“I can relate with that” can just as easily be substituted with “I can identify with that”.
But what does “relate” mean? What does it mean when she says we need to relate more.
Relate what, in this case? “Relate” in this case means to talk more. But talking isn’t identifying is it? But talking does potentially allow us to identify, especially if that is the goal of both.
I think that we have been put on this earth not to multiply but to identify (ourselves and others).
That is, it is not all about multiplication but rather the name of the game is identification.
That we should not be trying to form “relationships” but “identificationships”.
By agreeing to identify only, where and why we disagree, we form an identity that is all our own and allows us to identify someone that could be suitable for us to possibly mate/partner with. ie personal and business.
To participate in the identification process effectively I think we need a few things:
· An agreement that this is what we are doing, ie identifying only
· An agreement on a process of how we go about identifying (I suggest Rethink Perfect)
and ensuring that we don’t stray into blaming or judging what we actually identify.
For example for me to identify my mate I would be looking for someone that is trying
to identify also and be well on the way to understanding this process.
It is my theory that by identifying where we disagree we can deal directly and proactively with anger.
I think that getting angry is the result of failing to identify or identifying and trying to resolve the disagreement at the same time. The less we have identified the more angry that we get. I think anger is the domain of people being slack and incompetent and failing to understand and learn that we are put here to identify and let me be the first to put up my hand here.