[aaron_seattle]

"Nothing is ever personal."

The way people treat you, has nothing to do with you. They are just living out their own stories.

Related idea: "You train others how to treat you." Think reinforcement learning as applied to training a dog. (And I love dogs, have the deepest respect for them). The concept isn't that different when applied to our social interactions.

[dkarl]

For me, it was important to learn the converse, that other people will interpret my behavior in a situation as being about them. I have social anxiety and other issues that tend to create a strong undercurrent of aversion and discomfort in me in any social interaction. I realize now that a lot of people think I don't like them because when they talk to me they can read in my face that on a deep level I would rather not be interacting with them. I do my best to communicate enjoyment and interest, but in the context of evident discomfort, it can come off as fake. The onus is on me to minimize (ideally) or hide (when necessary) my social discomfort so people don't think I'm faking my appreciation of them.

[duxup]

I've worked with so many folks who take things personally and then I don't know if they realize it but all sorts of possibilities are closed off to them because of their response.

My career started weirdly but at one point I wasn't put off by a grizzly old guy at my first 'real' job. He was a wealth of technical information and etc, but could be kinda rough around the edges. He wasn't mean by any means, just not friendly in an office of really friendly folks who took things personally too often IMO.

So many folks were sort of scared / avoided him. I made it my job to watch for what he liked folks bringing him and what he didn't, made notes... and in a year or so we got along great.

After a while people who had a lot more experience than me would bring things to me ... to take to grizzly guy.

Technically I wasn't nearly as skilled as most folks (maybe all), but I just didn't take technical things personally as they did and ended up being this gateway that management recognized was ultra useful / valuable. Anyone could have done it, but for social reasons people just didn't.

[Cactus2018]

> Because of our desire to get a project going, most of us have a tendency to overlook and downplay early resistance and skepticism. We delude ourselves into thinking that once clients get into the project, they will be hooked by it and learn to trust us. This can lead to our bending over more than we wish in the beginning, hoping that we will be able to stand up straight later on. This usually doesn't work. When we bend over in the beginning, the client sees us as someone who works in a bent-over position. When we avoid issues in the beginning, the client sees us as someone who avoids issues. It is difficult to change these images and expectations of us - particularly if the client wishes us to bend over and avoid issues.

> Flawless Consulting, A Guide to Getting Your Expertise Used by Peter Block (2011)

[aaron_seattle]

You'd be surprised how hard it is to internalize the first principle. The mind can become very attached to the feeling of being attacked / rejected / overlooked / snubbed / etc.

[peterangular]

...And with abuse patterns a lot of us had that ingrained at a super young age as a control lever our parents/guardians installed.

I think a hard part of this is that people commonly abuse these mechanisms for control in social structures. I grew up with it, I experienced it in school, I've experienced it in relationships, and I've experienced it professionally.

In so many ways it's human social nature to subvert each other and I think that's why so many of us get attached to those concepts. It's really hard to not get bitter and still let the good in =(

[aaron_seattle]

That sounds really rough man, I'm sorry to hear that. I too have struggled with being on the receiving end of other people's power trips. My curiosity on "what's really happening here, at the level of the brain" lead to some interesting reads.

Chimpanzee behavior: when a higher ranked member is smacking and harassing a lower ranked one -- the higher ranked one is literally experiencing a rise in serotonin. Their dominance becomes a self-soothing behavior that relaxes them, makes them want to repeat the behavior. It's not hard to extrapolate this "very mammalian script" into whatever workplace situation where your counterparts are just lesser skilled at valuing the well-being of those around them.

I think part of the paradox here is your counterpart can both "be a huge asshole" and also just be a mostly helpless automaton of their own harmful behavior, applying a lack of critical thought or self-reflection about their own impulses and tendencies. It's not that you're trying to reframe the situation into one where you are better than them, or that you pity them. Rather, it's just to recognize the sharp qualitative differences between the state of their mind, and yours.

The Aurelius quotes: "The best revenge is to be unlike him who performed the injury."

and (more dramatic than appropriate here, but all the same): "Today I shall be meeting with interference, ingratitude, insolence, disloyalty, ill-will, and selfishness – all of them due to the offenders’ ignorance of what is good or evil." -- i.e. of course these default behaviors are a starting feature of the human animal.

I wrote a lengthier reply here, it may give you a possibly new way to reframe things:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23093457

[nicoburns]

I'd try not to read too much into chimpanzee behaviour. While they're genetically the most similar to humans, they have quite different behavioural patterns. IMO Orangutans are much more similar to humans behaviourally.

[dbancajas]

So sorry to hear this man. Do you have examples? I'm trying to learn to recognize if it exists in my current social relationships.

[nyanpasu64]

https://www.reddit.com/r/CPTSD/ is a support community for people who have experienced childhood abuse. It might be helpful for looking for examples.

