Divine rules for the conduct of life
“You grow up the day you
have your first real laugh – at yourself.”
Ethel Barrymore
3]
Israel b/Israel
17:24] And lower your wing humbly for them, with mercy, and pray, "My
Lord! Have mercy on them both, the way they nursed me when I was young."
[b/Israel 17:25]
Your Lord is Well Aware of what is in your hearts; if you are worthy, then
indeed He is Oft Forgiving for those who repent.
[b/Israel 17:26]
And give the relatives their rights, and to the needy, and to the traveller;
and do not waste needlessly.
[b/Israel 17:27]
Indeed those who needlessly waste are brothers of the devils; and the devil is
very ungrateful to his Lord.
pect
.
[
[b/Israel
17:28] And if you turn away from these *, expecting the mercy of your Lord, for
which you hope, then speak to them an easy word. (* The companions of the Holy Prophet, who
sought his assistance.)
[b/Israel
17:29] And do not keep your hand tied to your neck nor open it completely, lest
you remain seated - reproached, weary.
[b/Israel
17:30] Indeed your Lord eases the livelihood and restricts it, for whomever He
wills; He Well Knows, Beholds His bondmen.
Section
4
[b/Israel
17:31] And do not kill your children, fearing poverty; We shall provide
sustenance to them as well as to you; indeed killing them is a great mistake.
[b/Israel
17:32] And do not approach adultery - it is indeed a shameful deed; and a very
evil way.
[b/Israel
17:33] And do not wrongfully kill any living being which Allah has forbidden;
and for whoever is slain wrongfully, We have given the authority to his heir,
so he should not cross limits in slaying; he will surely be helped.
[b/Israel
17:34] And do not approach the wealth of the orphan except in the best possible
way, till he reaches adulthood; and fulfil the promise; indeed the promise will
be asked about.
[b/Israel
17:35] And correctly measure when you measure, and weigh correctly with the
scales; this is better, and has a better outcome.
[b/Israel
17:36] And do not pursue the matter you do not have the knowledge of; indeed
the ear, and the eye, and the heart - each of these will be questioned.
[b/Israel
17:37] And do not walk haughtily on the earth; you can never split the earth,
nor be as high as the hills.
[b/Israel
17:38] Of all this related before, the evil among it is disliked by your Lord.
[b/Israel
17:39] This is part of the divine revelations of wisdom that your Lord has sent
down to you (O dear Prophet Mohammed - peace and
blessings be upon him);
and O listener, do not set up another God with Allah, for you will then be
thrown into hell - rebuked, rebuffed.
[b/Israel
17:40] Has your Lord chosen sons for you, and created daughters for Himself
from among the angels? Indeed you utter a profound word!
Addnd your
Lord has ordained that you do not worship
Observations on face in mediation
However, there is much evidence
that mediators cannot be neutral. Leonard Riskin, an American academic and
mediator, suggests that mediators operate across a spectrum of influence: a
mediator at one end of the spectrum directs parties to a resolution of a
limited set of issues; a mediator at the opposite end is less intrusive,
embracing a wide range of issues and relational matters. Unavoidably, all
mediators make utterances with varying levels of intrusiveness, and more
directive approaches may be appropriate in some situations, such as commercial
disputes or in warfare. However, the majority of mediation work is premised on
the idea of mitigating mediator influence to the greatest extent possible.
Explorative
Mediation
Explorative mediation aims to reduce mediator influence by encouraging conflict parties
to explore the conflict and their part in it. An explorative mediator does
not seek to manage the parties' conversation, but instead seeks to follow it
and encourage dialogue. There is a general aim to understand both parties
without prejudice, and to try not to influence either party. The explorative
mediator strives for selflessness by attempting to become absorbed in the
parties' stories and focusing on moment-to-moment exploration of the conflict,
resisting the urge to 'manage' a resolution to the conflict. Paradoxically,
part of this process involves maintaining an awareness of the social and
political context of the conflict. The mediator's disposition may be expressed
as an attempt to engage selflessly. This apparent oxymoron captures a dynamic
conundrum that may find momentary and partial resolution if the mediator is
able to remain open-minded and undecided about issues that arise from the
dialogue. By doing this, and striving to minimise mediator influence (or at
least make any instances of intrusion transparent), it is hoped that the
parties benefit from a space where they can collectively discover truths that
might otherwise be hard to access.
