards others. For example, I might be tempted to tell a friend that he is never on time, or always late. Such an accusatory internal dialogue will likely trigger angry feelings inside of me for this person. Yet Chances are I am forgetting the many times this friend has indeed been on time. By making such an accusation, I am disqualifying the many times my friend has actually been punctual. In turn, he is liable to feel that his efforts in the past to be on time have been all but forgotten. He may subsequently feel disheartened, and may choose to stop coming by to see me all together. 2) Use "I" statements. More often than not people start their communications with others using the word, "You." For example, a person will say, "you're making me angry." Or they will say, "You're not hearing me." In these instances, the word, "you", puts people on their heels and may contribute to their feeling defensive. Moreover, the person speaking is not taking ownership of and/or responsibility for their own thoughts and feelings. I personally believe that when people share their thoughts and feelings with others by starting with the word, "I," their chances of having these particular sentiments considered go up considerably. This is because they are taking ownership of their thoughts and feelings, and this in turn gives the listener enough personal space to consider and respond to what is being said. Rather than become defensive, the listener will likely become more openminded, and receptive to what is being said. Therefore, it would be in the speaker's best interest to say, "I'm feeling angry", in lieu of, "you're making me angry." And it would be in the speaker's best interest to say, "I'm not feeling heard," in lieu of "you're not hearing me." One common mistake that people often make is when they begin each sentence with the phrase, "I feel that." For example, a person might say, "I feel that you're being selfish." Someone else might say, "I feel that sex shouldn't be taught in schools." It is important to remember that an "I feel" statement is meant to precede an expression of feelings. Statements that begin with, "I feel that you" generally defeat the whole purpose of sharing your feelings in the first place. For example, the statement, "I feel that you're being selfish" is really just another way of saying, "You're being selfish." It's a "You" statement masqueraded as an "I" statement, and so the addition of the word, "feel," in your statement serves no purpose whatsoever. Moreover, the statement, "I feel thatsex shouldn't be taught in schools" is really just a poorly disguised way of sharing your opinion and/or judgment about

whether or not sex should be taught in our schools. In this instance, I believe that you've fallen short of your goal yet again to share your personal thoughts and feelings with someone else. 3) Eliminate the word, "should," from your vocabulary. There is a saying in pop psychology, "Don't should on yourself or on others." The word, "should," can feel shaming to people. Moreover, it has a self-righteous ring to it as well. For example, a person struggling with shedding pounds doesn't want to hear from someone else, "you should lose weight." An A student would rather not hear from his parents, "You should run for president of your class." In such instances, the well meaning feedback that is couched in the word, "should," will likely put off the person on the receiving end because nobody wishes to be told what to do in such a self-righteous, presumptuous manner. In the first instance, the person may be may be thinking, "Who the hell are you to tell me to lose weight?" And in the next instance, the A student may be thinking, "Mom and Dad, don't tell me what I should and shouldn't be doing." There are other ways to make recommendations to people without encroaching on that person's personal space and violating that person's psychic boundaries. In the first example, the well meaning friend could say to his overweight friend, "I want to encourage you to lose weight because being heavy could end up causing serious health problems for you in the long run." In this instance, the friend who is offering this potentially hurtful feedback sounds genuinely interested in his buddy's health, and well being. By offering up a reason for his concern, he sounds like he is speaking up for a valid reason, and coming from a loving place. He is making it clear that he is not intending to sit in judgment of his friend, and take a shot at his already low self-esteem. As for the honor student's parents, they could say to their child, "I think it would be great if you decided to run for president of your class." This approach would likely sound far more encouraging to their child, and he or she will likely give their idea some careful thought and consideration. 4) When asking other's questions, do your best to avoid beginning your question with the word, "why". "Why" questions put people in their heads, and not in their hearts. They also put people on their heels, and on the defensive. Finally, "why" questions get people thinking more pragmatically, and solution-focused, and their focus is no longer on their feelings, and being introspective. Take, for example, the question, "Why are you late?" Or take the question, "Why are you feeling so sad?" Or take this last question, "Whydon't you like me?" These questions come across as though the person being questioned is undergoing an interrogation!! One way to ask the very same question in a way that allows the person responding to have more room to reflect is by beginning with the words, "How come" or "What." The question, "How come you're so late?" has a more inquisitive tone to it than that of an interrogation. The question, "How come you're feeling so sad?" has a rounder edge to it and affords the person

