Feelings are not facts, part 395486

Reminder: We never have the full perspective on anything or anyone. (Including ourselves, honestly, because shadows tend to obscure the shit we don't want to see, but we at least have greater ACCESS to ourselves in theory...)

But when we observe others, there are always missing pieces of information.

So to draw a conclusion on a situation or person and then act as though our conclusion is somehow correct despite our limited viewpoint is irrational at best, and potentially harmful at worst.

I hear this all the time "this person did this BECAUSE xyz" or "they are just trying to ________" or whatever other declaration of intent.

Typically we jump to these explanations because it helps to explain our FEELING about the situation. Like, I feel hurt and therefore this person was obviously trying to hurt me. Or "I feel inferior or insecure around this person and so therefore they must believe they are better than me" etc

I will always encourage folks to stay in curiosity, because honestly most of the time whatever conclusion we have drawn is incorrect or incomplete.

Example without too many details: I had a situation occur where someone reacted to something I did and told me how they felt about it and how they interpreted it.

I responded- without defensiveness - to their feeling, taking responsibility for the impact because I would never want to be harmful. But I went on to clarify that their interpretation was not correct because the assumption they made was like...entirely outside of how I would move in the world. Anyone who knew me would be like, ummmm, I don't think that's what that meant.

But this person literally ignored my explanation and proceeded with their belief in my intention AND proceeded to tell other people about their experience with me AS THO THEIR VERSION WAS ACCURATE.

And this is not the first time I can think of in recent memory that someone insisted on holding onto their "belief" despite being informed of what was actually happening.

It's wild. Folks do this in coaching and counseling all the time too, when recounting some story about their life.

They have constructed all kinds of reasons and explanations for the behavior of others, but often lack the imagination and breadth of knowledge to consider that there are 856 other possible interpretations.

I'll be like "well but maybe they were feeling this instead and that's why they did the thing you don't like...do you think that's possible?"

Don't get me wrong, I often have my own working theories about <people, circumstances, or events> that are confusing or which lack clarity. But working theories are just theories. They are not BELIEFS.

If I can't get more information, I tend to loosely hold my working theory until/unless I do get better/new information, but then I adjust accordingly because I am not a soothsayer and do not have magical inside access to people's innermost workings. I have to ultimately believe people when their motives are explained or become more clear.

A thing to know about me is I am very intellectually flexible, and rarely rigidly married to my ideas and opinions. Reliable, new data is always readily factored in.

(I'm informing you of this in case you didn't know and you think I'm stubborn or rigid. Expressing a strong opinion is not, in my case, indicative of an unwillingness to change it! Being willing to be wrong, change my mind, or adjust my perception is a value of mine. I try not to perpetuate unfounded assumptions, and I value curiosity and grace.)

Here are some questions I try to hold myself to answering before "deciding" something about motive or intent, that perhaps you could borrow:

• What is the most objective description of what is happening/has happened?

• What are some alternate explanations for how I am interpreting this?

• Am I bringing any biases to my version of events?

• Is there more evidence I could I collect before drawing a conclusion?

• Are there other perspectives I could consider?

• Does someone else know more than I do?

• What is my emotional state and how does it relate to my willingness to be curious/neutral vs. negatively ascriptive?

• What part of me is satisfied by believing MY version? Is it an aspect of my character of which I am proud or does my version allow me to gloat or feel superior? (If the latter, the version should be rejected/reassessed)

In other words: does it make me feel better to believe my version vs offer a more graceful explanation?

Try using these questions, or develop your own. If we want to have healthy relationships and be healthy people, we have to be willing to re-evaluate our interpretations so that we don't languish in negativity nor over-trust our own perception.

As humans, we are notoriously unreliable at evaluating, MUCH LESS interpreting other people's motives.

LET ME SAY THIS LOUDLY: We filter everything through our own biases, blindspots, trauma, and pain points. We project the fuck out of everything. We are UNRELIABLE NARRATORS of both "what happened" and "what it means."

Radical grace is about remaining in curiosity and giving folks the benefit of the doubt even when it's hard. It takes practice and commitment. I'm not perfect at it, but I sincerely try. Sometimes people really are assholes, and that becomes clear. But most of the time folks are just out here trying to avoid pain, and get their needs met, and that is as far as they got in their intentions.

I will die on this hill: leading with curiosity is always a gift your relationships deserve.