Conversation
- Started
- Last post
- 40 Responses
- vespa
So the war debates rage on, and I was thinking, isn't debate just another form of war?
With JagdPanther's help I realised that there is a difference between conversation and debate, mainly that conversation is not necessarily about "winning", but is about trying to find common ground and understanding.
Anyone else got any observations on conversation? Esp on how to make sure discussion of volatile topics doesn't degenerate into insults and attacks?
- unknown0
.........guess conversation is not that hot an issue on NT, makes one wonder what we then are doing here.
- lnu0
If it's a really hot topic maybe you should just be talking to one person at a time. In a locked room.
- mitsu0
debate can be a healthy form of communication between opposing sides when it is done correctly.
when expressing my view(s) last week on the issues of war in iraq, i was called 'brainwashed'.
there's really no room left for intelligent conversation at this point. the opposition has firmly expressed their obstinance and closed-mindedness to the issue since 'you're not agreeing with them'.
what's even more ironic is when i've tried to point out that these occurances could possibly point to a reason for NT'ers NOT to debate, i was overwhelmed with responses questioning why i believe people shouldn't be allowed to voice their opinion... sigh...
i still don't blame cypher for his actions.
- vespa0
That's what I'm saying mitsu, debate all too often degenerates into insults because the objective is to win instead of to understand.
How would you suggest keeping debates respectful?
- unknown0
the only way you can have intelligent conversation is for both parties are open-minded. too often one thinks they are smarter than the other, or not open to the other's opinions, the conversation isn't going anywhere.
I learned that from living in DC here that there are alot of people here that are very opinionated.. and they like to debate especially since this is a city is all politics... but they are often close-minded.
so that's why if you see me anywhere I don't talk to people that much.
- unknown0
too early in the morning, i can't even type.
"the only way you can have intelligent conversation is for both parties are open-minded."
durr.
i meant to be open-minded not are open minded.
- MaynrdWinter0
Conversation is just an exchange of ideas, common ground, and a way to understand one another. I think it depends on the person when it comes to conversation-volitile attacks. Personally, I wouldn't conversate w/ someone like that.
M.
- vespa0
Yea but in the real world you constantly have to deal with people you wouldn't normally converse with. How do we keep it civilised?
- unknown0
different cultures = different people = different beliefs = different ideals != intelligent conversation
- mitsu0
"How would you suggest keeping debates respectful?"
there's nothing you or i can do except to continue to debate without making personal attacks and simply hope everyone else follows suit.
a few things i try to be consious of too, is qualifying my language with things like 'i believe', or 'many americans...', etc. i see too much gross generalization and broad statements that would require an international census to back up. those type of statments just skewer the topic off it's mark, which gets you nowhere fast!
- mitsu0
well, i believe if the entire NT community were all at a party/ convention/ etc. our debates and communication would be much more civilized.
i've seen some intellectual conversations on here on many occasions... so i don't think this is an exercise in futility.
- providence0
The problem with the dynamic of conversation is that it involves two or more people and you can never account for the other person(s)'s personality.
I personally think evidence is found in compromise. You have to be able to compromise to reach the common ground. My take on conversation is very Aikido-like. I let the other person drive the context and meaning of things because I know that I am willing to try and meet them even more than half way if necessary, which it usually is merely do to the inherent egoism of people(i.e. how can our perspectives not be one sided, when we are one sided).
- vespa0
That's interesting providence.
This thread started out of JagdPanther and I having a similar discussion (see Phubar's date)
Previously we had been pretty antagonistic towards each other in other threads but once we got into this "conversation/debate" question we found common ground in martial arts, him in Aikido and me in Capoeira.
I do see martial arts as a way of working out possible answers to other conflict situations in life.
- unknown0
i got stuck in this conversation 3 weeks ago... it came around to this girl who went to u of cal or something and she was asking us where we went. i went to va tech, and so did my buddy but he didn't graduate after 4 years, but he's making bank as a house appraiser now.
i just said that degrees are BS anyways (mine was in marketing mgt), b/c half the people that get jobs in the real world don't have anything to do with their major.
She was like I DISAGREE, you need a degree to be rich. I was trying to explain to her that it often helps but is not the case for everyone, and she was adamant that if you had to be rich, you needed a degree.
she didn't listen at all, and i was about to call her a crackhead, but didn't.
- providence0
Applying what I know of Capoeira to discussion would make for a very interesting conversation.
And it is interesting that putting things into a common perspective(martial arts) for me and you and Jagd makes our part of the conversation easier. Philosophy is a good place to find methods of conversing effectively...IMHO
- vespa0
So cbr_dave what I'm wondering is, does anyone have any tips on how to get out of an impasse such as this?
I am starting to think that if you'd managed to find common ground in some other area of conversation then maybe she wouldn't have been so pig-headed, cos stubbornness is a result of defensiveness, which I know I slip into if I think there's no chance that the other person will listen to me?
- vespa0
Well to be honest this whole idea for me started from a book I am reading, called "An Intimate History of Humanity", which tries to track the history of our philosophical ideas.
So what do you know of Capoeira?
- unknown0
well it's at that point where you walk away. She was looking at her friends, being all flustered, saying that the conversation was pissing her off.
I wasn't trying to be confrontational or anything or trying to prove that my point was right. I just wanted her to know that there is no clear cut answer for anything. For instance my roommate has an MBA, and he's waiting tables b/c he got laid off. Just b/c he has a degree doesn't guarantee wealth, as she was saying.
She was so close-minded, and wasn't even compromising anything at all... for such a minute conversation.
I think that at that point where I wanted to tell her that she was smoking too much crack.. I just said, "hey that's what I think, all i'm saying is that you don't need a degree to be rich."
it does resort to name calling when the other person just stops listening. But at the same time, is it worth having a conversation or getting hot over a conversation with someone who isn't open to other points of view?
it's like taking advice from someone who doesn't know what they are talking about (coworker thinks he's a good lover b/c his friends told him so, but yet he's never really slept with anyone yet). you gotta pick who have conversations with, or it'll just be like talking to a wall... that's just my opinion
- unknown0
If you´re into reading, try out Dan Millman and his "The way of the peacefull warrior" or something like that.
For my part I don´t know much of Capoeira; saw some in the streets of Funchal, Madeira; singing and "figthing". Very nice and athletic; smooth movements. I like the way you start it all; sitting in front of eachother?
- vespa0
True cbr_dave.
I tried to only have conversations with people who are on the same wavelength as me but in the end isn't that just too limiting?
I never would have known this a few years ago but now I'm realising that I love being surprised by people, like you think you have them pegged and then they say something that makes you reassess your own assumptions.
Even last week I wasn't arsed trying to have a conversation with Jagd but now that I have I think those conversations are the ones where both parties can gain the most. I think this is the underlying problem with the war debate at the moment which is why I am thinking about it in so much depth.