being asked an opportunity to reflect and explore the roots of their sadness, rather than feel put upon to come up with a heady reason to explain away their sadness. Additional examples of these kinds of questions that come to mind are, "How come you don't like me?" and "What about my behavior bothers you?" Again, questions asked in this vain implicitly give the person on the receiving end permission to explore his or her thoughts and feelings without feeling put upon to reflexively deny that such feelings exist in the first place. In conclusion, do your best to remember when asking questions that the words, "How" and "what," give people the room they need to process for themselves what they are thinking and feeling. "How" and "what" questions inspire others to open up and share their thoughts and feelings in greater depth with you, and with more honesty. 5) Do your best to avoid saying that someone "makes" you feel or think one way or another. For example, "He makes me feel loved." Or "Hemade me angry." When used this way, the words "makes" and "made" respectively imply that someone other than yourself is responsible for the way you think and feel. In truth, no one can "make" you feel loved, or "make" you feel angry without your consent. When a person uses these words in this way, he or she sounds like a passive witness in his own life, a chance recipient of the good and bad that is up for grabs all around them, every day. I believe that we are ultimately responsible for how we choose to feel and how we choose to receive information and feedback from others. We generally make choices to open our hearts and take in the love from those around us. Furthermore, we are responsible for choosing to react angrily when provoked by others. For example, a more empowered way to say how you feel around a loved one would be, "I feel loved by him." Said in this way, it is implied that you are the one who is letting in that person's love for you. Instead of saying, "He made me angry", take ownership of your feelings and say, "I felt angry" when he said or did that." Said this way, it is implicitly understood once more that you are the person responsible for allowing yourself to feel triggered by someone else. By the way, the world is filled with people who will make every effort to frustrate and anger you. These individuals may find some sadistic pleasure in seeing your face redden with anger. Perhaps baiting you in this way offers them a fleeting sense of power and control over you. Their ultimate goal is to lure you in, and catch you, hook, line, and sinker. Whether or not you choose to feel angry, and bite onto their dangling hook is entirely up to you. This reminds me of some of the men I worked with when facilitating domestic violence groups some time ago. Many claimed that their girlfriends, wives, and children were the ones responsible for making them mad, and making them act violently towards them. A man might typically say, "She was complaining about everything, and made me feel angry as hell." "She kept on complaining for over an hour, and mademe go over to her and slap her so she'd shut up."

I believe these guys were consciously and sometimes unconsciously manipulating their choice of words to avoid taking responsibility for their actions, and simultaneously projecting the blame onto their victims. In truth, these men were the ones who chose to feel angry when their wives complained, and they also made the choice to physically assault them as well. 6) Another one: Avoid the phrase, "have to". For example, I can't make it tonight, because I have to be at work." Truth is, you don't "have to" do anything. What a person chooses to do or not do is really up to them. Do your best not to hide behind phrases like this. Take responsibility for the choices you make in your life. A more empowered way to express your sentiments in this instance would be to say, "I won't be over tonight, because I'm going to be at work." This statement implies that you are choosing not to come over tonight, and that you are choosing to be at work instead. 7) Avoid the word, "can't." For example, "I can't make it tonight." Or "I can't see the good in going to war in Iraq." Truth is, unless you're impaired in some way, you usually can do whatever it is that you want or don't want to do. How about saying instead, "I won't be making it over tonight." This statement implies that you are choosing not to come over. Regarding going to war with Iraq: How about saying instead, "I don't see the good in us going to war in Iraq." Or "I think being in Iraq isn't in our best interests or in the Iraqi's best interests for that matter." These latter statements reflect a willingness on your part to take ownership and responsibility for your thoughts and feelings. 8) Avoid the word, "Need." For example, take the following statements: "I need to be in bed by ten o'clock." Or "I need you here by early morning." In truth, we really don't need much, save food and water. We generally want things. How about saying instead, "I want to be in bed by 10 o'clock." Or "I want you here by early morning." Instead of saying, "I need you to understand me", how about saying instead," I want you to understand me." Better yet, say "I want to feel understood by you." 9) This is Very important!!!! Take the time to improve your "emotional vocabulary!! Become familiar with different shades of emotions. I once heard that Eskimos have over 100 words to describe different kinds of snow. Be like the Eskimos when it comes to incorporating into your daily vocabulary words that describe your whole color spectrum of emotion to a tee. Most people can identify some basic emotions, like mad, sad, glad, fear, and shame. Yet when we expand our emotional vocabulary, it increases our chances of being understood by those around us. Some descriptive emotional words include: "I feel unacknowledged"; "I'm feeling invalidated"; "I feel betrayed"; "I feel discouraged"; "I feel disheartened"; "I feel exasperated"; "I feel overwhelmed"; "I feel disrespected"; "I feel humiliated"; "I feel forgotten"; "I feel invisible"; and " I feel unimportant." There are countless words that describe a wide range of human emotion and feeling, and each and every word has the potential to capture most accurately the subtle nuances that distinguish one feeling from another. Therefore, I

