Can We Talk? Jews, Muslims, Republicans, Democrats, and Others

 Of course, we CAN talk. But how?  And there are other equally important questions: what are the objectives of our talk? Do you primarily seek victory or open, honest dialogue? Or, more precisely, what exactly do YOU, I, and WE want?

 

Such questions are easily asked, but not so easily answered. I wrote two relevant books whose texts I now draw upon: Questioning & Answering: How, Who, When, Where, and Conversation: Striving, Surviving, and Thriving: Searching for Messages and Relationships. But, in the interest of brevity, I cannot in this posting explain sufficiently the details they provide.  So, I collapse all the important, complicated introductory questions into a deliberately simplified, format.

 

THE MODE OF LISTENING - Do you listen only with conscious or unconscious intent to rebut?

 

THE BALANCE OF LISTENING - Do you deliberately strive to keep yours and your interlocutor’s allocation of listening as equal as possible?

 

THE MODE OF TALK - Do you talk as objectively as you can manage?

 

THE BALANCE OF TALK - Do you deliberately strive to keep yours and your interlocutor’s allocation of speaking as equal as possible?  

 

THE EVALUATION PROCESS - Do you continually monitor your emotion and simultaneously try to dampen it during your dialogue?

 

THE EVALUATION CONCLUSION - Do you accept, as accurately as possible, how well you have been able to combat your biases and preconceptions?

 

THE INVITATION TO FURTHER LISTENING - Do you objectively help your interlocutor to listen to your legitimate points and offer to explain your ideas more clearly, such as with more nuance and/or examples, and/or admissions of your ideas' limitations?

 

THE INVITATION TO FURTHER TALKING - Do you ask for further examples and explanations from your interlocutor when they might facilitate your understanding of their positions?

 

Perhaps you broadly agree with the advice, but believe that it is easier said than done.  And, if you do, I totally agree.  The primary impediment, I think, is one’s perception of their interlocutor.  When you do not respect your counterpart, your emotions distort your mentation such that you operate with rigidly biased cognitive “reflexes” focused on self-defense or self-offense rather than on rational reciprocal exchange.  During dialogue, attempt to be aware of any relevant biases that you might have and counter them with as open a mind as you can. Take maximal responsibility for the conversation.  That is, be responsible for your own rational listening and speaking and facilitate, in so far as possible for promoting the rational listening and speaking of your interlocutor.