The Whole is Always Greater than a Sum of It´s Parts

A very important reason for difficulties in resolving conflicts is the fact that the parts
involved have quite different imaginations of what the whole situation is about. They have
different stories about what happened, what was the main point in the thing happened, what is
important and what should happen next.
Because os my own story seems so obvious and so sensible, it is easy to overlook that the other persons story also may be
reasonable, though in a completely different way.
I have to always remember that what I see and hear is NOT the absolute and objective truth!!!!!There are as many truths than there are participants. That is why it is unnecessary to try to understand what happened when the parts involved are not there in person.

Difficult talks are difficult when/if each of the involved parts insist that their own description of what the conflict is about, is the only authentic way to see the things. Seeing the things from your own viewpoint is often the only reason for you to think that the other is not more flexible, that they are malicious, reckless, stupid or something else negative.
Then, how can we talk to each other about what happened and what should happen without going to personal attacks, filled with debt, negative testimonials, sarcasm and other meaningless things?
Experience shows that the discussions can be more difficult than needed because of the people involved are going into the the discussion with false assumptions
There are three kinds of false assumptions that are extra ordinary:
1. My picture of the situation is the true picture.
2. I know what the assumtions behind your actions were.
3. Someone is to blame for what happened, and it is not me.

These assumptions have harmful effects on the discussion because they are not on a conscious level.
We simply assume that it is so and therefore do not want to find out if it is true or not. An important part of the art of bringing constructive talks in conflicts is to transform these three assumptions.
If you instead assume the following basic settings, chances are greater that the problems you have can be handled constructively:

1. I do not know how the other's thoughts of the whole situation are, therefore we must begin with finding out the main features of everyone's story.

2. I know what effect the other's behavior had on me, but not the intentions of the other guided by in different situations.

3. To determine who is to blame for the problems is an ineffective way to avoid similar problems in future. It is more interesting to
find out how all contributed to the point where an unfortunate situation occurred, so that
we can find ways to prevent it happening again.

Never do the mistake you are sure about what another person thinks!!!!!

Never do the mistake to interprete the other persons intentions before you have asked him/her!!!!

There do not need to be someone to blaim; no one can discuss or argue alone!!!!

And never use the power of i.e. your higher position in the profession to claim your opinion is the right opinion!!!!



The truth gets its meaning through the story it is the part of.

Draft conflicts can often be solved by simply defining what
the facts are. The conflicts that seem difficult to solve do not arises because the of involved parts can not agree on facts, but because they have different experiences of the
facts important in the situation and the facts insignificant in the context. So why do not find out what the other part means?????

A very important prerequisite for the art of the constructive talks is you being aware that different people's perception is filled with completely different things.
Everyone has their own story about what happened and is happening. It is the story as a whole, that gives the individual facts a meaning: The whole is always greater than the sum of its parts.

About leadership

The authoritarian nature is not devoiding to want to be active, to have courage and faith. But these features of meaning for them is something else than the meaning for a person no longing after submission. In the authoritarian nature the desire of activities is based on a profound sense of powerlessness, as that is what it strives to overcome. Activities in this sense means to act in the name of something that is higher than their own self. It can be done in God´s name, in the past´s name, the nature´s or the duty´s name, but never in the name of the future of the unborn, right of them whot have a non power, or of life itself.

For the authoritarian character a lack of power always is a sign of guilt or inferiority, and the authority on which the person believes is showing signs of weakness, has released the love and the charity for resentment. This character lacks the aggressive spirit that can attack recognized powers without first having to enter into service in the second and stronger powers.

The courage of the authoritarian character is essentially courage to suffer the fate or something the personal representative or "leader" has decided. To suffer without complaint is the highest virtue - not the courage to try to end the suffering, or at least reduce it. They don´t like to change fate, but submit to it, it is the heroism of the authoritative character.

Read more: Erich Fromm: Escape from freedom