believe it is in your best interest to find words that most accurately reflect to others the essence of what you are feeling in your heart. 10) Avoid the word, "But". For example, I want you to come over this afternoon at 4:00 PM, but I have a dentist appointment at that time. Incorporate the word, "and" into your everyday parlance instead. This word gives all thoughts and feelings equal importance. I think a more effective way to say the aforementioned would be, "I want you to come over this afternoon, and I am scheduled to go to the dentist during that time." The word "but" creates an either/or situation, and negates everything the person has said prior to its usage. I think it's important to understand that two opposing thoughts or feelings do not have to cancel each other out. For example, I can say, "I know that you are self-reliant and resilient, and I worry about you never the less." 11) Avoid the word, "Try". For example, if someone asks you to come over and feed his pet canary while he is away on vacation, you're not likely to say, "I'll try." More often than not, you'll know in your heart beyond a shadow of a doubt whether or not you plan on following through on something. The word, "try", is an evasive, non-committal word that gives a person wiggle room to get out of something. 12) MY SENSE IS: This phrase is an incredibly effective one, and I encourage you to incorporate it into your everyday conversation with others ASAP. When you sense someone is feeling one way or another, it will serve you well to begin by using this phrase. For example, if someone is angry with you and chooses to stonewall and keep these feelings to himself, you can choose to be more proactive and say, "My sense is you're feeling really angry with me." If you've invited someone over and that person seems hesitant around accepting your invitation, you can share your intuitive sense of where he or she is at, and say, "My sense is you would really rather not come over tonight." If a friend is unusually quiet after breaking up with his girlfriend, you can break the silence by saying, "my sense is you're really hurting right now." When you begin with the phrase, "My sense is," you're not pretending to know what someone else is feeling, thinking, and/or experiencing. In turn, you are not being presumptuous, but rather you're acknowledging that another person lives in his or her own world, and that you can never know for sure what that world looks like at any given time. Instead you are sharing with that person your intuition, which in turn shows care and concern on your part while simultaneously honoring his or her personal space. You are effectively giving the other person enough emotional space to receive your sense of him or her in a non-threatening way. This affords the person an opportunity to agree with you, or disagree with you. This non-threatening, nonintrusive approach also clears enough space for the recipient of your feedback to reflect for a moment and then clarify for you what he or she is really thinking, and feeling. Again, offering yoursense of someone else in this gentle way

inspires him or her to reflect more, and share their thoughts and feelings openly with you. Finally, this phrase takes people out of their heads, and puts them into their hearts. 13) Sometimes it is helpful to share with someone else what your perception and/or experience is of his or her behavior. Communicating your subjective experience of someone else can be tricky, however, as you may come across as being judgmental, disapproving, and hypercritical. Never the less, by emphasizing and owning that you are merely sharing your own subjective point of view, you are hopefully making it abundantly clear that you are aware that your perception isn't based in fact. For example, let's say I sit down and have dinner with my friend, Paul, and he appears angry, all the while talking on and on about his life without bothering to listen to what I have to say, and without bothering to ask me about my life, and/or how I am doing. In this instance, I might say to Paul: "My sense is you're feeling really angry right now, and I understand you have a lot on your mind. My heart goes out to you, and I also want to let you know that I'm feeling more or less invisible and all but forgotten here with you." If Paul chooses to disregard my feelings, and becomes defensive and agitated instead, I might say: "Paul, it is my experience that you are being really defensive right now, and agitated." In this instance, I'm making an effort to share with Paul how I am experiencing him, and his general disposition. It is important to remember, though, that sharing your experience of someone else is often tricky, as you may unintentionally sound as though you are sitting in judgment of him or her. So tread carefully, and remember to underscore that you are merely sharing your own subjective experience of him or her, and that you are aware that your perception is yours, and yours alone. 14) Do your best to avoid labeling people. This includes name calling, and/or categorizing those around you. Name calling and labelingothers serves little constructive purpose, and more often than not names and labels are merely intended to hit below the belt, and hurt. Moreover, lashing out at others and calling them names has an insidious way of objectifying that person, and/or dehumanizing them. Human beings are very complex, multifaceted, and dynamic. Calling someone names has a way of reducing someone into one thing or another, and doesn't assess or portray that person fairly or accurately at all. If I lash out at someone at say, "You're a bitch", or "You're a jerk", or "You're a selfish, lying bastard," I've done little to let that person know how I'm feeling, and how I would like them to treat me differently. In other words, my intention from the get-go had little to do with making myself understood. It had everything to do with trying to hurt that person, and making him or her feel small. When we feel hurt by someone else, we are often tempted to hurt back. That's human nature. Yet being vindictive and striking back generally makes things worse. In the moment, it may feel good to hit back and cut someone else down. The adrenaline flows, the venom flies, and the heart may feel momentarily

