Communication Problems

[wolven7]

Rasputina - [Sister Sleep]--- If I might be allowed to project, a moment, it feels like there have been some communications issues, in the world, lately. (DeathBoy - [Let Me Show You : A Drug Symphony in Two Parts (II A Game That We Play)]). My personal communications issues are my fault, because, well, I've been a bad communicator, and I haven't been able to see that until recently. That is, I haven't been able to see how a fundamental misapprehension of the principles of communication on my part was to blame for everything I have been doing wrong.

In its basest, simplest form communication arises of two processes: Input and Output. When we actively engage the process of parsing that which being communicated to us-- when we listen to another person-- we can more clearly and fully understand them. (The Mediæval Bæbes - [Undrentide]). This is of equal importance to the idea of being understood, of our responsibility to express ourselves, clearly.

My inability or unwillingness to listen to the nuances of expression have caused some serious issues in my life, these past few months, because I've been spinning what I hear to fit how I want to hear it. This is completely unacceptable, and needs correcting.

If we are truly going to communicate with each other, then we have two sets of responsibilities, each mutually important, each crucial: 1) Say what you mean, what you want and what you need, in such a way as to be understandable to the person you're communicating with; and if part of the fun is that they decipher it, come to piece the puzzle together, then at least let them know that ;)

Mind.In.A.Box - Out Of Time--- 2) Listen and hear. Fully engage the whole of that which is being communicated to you, in stance in non-verbal utterance, in every communication vector. Understand what other people are saying and why they're saying it, on their own terms, and seek to communicate back to them, from there.

So, today, we listen. We take in, as much as possible. (Mirrormask - [A Rather Tense Dinner Party]). We do the best we possibly can to make active the "passive" side of communication because, when it or any part of it breaks down, then there is... Nothing. Static, line noise.

Prince of Persia - Sands of Time - [The Prison Intro]--- So, good morning, I guess. I know what I'm doing, today.

Amanda Palmer - [Leeds United (w/ The Born Again Horny Men Of Edinburgh)]--- How about you?

Comments

[necrophonic.livejournal.com]

Good concepts for everyone to think about.

I've been thinking a lot over the last... I dunno how long it's been... But I've pondered where that disconnect was in our discussions, and it so often has come to my mind that there was always this one underlying principal that was often mentioned (usually by your colleagues, and very occasionally by you yourself)

The whole idea of what words to use and how to define those words kept coming up as one of the the main stumbling blocks. Whether it was in our discussions, my discussions with your colleagues, or discussions with the YouTube philosophical community, no matter who was talking to who, or about what, it always seemed to be the big stumbling block for everyone.

And usually, no matter what side the person was on, people seem to always think that the OTHER guy needs to "accept (my) philosophy and my definitions or else they're closed-minded".

Which, of course, is usually what both sides are screaming at the other.

I always thought of myself as a person who tried very hard to "accommodate the other person and their way of thinking or defining terms" and large swaths of time are often taken up in just defining a term, how each party uses that term in day to day use, and what terms can be used during the discussion in order to differentiate between either person's use of the term.

example:

Your definition of magic = a large number of concepts which you know better than I

My definition of magic = various categorized concepts which I usually list individually, often times being in stark contrast to those concepts you mention

Such as

applied psychology "magic" (the sort of Anton LaVey "it's not really magic but we'll call it that, we're really just manipulating people like ad agencies do by exploiting the functionality of the human brain")

telekinetic "magic" (action at a distant, thoughts that cause "direct" physical phenomena such as an object moving in a different room without any intermediary steps)

action by proxy "magic" (the thoughts of the mind/brain translating into physical action of the brain/body associated with that mind/brain/body unit, translating into physical actions within a system, and by cause-and-effect causing larger macro effects in the system, giving rise to vastly distanced effects. "butterfly flaps its wings in Tokyo" kind of thing)

Whereas, we could just say "magic" and be talking about entirely different things. And how do we go about deciding who's going to use which term and what concept is associated with it? And then how do we establish a parsing system for deciding the sort of A+B=C logic-speak required in philosophical discussion, and how each of these concepts applies to the other?

...which is probably why so few philosophy students make it past the "can we truly 'know' that we exist?"

Sorry to drop in unannounced, but I had some time to kill and wondered how things be with ye.

[wolven.livejournal.com]

I think, often, the only thing we can do is come to understand how we're using the terms, and hope that we and the other people involved are actually doing as you indicate: Trying to understand how the other person uses their terms.

If we can make that first step, I think we can come to figure out, in the course of conversations, which aspects of whose definitions apply to the particular topic, and everyone can come out of it with a more robust understanding of their own and each other's positions.

And I'm... Frustrated, often, obviously. But every one of these posts is an effort to correct the non-useful aspects of my perspectives which have been keeping me from going forward, from being happy with the good things and not-incapacitatingly-frustrated with the bad.

How are you?

[necrophonic.livejournal.com]

"And I'm... Frustrated, often, obviously. But every one of these posts is an effort to correct the non-useful aspects of my perspectives which have been keeping me from going forward, from being happy with the good things and not-incapacitatingly-frustrated with the bad."

I'd say that this pretty much sums up my week. heheh.
Things are well, but right now it's a struggle to get over the hump, and I have limits to my stress-coping abilities. Such is life, I suppose.

Nice to pop in and see that debate/discussion is alive and well in some corners of the porno-webs, though. Wish I had more time to devote to that, but... Meh. Exhaustion + Lack Of Time = Not Much Philosophical Output