“Ally-building” vs “Risk-neutrality” was a recent one, where the former thought that a low probability high reward strategy was bad and so I felt bad when I failed. Once I realised this was the debate, it was easy to let risk-neutrality ask the right questions and bring ally-building around to the true position (and no longer feel bad).
It sounds like your naming process is actually focusing. For me, the names don’t matter as much, and I just have a conversation involving focusing to figure out what the parts want.
Do you use one word names or more descriptive ones?
“Ally-building” vs “Risk-neutrality” was a recent one, where the former thought that a low probability high reward strategy was bad and so I felt bad when I failed. Once I realised this was the debate, it was easy to let risk-neutrality ask the right questions and bring ally-building around to the true position (and no longer feel bad).
It sounds like your naming process is actually focusing. For me, the names don’t matter as much, and I just have a conversation involving focusing to figure out what the parts want.