Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
i apparently think and talk in a kinda abstract way. i don't see this as a problem, but it seems that others sometimes do. i'm ususally pretty precise, even though it can sometimes take a while to get to it, particularly if i'm thinking something out as i'm talking.
some folk seem to find this a burden, like there's some malice behind making demands on their attention.
i can usually get away with it in 3-d because i'm an affable sort.
but not all situations allow for that--here for example. this is why i make a hard distinction between roachboy and me.
there are things about this thread that confuse me.
like when you would pretend that directness is some kind of imperative, i don't know what you're saying really.
not everything is simple: not everything is obvious. it's often the case that being "direct"means trafficking in cliches the only function of which really is to exempt the person you're talking to from having to work too hard. as if there's an advantage to be gained from that.
i figure life's too short to bother with that.
this is different from being emotionally open, btw: its more about the way openness is expressed. there's no necessary connection between using short pithy phrases and being open. the connection seems to me an illusion...except insofar as you may find yourself talking with a particular person who demand this of you, for whatever reason. so when i do it, i'm generally just being nice. but chances are these people will never get to know me. it's just like that---you impose a little screen, you see little programming.
|
Communication isn't about work. It's about trading ideas, expressing emotions, needs, wants, whatever. I'm not sure where anyone stated that directness is an imperative anymore than you stated that speaking in the abstract is imperative. We're expressing our preferred method of communication. Mine is by stating succinctly what one's needs are.
This stems more from years spent playing a particular career game with people where directness was feared as it might upset people. While I played that game that people needed to be protected from certain truths, I never really agreed with it. I became curious to know what would happen if I stopped playing that game. It's nothing really special, it's just a choice I made in my life.
Everyone has their own desired method of communication, but if people who are communicating can't agree on the rules of that communication, then it's ineffective. Two people can speak the same language but never understand a word the other is saying. Sometimes I decide to engage in that communication, just to see what happens, sometimes I don't.
All I know is that for me, I prefer it when a person comes out and says directly what they want, instead of using language to get me to guess. Again, nothing special, nothing superior, nothing inferior.
I don't demand anyone adjust to my method of communication, but I do get to decide if I engage in communication with that person. But I'm not special, so does everyone else.
However, going off of what I mentioned earlier, I do find it curious when a person
does demand that the receiver adapt to the sender's preferred style and instead of declining to engage any further, becomes upset and attempts to control the situation. I wonder what it is about that person that makes them feel so out of control of a situation that no one is trying to control but them. I can't help it. It's a quirk of mine. Well, that's not true, I can help it. I just don't want to. Some day that might change.