vindicated. In the long run, though, we've made matters worse with our loved one, our friend, or even our adversary. That person no longer trusts us, or feels safe around us. And it's often very difficult to win back trust and safety after they've been broken and lost, respectively. Apologies rarely piece back together trust that has been broken. The damage is usually done, and while the cuts may heal over time, the emotional scars never fully go away. Imagine, if you will, a piece of wood, a hammer, and some nails. Every label hammered into someone, or at someone, gets lodged into the wood that makes up their psychic foundation, their psychic architecture if you will. Apologizing is one's way of extracting the nail from that piece of wood. However, we all know that what is left is a splintered hole, with splintered wood. The hole remains, even though the nail has been removed. And I believe that this is the sort of hole that remains in the heart of those whom we name call, label, and verbally abuse. Rather than say, "You're being a bitch," be constructive instead and tell that person, "When you do such and such, I feel angry, or disregarded, or discounted, or invalidated, or exploited, or hurt, or sad, or invisible, etc." Then tell that person how you would like them to treat you instead. For example, "I'd appreciate it when I talk to you that you look at me, and appear interested in what I am saying. When you turn away and get distracted with other things, like the television, I feel unimportant, insignificant, and uncared for. Please make an effort to pay attention to me when I am talking, because I want to feel as though you care about what I have to say." Remember, it's all about intention, folks!! Are you intending to hurt someone, and strike back at them, or are you endeavoring to make yourself understood and/or teach someone else how to treat you in a way that is more to your liking. 15) Anger: Be as conscientious as you can to communicate your anger with others responsibly. Remember to use "I" statements, thereby taking ownership for your angry feelings. Verbally abusing someone else, or labeling them, or aiming to be destructive and hurtful, will only serve to put that person on his or her heals. The listener will be in defense mode, and he or she will be far more concerned with self-preservation than with listening to what you are saying, or screaming, for that matter. In lieu of going into defense mode, some people will retaliate, and angrily hit you right back. The tension between the two of you has escalated, compounding the original problem. The two parties will likely emerge from the battle suffering from more losses than gains. They will have been participating in a lose/lose type of scenario. Feelings will have been hurt, trust broken, and the fabric of their relationship will have been irreparably torn apart. I encourage clients to remember that their anger is a secondary emotion, masking more primary emotions like fear, hurt, and frustration. When you are feeling angry, take a time-out so that you can experience your anger, and find a

safe place to vent your anger so that you are leaving no collateral damage behind. I also recommend that you take some time to introspect and discern what primary emotions have triggered the rise of your anger in the first place. The purpose of engaging in such introspection is so that you can come from a more vulnerable, authentic place when you eventually make an effort to communicate your thoughts and feelings with whomever it is that upset you. People are far more likely to listen to you, and hear what you are saying, when you appear calm and rational, and when you are trying to be constructive, in hopes of creating a win/win scenario. 16) I have recently learned of the following anachronism: D.E.E.S.C.P. The D stands for Describe, the E stands for Emotion, the next E stands for Empathy, the S stands for Specify, the C stands for Consequences, and the P stands for Positive Consequences. This anachronism offers you an easy format to follow when communicating your thoughts and feelings with others. Take the following situation for example: I asked my friend, Maggie, to pick me up at my house at 4:00 in the afternoon to take me to the airport. If Maggie fails to show up on time, I might use the above script to guide me as I communicate my thoughts and feelings to her. I might say: "When you don't come over when you say that you're going to come over (Describe), I feel angry and disappointed (Emotion). I understand that you have a lot on your mind, and that you're been feeling overwhelmed of late (Empathy). In the future, I would like you to follow through with me, and when you make a commitment to doing something on my behalf, I want you to follow through and do it (Specify the behavioral change you're wanting instead). If you don't honor your commitments with me in the future, than I will choose to rely on you less and less (Consequences). If you do decide to make a greater effort to follow through on your commitments to me, and do what you say you're going to do, than I will feel closer to you, and more trusting that I can count on you. In turn, I'll want to spend more time with you, as I will value your presence in my life that much more (Positive Consequence)." 17) When giving someone instruction and/or counsel on what they can do to change a certain behavior, focus on the positive change they can make rather than harp on their negative behavior. For example, take a tennis coach who notices that his young protege is using too much wrist on his volleys: The coach could dwell on this if he so desires, and may be tell his pupil, "Don't use your wrist." "Stop collapsing your hand when you make contact with the ball." "Don't squeeze your grip so tight." In this example, the tennis coach has emphasized for his pupil what not to do. Unfortunately for the youngster, his coach has yet to teach him what he can do to turn his volley into a weapon. A more effective coach might tell this youngster, "Keep your wrist firm." "Extend your forearm through the ball." "Move your body forward and keep your knees bent as you make contact with the ball."

