There has been a great deal of commentary by the talking heads of the media for the need of more extensive psychological testing of pilots in the light of the disaster of the Germanwings crash . Psychology is a very inexact science and I opine offers very little to increase safety, mainly because it relies so much on the veracity of the patient. Therapy helps people who want help - but some mental illnesses preclude that avenue.
To illustrate, I was once asked (long story) if I was suicidal. My immediate thought was, "If I were, I sure as hell wouldn't tell you." because you'd do what was necessary to prevent me from killing myself. So both the suicidal and the completely healthy person would say "no". Now, if I was not suicidal but wanted help I'd answer "yes". (Has anyone never had the random incidental thought of suicide? If you did nothing else except read this sentence, I'd say you have.)
My point is that if you're mentally ill, your answers to the questions will be designed to conceal the mental illness except in some extreme cases. Why be truthful? Are there psychological therapeutic tests that are not verbal? The co-pilot's reaction to his diagnosis illustrates my point. He concealed it and carried out the scenario that his mental illness dictated.
Life can't be perfect.
© 2015 Lester C. Welch
Saturday, March 28, 2015
Friday, March 6, 2015
“The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.” ― George Bernard Shaw,
My wife is taking part in a church sponsored workshop about "Non-Violent Communication." This sparked a discussion between us. It strikes me that one must consider not only what you say, but where you say it.
To prove my point, suppose you say, “That’s a
lovely shade of lipstick you’re wearing.”
If you’re speaking to your niece at her wedding you’ll get a very
different response than if you’re talking to the roughest looking dude at a
biker bar. What is considered as “non-violent” in one milieu can be very
provocative in another, so the greater skill is recognizing the milieu.
My wife and I have developed a mode of
communication that I think is a bit abnormal – but it works for us. We will raise our voices and appear to be
angry when we’re really venting our frustrations. We each recognize this pattern and know – as has happened many
times in the past – that there is no great significance in our
interaction. Paradoxically, it’s not
personal. All will be smooth in a
couple of hours. However, other fringe
family members and friends who hear the interaction fully expect to be called
to the stand in a divorce hearing.
This mode is something I had to learn (to
survive). It was not the way my parents
communicated (if, indeed, they did). I
attribute this mode to the fact that my wife was raised with only sisters (no
brothers) and women - especially sisters - communicate differently than the
rest of the universe.
As an aside, I’ve seen the lot of them (5 now)
when planning an evening out together, play ploys that would put Machiavelli to
shame. “I’m allergic to anything other
than Italian!” I’ve had Italian every
night for the last 8 months!” They eventually do Chinese and have a great time.
So my wife has had to learn verbal scrapping at
an extreme level and she used the skilled techniques on me.
I had to learn to swim or sink.
But, we do it very well. We know we’re just blowing off steam. I’m really anxious to see if “non-violent
communication” makes the slightest dent in her approach to me. I hope not.
I can handle the current mode.
© 2015 Lester C. Welch
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)