From my personal experience, I've had:

- conditional parental approval based on performance - teacher: "do what i say because i'm authority, I don't have to explain" - More I can't remember or don't feel is relevant

[sharemywin]

You have to accept the world doesn't revolve around you. and that's hard for people.

[pstuart]

I have a twist on that: "You are the center of the universe, and so is everybody else"

[brain5ide]

How's the water today, boys?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI

[pstuart]

I love that speech. But I had the notion I shared well before encountering it :-).

[lukifer]

And in the same breath, accepting that it's entirely natural / inevitable that others tend to operate as though the world revolves around them, and forgiving them for it (within reason). Carnegie's "How To Win Friends..." is corny and dated but still relevant.

[ver_ture]

I'm glad that I can recognize it for the corny and giddy book it is, because a few years ago I worshiped it. Many of its lessons regard selflessness, and fanning others' egos. It's like the fast food of social advice, 'let them eat cake.'

[rsp1984]

True for about 90% to 95% of interactions but the reason I still find this idea very problematic as it is easily used an excuse by all sorts of sociopaths, narcissists and power addicts that their behavior is somehow ok because it's either "not about you", or it's your fault in the first place because "you asked for it".

Let me tell you, for these people, it absolutely is about you and it is personal. And the more you try to ignore it or brush it off or search the fault within yourself, the more they will see it as confirmation of their own behavior.

[aaron_seattle]

This is the most challenging edge case, for sure. But if I may proffer:

> the more you try to ignore it or brush it off or search the fault within yourself

It should never come to any of these things. "It's never personal" doesn't mean you put up with unacceptable behavior, nor blame yourself. If some sociopath decides to fling emotional abuse my way, he gets called out on it. Not because it's an attack and I will defend myself (both of which are true, at the limbic system level) but because in the end, my personal integrity requires it: I wouldn't treat others this way, I won't be treated this way, I wouldn't be an idle witness to somebody receiving similar abuse, there are healthy ways of resolving conflict, etc. In this way, it's fully de-personalized: it's not about him, or me, but the values which I'm always free to choose and reaffirm.

The fact that they may make it personal, make it about you -- that's a further reflection of how impersonal it is for them. The psych term is projection, but you don't need to concern yourself with their diagnosis.

There's a reason I paired the "it's never personal" quote with the "you train others how to treat you" quote. The latter is a reminder of your own agency.

Dealing with a sociopath or narcissist is, in some ways, easier. Their behavior is so uncooperative, they immediately forfeit the privilege of your empathy. They clearly have had a terrible emotional upbringing to even arrive at a point where they would so freely treat another person like this. And that's the point: it's not personal, they're just... a fairly broken human being.

People this broken, they can't hide broadcasting their brokenness from a mile away. It makes it easier for you to know who to keep at arm's length with minimal trust.

[pendu]

Can you point to some source/material that elaborate on this ? Would like to read more about it.

[aaron_seattle]

https://psychcentral.com/blog/the-second-agreement-dont-take... , opening passage.

Be warned, there's a "woo-woo shit" risk factor here, which my skepticism keeps at arm's length. I'm more of a neuroscience / mindfulness meditation kind of guy. But I do cherry-pick from other areas, where my curiosity takes me. And the original quotes were good cherries.

Reframing the "nothing is ever personal" idea in more neuroscience terms: some astonishing high degree of our neurological processes (90+% ?) are subconscious or preconscious. A similar percentage of neurons are formed before the age of 18. In many ways, the quest to improve ourselves reduces down to the skill of paying slightly more attention to the activity of our minds.

So when someone interacts with you in a way that causes you stress or hostility, you can choose to recognize the above facts as playing out in the arena of their brain, in the same way as they are playing out in yours.

This is not to excuse behavior, nor disregard the need for boundaries, protection, standing up for yourself, etc. But it does take the sting off. What's better for your own equanimity? Succumbing to a feeling of being singled out? Or recognizing your counterpart as being stuck in their own behavior loop, unaware that they're (arguably) in a state of some kind of suffering?

Socializing is our most complex and wonderful skill; there are a ton of attendant instincts that evolved with it: status signaling, negotiation and exchange; hierarchies for coordinating group actions; grudges and revenge as deterrents meant to preserve social harmony (see chimpanzee behavior; then see bonobo behavior for something more inspiring). All of this monkey software can be dialed down, even outright idled at times. Because nothing is ever personal.

These are some truly advanced and empowering concepts, so apologies if I'm probably not representing them properly.

[lukifer]

The evolutionary biologist Diana Fleischman is currently writing a book (a bit tongue-in-cheek) called "How To Train Your Boyfriend". She's discussed the ideas in a few talks and podcasts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jre_xN2HSrk