Changing Discussion Patterns

How do you engage in a conversation?
Do you listen first and then respond?
Do you ever ask for clarification or offer additional insight without being asked?
How do you respond when people laugh at your carefully thought-out responses?
Do you approach conversations with others as an equal? Or perhaps it varies.

Have you worked to change your habits - the pattern you follow for discussions?
---
Today I learned that the way that I evaluate conversations and point out errors is toxic. It is a means of undermining that other person. To destabilize them and to reduce their credibility. That was certainly not my intention, but I see it now. And I can't un-see it.

At this point I am processing this information and attempting to determine how I can begin to untangle these habits. This is a lot for me to take in. I am ultimately thankful that someone took time away from their day to point it out to me.

I was going to write a blog post about this, but since it is relevant for philosophy and political discussions I decided to start a thread on the topic. I hope others will share their thoughts here.

 

I'm really a back & forth type of guy.
But I expect the other person to leap in too. Not just wait for me to completely stop.
To me, conversation is a banter...sharing amongst equal participants.

Now, if someone is trying to make a point...or needs to clarify something. Kindly wait.
But even then, a question may come up that you don't want to lose with flow of conversation. (sometimes it provides context...and often you can't go backwards in a discussion)

Many I who know me, say I talk a lot...but I actually listen quite a bit. Especially is someone is very involved with a story or emotionally connected.
I can't tell ya how many talks I have, where I'm sitting nodding, saying "yeah" and "uh-hunh" repeatedly. Even with a good friend.

I always ask pointed and probing questions, if needed...how do you fill in the blanks otherwise...or get more context?

People laugh at inappropriate times, quite often. That or they talk down, with skepticism or disdain.
You just have to be confident and comfortable with your words.
You also have value too...and remember people often try to tear down or suppress ideas that they don't understand or agree with. (almost instinctively)
That or they have an agenda.

And yes, I'm constantly tweaking, analyzing and adjusting my conversation patterns.
I went from a young man with a stutter, high nasal voice, who couldn't go with the flow of conversation
With constant practice, I don't stutter now...speak in lower clear tones (trying for a elite brit like) and listen for the flow of conversation. (even stop, if I'm not getting across or they lost interest)

I've also gotten better at public speaking, speaking with authority, with authority figures/VIPs, politically, even knowing the audience and adjusting for that circumstance, mood and class level.

Now, what I have to be careful of...is when I get really interested in a topic that I have lots of knowledge on, I can go on like a professor...just spouting on.
It's instinctive for me...so I really have to make myself aware and check myself. See if I'm boring or overwhelming a person. It's actually quite a challenge.

Another thing, I have to be wary of...is that I'm a big guy and my voice projects loudly easily...so I have to check my volume for the appropriate level.

Still have tons of work, always trying to get better, still make mistakes...but I am proud at how far I've come. I wish I was a natural politician, but with work, it comes bit by bit.

I don't think I criticize or talk down or zap people...but I am very analytical and empathetic, a detective
...and I don't think people appreciate deep insight comments on habits or character. (they like their secrets)
So I have to check that, it's gotten me into trouble...or chases some away. (even SOs, IMHO...I could be wrong, it's a theory)

Oh..and on here, on the board...I speechify.
(yes, I know )

 

I admit I did want to walk away entirely from the conversation when the person was laughing at me. It doesn't feel good to be laughed at when I am trying really hard to make sense of conversations and communicate in the first place. It took me a while to realize that they were trying to help me and not just treating me like a joke.

 

I have finally concluded that arguing or trying to discuss the 'facts' with Trumpists and Evangelicals is kind of like the old saw about trying to teach a pig to sing: It wastes your time and annoys the pig.

Not that those folks are pigs, although some certainly are, but that they believe what they believe as unassailable articles of faith, not as facts.

 

Actually, when this crud just started...I was called a Conspiracy Theorist by my boss.
and many called me many other names.

I found out it was coming from a coworker who has family in Wuhan. (of course, China was covering it up or minimizing it)
That was in mid-Jan 2019...before it was acknowledged in the US or even Europe.
And I still had connections in the federal government that confirmed it. (secretly and under the table, of course)

I felt like the boy who cried wolf. (except there really WAS a "wolf")
I felt like I was trying to help people...save lives and from harm.

Now I just nod my head and keep my mouth shut.
Or just correct with the facts and ignore them if they ignore me.

Can't help them anymore. I can only help myself.
If they don't know by now...there's nothing I can do.

But I also ignore those who go overkill or get up on a pedestal. (like they're grammar police)
There's a balance.

 

Oh, yes. That's a very good point. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

 

Yeah. There's only so much I can do to argue with ignorance. It's not my job to make up for decades of education that they somehow slept through.