The Disarming Technique - David Burns and Mike Christensen

[@jasonwaters1675]

Thank you Doctor Burns for all of these videos. The tools that you bring out. Are really helpful to me. Please keep doing them. I appreciate it.

[@brianw.5230]

Dr. Burns is a genius!

[@SlackKeyPaddy]

I'm sure. one could have found many people to say the same thing about Hitler, how loving and caring he was! LOL

[@Think_4_Yourself]

Do these techniques require two willing parties? Or does it only take one for people to get along?

[@GoingSane]

Yes and no. The structure of the 5 secrets of effective communication is such that there is no room for ulterior motives. Your desired outcome must for for more closeness with this person or at the very least to humanize them and not think of them as an obstacle. Consequently it’s very important to shift your locus of control from neutralizing the negative experience you are having with them and on to what you can honestly do to improve the relationship or interaction. So yes, they will work for you to create a situation where openness can thrive, but that doesn’t necessarily promise that the other party will change. Approaching a conflict in this way can help others to feel heard and like they no longer need to behave defensively in the interaction to feel safe. If you think about it trying to force the other party’s experience into this mold just so you can feel more comfortable is the sort of thing that can poison an interaction.

[@cynthiamack2840]

So how does this apply , if your dealing with said person is an emotional manipulative person? And by admitting your faults it’s used as a weapon?

[@mariaq.8697]

There is something unsettling in this method. In one of the examples, Dr. Burns did mention that it is a little manipulative, you give up the expectation that she'll be better, and you have to decide to handle her giving up the expectation of a deeper connection. I don't want to be on the other side of that.

[@dingerness]

I'm very interested in learning more about this technique and see a lot of value in it. However, in the "you never change" scenario, Dr. Burns acknowledged at the top that it is in fact false on several levels. Then in your role play, you said, "That is completely true". How is that not disengenous at best and a lie/manipulation at worst? Would it not be better to accept "A" truth without suggesting everything the other person has said is true?

[@tonyburton419]

Yes, to just 100% agree completely in the example you cite seems to me also somewhat just excessive, and if one knows internally it is not true, a more measured response seems more genuine? Not just to agree completely, would this not merely be reinforcing the other person's possible very own cognitive distortion/s? However, the example of the sexual issue was exemplary however? Just not overly convinced of this - it is indeed disengenenous and covert manipulation.....

[@user-vf6we8or1d]

In the context of the COVID 19 pandemic, I have many who I sist that the COVID vaccines m are dangerous and a fraud
It would seem harmfully to disarm in response to any individual vlaimu g and I aiti g COVID Vaccines are fraudulent and harmful in most cases.

[@user-vf6we8or1d]

In NJ no in NJ XD to🎉h bl no on in TV in Ryan and vr XD y in in in in in TV

[@erikagardea8334]

Agree with your adversary quickly.

[@susan9615]

l

[@carlinmariepower5691]

? developing the essence of lovord as who0 here t here ends warsex :) contributors well come nows good allo0 whl0

[@FoCoCo750]

This is the most pathetic excuse for an apology I've ever heard. Having listened to several of your presentations I've become very aware of the fact that you have extremely poor boundaries and clearly, can't stay in the professional lane but are constantly compelled to drive in the political lane as well, no metter how inappropriate.