This is G o o g l e's cache of
G o o g l e's cache is the snapshot that we took of the page as we crawled the web.
The page may have changed since that time. Click here for the current page without highlighting.
To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url:

Google is not affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible for its content.

Four Levels of Communication

NT Home Page
Money/Power/Love Advantages
Search WWW Search

Neo-Tech Home Page
The Ultimate Leverage for Riches

Next Page | Contents | Feedback for Valuable/New Information | Previous Page

Neo-Tech Advantage #95

Four levels of communication exist. The appropriateness of each level depends on the circumstances as illustrated below:


Level of Communication Description
Exchange of familiar or automatic phrases (e.g., how are you, good morning).
Smooth, pleasant, cheerful, efficient, noninvolvement method of dealing with people.
Reporting facts.
Efficient, noninvolvement method of transmitting information to people.
Reporting or communicating one's own ideas, thoughts, and judgments.
Can range from completely impersonal to deeply personal.
Communicating personal feelings and thoughts.
Personal to deeply personal. Communication requirement for friendship and romantic love.

Many books on sex, love, marriage, and personality development imply that impersonal communication is inferior or undesirable. They further imply that highly personal communication is a superior, more honest form of communication toward which everyone should strive. Such implications are false and out of context:

Openly revealing one's deep personal self to everyone diminishes self-esteem. That, in turn, militates against one's best interests and happiness. Nevertheless, many authors, gurus, and "therapists" advocate revealing one's personal and private self to all comers. Those "total-openness, let it all hang out" advocates are promoting an egalitarian recipe. That recipe calls for breaking everyone's ego by sharing all personal values and emotions with all comers. Such ego-breaking recipes are often well-disguised, downhill roads to impotence and unhappiness.

Those advocating ego-breaking, emotional egalitarianism usually do so under false labels of openness and honesty. But the opposite is true. Failure to discriminate with whom one shares his or her private personal feelings destroys the potential for experiencing a close, genuinely open, romantic-love relationship with another human being. Instead, an egalitarian "total openness" to everyone is a cheap giveaway of an individual's most precious possession -- one's own personal, private self. Nothing squelches romantic love more completely than a Leo Buscaglia's love-all, share-all egalitarian approach.

A person can and should be sincere and honest to everyone without sharing his or her private self or emotions with everyone. In fact, when a person does share his or her private self with everyone else, that person's sincerity and motives become questionable.

An objectively beneficial level of communication exists for every type of human relationship. [Re: Table 61, Neo-Tech Reference Encyclopedia] Only within a romantic relationship in which the partners love and value each other in their private universe can the full range of physical and psychological sharing be experienced without diminishing self-esteem. Within the romantic relationship resides the full scope of psychuous pleasures: the combination of full-range sexuality with the freedom to fearlessly share any aspect of one's self...any thought, feeling, fantasy, emotion -- good or bad, rational or irrational. Thus, a person can let go completely to share and guiltlessly experience any aspect of one's body, mind, emotion, imagination with his or her romantic-love partner.

Within a romantic-love relationship, one can freely share any aspect of one's self and life. But one need not share every aspect. A person always has the guiltless right to privacy to any area of his or her life, even within the closest, most open and honest friendship or romantic-love relationship. Total honesty does not require total revealing all of one's private self. Indeed, absolute and total sharing of one's self and psyche involves losing the most profound essence of privacy. That loss, in turn, diminishes the sense of "I" and one's self-esteem. Retaining the essence of personal privacy is not an act of repression, inhibition, dishonesty, or lack of openness, but is a self-respect preservation of an individual's inherent right to privacy.

To experience psychuous pleasures through romantic love requires genuine self-esteem (valuing of one's own self). Beyond the romantic-love relationship, self-esteem is diminished or even destroyed by indiscriminately sharing or by giving away one's personal, private self too cheaply. That loss of self-esteem can be especially severe (even leading to suicide) if one promiscuously gives away his or her private self just because socially chic books, gurus, and media commentators falsely promulgate the need to be totally open with everyone. The most harmful of egalitarian neocheaters are the high visibility Leo Buscaglias who mystically promulgate the self-destructive, love-everyone concept. They imply that love, openness, and honesty are demonstrated by the giving of one's private self to all comers.

Valuing of one's private self does not mean holding back or manipulating communication in order to bargain for advantages. The sharing of oneself is a personal choice and judgment. Such sharing with another person may occur quickly, even on initial contact if judgment responses trigger desires to move toward deeper personal or romantic possibilities. Chances should and must be taken on exploring potentially valuable relationships. Errors in judgment are often made. But minimum harm from such errors results so long as the individual is making his or her own conscious choices, using reason and reality rather than following the words of mystics, social "authorities", or gurus.

Surrendering one's independent judgment to mystics, social "authorities", or gurus and offering one's private self to all comers results in:

  1. Diminished self-confidence and self-esteem.

  2. Unproductive, unrewarding consumption of time: Such wasting of irreplaceable segments of one's life span continually diminishes the time needed to build a competent, productive life necessary for growing prosperity, romantic love, and abiding happiness.

  3. Diminished personal desirability: Indiscriminate "openness and honesty" is often a boring imposition on those being gratuitously subjected to such personal openness.

  4. And most important: After selflessly giving one's self to all comers, little if anything that is private, exciting, or precious is left to share exclusively with one's closest friend or romantic-love partner...little if anything is left to build that unique, priceless, private universe crucial to a romantic-love relationship.

Happiness exists as a private world within one's own self. That world expands into a mutually exclusive universe shared by two people involved in a psychuous-pleasure, romantic-love relationship. And that exclusive, private universe is a uniquely precious, emotional treasure. But that treasure can be forever lost by indiscriminately or promiscuously sharing oneself physically, psychologically, or spiritually with others.

That selfless giveaway and subsequent destruction of one's private inner world is exactly what the egalitarian advocates of "total openness" wish to accomplish. Only by negating everyone else's private values and self-esteem, can they justify their own prostituted inner world. Moreover, most of the "total-openness" egalitarians are professional mystics or neocheaters who depend on extracting their material and spiritual livelihoods from others. To do that, they first must dupe productive people with altruistic guilt. Then those neocheaters can psychologically pull the producers down to the level of mystics and parasitical neocheaters through selfless egalitarianism. ...The lower the level that value producers can be reduced, the more easily can their values be usurped by neocheaters.

By contrast, avoiding that self-giveaway trap leaves romantic love and abiding happiness open for any value producer.

Next Page | Contents | Feedback for Valuable/New Information | Previous Page