I Wanted To Talk So I Just Listened, And This Is What I Learned
A few days ago, my Philosophy of Man professor gave the class a really interesting assignment. We were instructed to view people we usually talk to not just for our certain perception of them but rather for the way they see things, the way they think. Now the challenge in this assignment is realizing how we have short attentions spans and predetermined speeches laid in our heads when we get into a conversation instead of actually listening to people when they talk and actually respond. It was important to surpass this challenge in order to see people for how they view things past our idea of them, for if we were to keep on replying to them just to make them feel our presence and fake our attention to what they are saying, then we wouldn't really get there and end up having a pointless conversation like this:
My Experience
I am the type of person who easily gets triggered when people state concepts that oppose my views, so the moment I got the instructions for the assignment, I knew I was in for a tough ride.
Later that day, I went to meet my boyfriend. I have a certain concept of him which would be really difficult to put in words, but he is basically the type who does not speak much, because he is the type who ACTUALLY communicates--listens (at least that's what I think :p) and responds in a way that he really acknowledges your thoughts, which most people, especially my type fail at.
Right then and there, I knew he was not the person I should have this experiment done with, for there is no problem with the way he communicates. He is not as triggered as I am when it comes to facing notions that are against my ideal ones, because he knows how to take these different views and think about them rather than just immediately negating them because he does not want them to ruin an ideal concept of his.
However, my friends were his complete opposite, so the next day, I went to my friends and I's routine lunch not just to catch gossip and eat but work on my assignment. We were in the school cafeteria sharing our stories from the day before when my friend Z spilled how he felt about our relationship as a group of friends.
He said, "I just feel like you guys are not the type I can tell my problems to." This immediately triggered my other friend A, and he said, "W-wait hold up, do you even come to us and talk?"
The whole conversation was electric. My other friend E and I were both in the circuit with the other two despite our refusal to actually go deeply into the now sparked up topic growing into fire.
E: All I can say is that I 'm not the type who could comfort you [to Z]
Z: The people I was drinking with last night listened to me and they were not even my close friends!
A: You don't even come to ME to talk!
Me: See, [to Z] we all have friends we can talk to and other friends who can just offer the entertainment part, and well we are your entertainment gang!
Z: I just want my close friends [E, A, Me] to be the same people I tell my problems to. It's just how it is.
They all went on to saying basically the same things, and I continued sipping on my iced tea to analyze everything that was happening despite itching to join the drama and get to say something like some Mother Teresa figure and just stop them. Turns out, we all just wanted to participate in the conversation and simply say something--that if I pulled the Mother Teresa thing, I would only add fuel to the fire. Z initiated a topic, he wanted to talk about it but we ended up speaking for ourselves, trying to take the floor in wanting to be heard as well! It was bound to not end AT ALL!
A did not even take a moment to understand what Z was implying which was at first just to share how he felt. A already had a prepared reply and it was to save himself from criticism or blame, because he thought Z hated us when he really did not.
E and I wanted to get our asses out of Z's ideal close friends thing so bad we did not even allow him to further talk about how he felt.
Z felt so attacked later in the conversation that he began insisting that his idea of close friends was the only right and available option.
In the end, we all just let our own ideas clash instead of accepting our different perspectives and listening to each other discuss it.
During my moment of observance of the whole conversation, I also realized that my idea for each of my friends did not change, however it is how I handle them that was all of a sudden something I knew I had to change. I realized that I have to be more warm in welcoming their thoughts that usually go against mine so that we would not have any misunderstandings at all. This does not apply to just relationships we have but also in a bigger scale.
There is war out there because everyone refuses to stop, look, and listen. Everyone just wants to be the center of attention when we could just all listen to each other and accept the differences that are not solvable by corrupting peace in the first place anyway. Sure it is not that easy, but have you ever thought about it before or you just keep taking sides?
Very interesting post!
I try to be like this too. It takes practice to listen and analyse before jumping in with a worn out script of your own ideas. I'm still practicing this!
Stop, look and listen. Yes, I like that. Very well said; thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Great post. The most basic and necessary thing for progress is communication. At least half of communication will always require listening.
I recommend you check out Anthony Magnabosco and watch some of his Street Epistemology videos. It's about asking the right questions and listening to make sure you understand the other person. If you see a flaw in their reasoning don't point it out. Instead, ask them a question that would convince them to confront the flaw and see what they say in response to it.
Another path of thought worth considering is how you value rationalism. If you are incorrect about something, would you want to know that you are incorrect? How would you go about doing so?
If someone offends you by their suggestion that you could be wrong, is your offense an appropriate response even if you are wrong? I think present day world culture is slowly growing away from this social response of being offended by a difference or challenge of belief. I think it's often caused by the less effective ways in which most people are raised to learn as children that if we oppose what our parents tell us or question it, then they get angry and use that anger as their argument.
As far as I'm concerned, such an argument is invalid on the face of it. Peter Boghossian, the creator of Street Epistemology, once said something that really stuck out to me, "Your offense means nothing to me. Give me evidence or a new argument, then I might change my mind."
See, this is a social dysfunction. A common social rule that is invalid. You should be happy if someone has the ability to inform you of something important to you that you otherwise wouldn't know. You should know your own limits for those few things you might not be ready to know, but recognize those limits as limitations that you impose on yourself by keeping them. It's human, but it's also a weakness.
Here's some videos of Boghossian if you are interested in learning more about his ideas, like Street Epistemology: