Da Greg Bissky

Gli atteggiamenti cinesi nei confronti della comunicazione sono stati modellati da molte influenze. Due dell'più importante sono storia sociale cinese ed il pensiero dei filosofi sociali cinesi, particolarmente Confucius (e Confucianism) e Lao Tzu ( Tao Te Ching). L'effetto generale di queste influenze è stato di limitare l'individualità ed il desiderio discutere ed infondere un'identità del gruppo e un desiderio per armonia. Ogni influenza brevemente è esaminata sotto.

Dai periodi antichi la Cina denso-è stata popolata ed era dipesa per la sopravvivenza da coltura laboriosa del riso. La cooperazione era cruciale, particolarmente per la creazione ed il mantenimento di un sistema molto complesso dei dikes e dei canali di irrigazione. Per i motivi politici e geografici la gente non ha viaggiato e rimasto legata al loro villaggio, un modello ripetuto per le generazioni countless. Il ciclo di piantatura del costante rimasto allora di raccolta, lasciante occasione pochissima (o desiderio) per esperimento: un esperimento guastato significherebbe l'inedia.

Un'esistenza unchanging ha significato che la saggezza è venuto con esperienza ed esperienza con l'età. Una società gerarchica è emerso, con l'età che si trasforma nella fonte di autorità. Completamente assente era tutta l'idea di uguaglianza, con i gemelli uniformi che parlano (e che obbediscono) come “fratello più anziano, il fratello più giovane.„ L'autorità è venuto così non da motivo ma da condizione superiore: età.

Da questa idea che “più vecchio è migliore„ o “più vecchio è la destra„ è venuto una mancanza di interrogazione: su che base potrebbe un giovane interrogare un elder? Perchè un elder metterebbe in discussione una gioventù? L'individualità si è trasformata in sempre meno in elders importante-uniformi del villaggio è stata costretta dalle scritture e dai detti degli antenati. Come il corpo di lavoro scritto si è accumulato sopra la società cinese di anni e la comunicazione presso la società è stato standardizzata. What was right yesterday had to be right today, and would still be right tomorrow.

This rigid hierarchy based upon respect for age was already well in place by the time of Confucius. China’s greatest sage, and the greatest influence on all aspects of Chinese society, Confucius gathered all the influences of popular culture and codified them into a series of well-structured rules and laws. Beginning in the Han Dynasty (206 BC) the writings of Confucius became the state-approved philosophy, and, though endlessly interpreted and added to, remained the official philosophy at least until the fall of the Qing Dynasty in 1911.

Confucius taught the importance of following rules and of maintaining relationships, and explained the hierarchy that all fit into, explained how one should act towards others above and below in the hierarchy, and made the goal of all human behavior the maintenance of harmony. The “goodness” of an individual could not be measured by the individual but only by the group, and was decided by how the individual acted towards the group. Proper behavior towards others became the only way to achieve “goodness,” thus making harmony with others more important than individual expression or desires.

In contrast to Confucianism and its emphasis on proper behavior towards others was the Tao Te Ching (Taoism) of Lao Tzu and its emphasis on man’s finding peace with himself and within nature. A philosophy perfectly suited for hermits, Taoism taught that man can never really know anything, and should therefore not strive to understand but to accept, not try to change nature but to live in harmony with it. Indeed, the entire concept of proactive change was viewed with suspicion—change happened only by not trying to make change happen.

Both philosophical orientations shunned clear speech and (especially) argumentation. Argumentation—the asking of difficult questions in order to find the true nature of a thing or idea—is necessary for discovery, but discovery was not necessary for either of the great Chinese philosophers: for Confucius because truth depended upon age, and was thus already known; for Lao Tzu because it was impossible to really know anything. In fact, both philosophies argued against what we now call eloquence, persuasiveness or precision. As said in the Tao Te Ching: “He who knows does not talk; he who talks does not know. Keep your mouth shut.” The final chapter sums it up:

True words are not beautiful; beautiful words are not true. A good man does not argue; he who argues is not a good man . . . The Way of the Sage is to act but not to compete.

Yet the Chinese still had to communicate: messages still had to be transmitted. What developed was one of the most sophisticated and complicated ways of communicating in the world. Understanding messages involved far more than the meaning of words. Chinese communication became like highly-structured poetry: understanding messages meant considering how something was said, then the meaning of the words, then who said it, then when it was said (and many other factors). The style was very indirect, with real skill being the ability to communicate something without ever saying it, and understanding something without ever hearing it. Such indirectness made the ultimate goal of Confucian thought—maintaining harmony in human relations—easier. Understanding Chinese attitudes towards communication depends upon understanding that the goal of all communication was (and is) the desire to maintain harmony in human relations. No matter what the message, it should be given in a way that would not upset the relationship between sender and receiver.

Emphasis was on “being polite,” something we now call the desire not to lose, or cause one to lose, face. Over the years this created a deep-set fear in most Chinese of going too far or saying too much when communicating. Other people’s feelings became very important, and negative messages such as disagreement or disappointment were communicated in an indirect, save face way. Further emphasis was placed upon accepting the world around you, on obedience and a lack of questioning. No need to discover the new meant no need for precision or clarity. Over centuries a body of ritual phrases developed, and communication skill came from repeating them at the appropriate time.

Greg Bissky, www.treasuremountain.com

This is the third part of the article “Communication in Chinese Offices”. Next week we will publish part four.