In my work with couples, I often hear one person tell the other what they're doing that they find bothersome and/or annoying. A woman might tell her husband, "when I'm crying, don't just sit there and say nothing." "And don't just walk away from me either." I think it would be in the woman's best interest to tell her husband what she would like him to do when she is crying. For example, she could say, "When I'm crying, please hold me, and reassure me that everything is going to be OK." 18) Do your best to eliminate disempowering words from your everyday vocabulary. Such words include, "kind of", "sort of", and "maybe". People often hide behind these words for one reason or another. For example, a man might tell his wife, "I sort of feel angry with you." A guy might tell his date, "I kind of liked that movie." A woman might suggest to her friend, "I'm thinking maybe we should go out have some Chinese food for dinner?" These individuals clearly sound non-committal in their thoughts and feelings. They sound like they're afraid to say unwaveringly and/or unequivocally what they're thinking and feeling. I think they would sound more empowered and forthright if they said respectively, "I'm angry with you", "I liked that movie", and "I think it'd be nice if we went out and had some Chinese food for dinner". In conclusion (regarding communication skills and techniques) I want to remind you (and me, for that matter), that words carry vibrations which reflect out thoughts and emotions. We hear the words we speak, as do others. And we shape our reality (positive and negative) by not only our thoughts and actions, but by our words too. Therefore, it is of great importance that we choose or words wisely with others, and pay attention to our tone of voice, and body language. If we choose our words well, and couch them gently enough, then whomever we're talking to will hear the message that we're trying to convey. Moreover, they will likely give our thoughts and feelings far more consideration than they would have had they been feeling attacked, condescended to, etc. If our tone of voice is soft, and slow (not pressured, abrasive and/or aggressive) than the person listening to us will likely receive what we are saying with an open heart. They will not check out, or dissociate, or become intimidated and/or defensive. If our body language appears open, gentle, and non-threatening, then the listener will lean in and listen to what we are saying. He or she will not feel a need to pull away, or fold their arms across their chest as if to protect themselves from our aggressive stance and/or posture. I strongly believe that if we, as communicators, have made every effort to choose our words carefully, and use our tone of voice and body language to our advantage, than we will have raised the likelihood that we're going to be heard ten fold. In turn we're very likely going to feel heard, validated, and understood by whomever it is that is listening to us. Regardless of the outcome, I believe we would have every right to feel very proud of our efforts to communicate our

thoughts and feelings responsibly. We would have every reason to feel as though we've conducted ourselves with a lot of integrity, for we will have gone to great lengths to live our lives consciously, and speak our speak our minds thoughtfully and conscientiously. Whether or not our listener actually hears what we're saying is another matter entirely. Whether or not he or she chooses to respond back to us with equal care and consideration is his or her prerogative, and is completely out of our control. All we can do is have the best ofintentions when we share our thoughts and feelings with others. And if we manage to come from this clean space, then we can rest assured that we've been in integrity with ourselves. We would then have every reason to go to bed at night feeling at peace with ourselves. We can feel proud of the efforts we've made to communicate with others fairly, and constructively. We also feel proud of our choice to share our thoughts and feelings with others in anassertive manner, without being passive, or aggressive. We will have every reason to hold our heads high, and like who we see in the mirror, for we will have done our part to create a win/win situation in our communications with others.

TERM PAPER IN PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT

JANA KAYLA D. DE GUZMAN BSED I MRS.LEONIDA REYES