Experiencing
face in mediation
Goffman's concept of face looks
at the 'positive social value' that we attempt to maintain during social
interaction. This positive social value involves our feelings of self-worth,
which are attached to our notion of 'who we are' in a particular social
interaction. For example, an academic's face while giving a lecture may be
related to their status as an academic and expert: if they forget an important
aspect of a theory in front of students, then they will experience a loss of
face. At home with their family, however, the academic's expertise in a
particular subject will not be a major part of their face; instead, their
status as a son/daughter, mother/father will play a greater role in their
experience of face. We may view our face as consisting of various identities:
some are prominent in a given situation, while others may surface subject to
discursive events. Face influences our behaviour: what we say is related to our
desire to maintain our own face, and our knowledge that others experience face
and have their own face needs. It is woven into all social interaction. An
important aspect of Goffman's notion of face is the idea that we can attack the
face of others: because we know that others have face needs – a desire to have
their status respected, and to be liked by others – we can attack these through our words and actions.
A heightened sensitivity to
face can help mediators to be more attuned to their own needs and feelings and
to those of others. The observations below discuss moments in mediations where
I can now recognise that face either helped me to work with a situation, or has
been significant in learning from a missed opportunity to make an intervention.
Being
challenged at an initial mediation session
An awareness of face can be
invaluable in the way a mediator approaches challenging situations. During an
initial mediation visit my co-mediator and I were challenged by a highly
articulate and extremely verbally aggressive party who was unconvinced by the
value of a mediation process or our role as mediators. He demanded our opinion
regarding the legal correctness of his criticism of his neighbour: "You
must have an opinion, and since I am technically right, then you must agree
with me." I found myself feeling as though my face was being attacked: it
felt as though the individual was being hostile towards me as a person by disparaging
my role as a volunteer mediator. Not untypically I was being encouraged to take
sides. I responded by explaining our need as mediators to remain impartial, the
session continued and I recovered a mediator's equilibrium. However, I felt
that my internal response to the party's attack on my face was too personal:
while it may not be possible to 'neglect' our own needs in such a context, a
keen awareness of face may have allowed me to better hold to my pre-defined
role as a mediator. By selflessly seeking to understand his anger I would have
dealt more comfortably with the attack on my face. Dealing with antagonism,
after all, is an important and routine part of mediation, and so such a
consideration of face may allow a mediator to step back and think "I
recognise my face is being attacked, but this is not important to me in this
role." This incident underscored the difficulty of practising mediator
selflessness.
Working with an intransigent
conflict party
Often in mediation, we
encounter conflict parties who are intransigent. In our normal day-to-day
lives, we might feel free to confront someone who we believe is being
deliberately difficult, or at least feel that we have the right to be irritated
by them! When in the role of mediator, however, it is important to try to
maintain a certain distance from such feelings. Again, an awareness of face can
help. It can help us to be aware of our own privileging of certain aspects of
face – ordinarily, we might be able to act on our desire for an individual to open
up and be less difficult by confronting them, but our task as mediators is to
privilege the 'mediator' aspect of our face above that of our 'normal' everyday
self. This is clearly necessary to maintain a helpful stance towards the
conflict. Only by giving compassionate consideration to a seemingly
intransigent party's interests and needs, as well as the background and the
context of the conflict, will the mediator be able to understand the conflict
party. If the mediator cannot strive for understanding and dialogue then we
cannot hope for all parties to attempt to do likewise. In this case I felt my
normal face 'intrude' in one part of the conversation but was able to notice
this and therefore able to adjust my disposition accordingly. While it is not possible
to simply choose not to experience face, we can to some degree be self-aware
about how we react to threats towards it, and privilege aspects of our face
that are not so 'personal', such as that of 'mediator'.
Responding to an attack on face
At the end of a long and
fraught session between multiple conflict parties, the group as a whole was
moving very gradually towards a sympathetic mode of communication. The meeting
seemed to be coming to a natural close, with some practical action already having
been agreed upon. At this point, one party suddenly launched a very personal
attack upon another party. The meeting closed soon afterwards. Perhaps because
there had not been a wholly co-operative and considerate dynamic to the
session, the group did not take action to recover an equilibrium of respectful
communication. With hindsight, as one of the mediators, I might have diverted
the meeting to work with this attack and deal with it effectively. However,
because my face – and that of others (mediators and conflict parties) –
experienced embarrassment and fear, we collectively allowed for the outburst to
be ignored. Because we had reached an agreement, we felt it may be too
dangerous to address this late outburst. Possibly as a result, the 'agreement'
the parties had so far developed broke down shortly following the session. I
may have been able to deal with this situation differently if, at this time, I
had had a greater awareness of face. Perhaps the more 'personal' aspects of my
face and that of others might have been less significant to me, and I would not
have felt the embarrassment that I did. Instead, I could have privileged the
aspects of face related to our respective roles in dealing with a conflict –
mediators and mediation-seekers. As a result, I may have been able to help the
group to explore and manage the attack, allowing the parties to deal with this
threat to their progress in resolving their conflict.
Comments
Post a Comment