I remember being in high school talking to my buddies. One joked that they needed a special dictionary to understand what I was saying. Apparently my vocabulary was significantly advanced to often leave the rest of them scratching their heads. Of course, I didn't notice--I did not intentionally use large words. This is key: I did not understand that our cognitive abilities were so disparate that it was actually leading to a loss of communication and understanding.
Flash forward to recently when a discussion with someone revealed many lapses in their logic. At the beginning of the discussion, I had considered that we were just not quite on the same page, but that a simple discussion of facts would bring us to common ground.
As the conversation continued, I began to get a disconcerting "Alice in Wonderland" sense. Honestly, I considered every angle I could think of. The medium was text only, which can provide much fertile ground for misunderstanding as communication is largely nonverbal. However, I could dismiss that as the source of the problem as the conversation continued and there was no glaringly obvious hint to miscommunication.
Maybe I was just wrong. Hey, it happens. I know enough to know that even "rock solid" foundations can have hidden cracks, and I am not afraid of being wrong. Test my fences--if they break they were not good fences.
No, I was not wrong.
I tried to understand his point. In fact, I often attempt to say "Ok, what do I know about this person,
their nature, their history, their background which would indicate a
reason for this conclusion that they themselves might not even know or
understand.". Sometimes we all need to step our of heads and into
someone else's. It is good practice for empathy, as well as for
pursuing truth and understanding humans.
The more we talked, the more I saw biases and cognitive dissonance emerge from the other party, which is usually the root of the argument: not fact or truth, but bias and desire.
-A position may agree with the other person's position but may be tossed aside because he did not approve of the quarter it came from.
-Many logic fallacies crop up. It is useful to see the list of logic fallacies and learn them so you do not make them--we are smart, but we are still humans.
-There is often a sudden change in the tone of the conversation, going from "topical discussion" to "personal attack" if you make a point they cannot argue with.
-Or they simply ignore your point and might actually refuse to answer.
-You might find that they keep trying to change the frame of the discussion
-You might discover that the root of the argument is an earnest desire to fix a situation that you want fixed as well, but one is trying to argue tactically and one strategically.
-You might find you were actually completely wrong and it is difficult for us to say "Yep, I was wrong", but it is an invaluable skill.
-The other person might fully acknowledge your points but just simply decide not to accept them. The term "agree to disagree" often comes up at that point.
It is a useful skill to be able to recognize those moments of cognitive dissonance in yourself (for no one is immune) and in others. If the discussion is civil but then you find yourself reacting in anger to a point someone makes, stop. Identify the actual root--it might be because cognitive dissonance has been created and the psyche does not like that. It might also be because the other person is being hard headed or illogical or morally unsound or is acting like a jerk.
BUT it might be because fact has just clashed with bias. It is very difficult to swallow that one is not as (liberal, holy, honest, conservative, awe inspiring, rational, compassionate) as one thought they were.
When there is an impasse and we know that we are correct and the other person simply will not acknowledge it, we are left with two possibilities: they did know better but chose not to acknowledge it or they truly could not understand logical thought.
It is difficult to know if someone else a)knows something you don't b)is refusing to acknowledge a fact or c)is incapable of the complexity of thought that you are presenting.
This seems like a cause for superiority, but of course that's nonsense--we did not create or earn our own intelligence. However, it still presents difficulties with communication, which is vital in humans, and honestly needs to be addressed.
I would offer these suggestions:
1) Consider if this is really where you need to plant your flag. A difference on wall color, nah. A difference in discipline for a child, perhaps. A difference in spiritual or physical life or death matters, almost certainly. (Notice that "But I'm right" is not a valid reason for flag planting ;) ). If you need to plant your flag, do so, but not in the foot of the other guy. You need to NOT make it a pride matter with them, so be respectful but firm--hopefully they will come around at some point.
2) Consider any medium issues or timing problems. Don't argue when either of you is sick, hungry, hormonal, stressed, tired. Just let it ride til rational thought can be used by both parties.
3) Consider that you could be wrong. Might as well walk that dog and get it over with to see if it barks or doesn't.
4) Try to find common ground. There almost always is some.
5) Look at the person as a whole. Why would they think this way? What are they actually saying? It is easy to hear but not listen. It is easy to just wait your turn to talk. However, use your cognitive ability to delve into the other person as much as it is possible for you. Relating to people is not always about ensuring your position is acknowledged as correct as much as working toward a common goal.
6) Consider and RESPECT their abilities, their inherent worth. They might not be as intelligent as you are, however, they might have wisdom or mercy or other abilities that turn "cold logic" into "warm benevolence". Cold logic is not the height of human cognitive ability. The ability to use mercy and reason, logic and grace, honesty and benevolence and love all at the same time is. Truth is always important. Fact is not always important.
7) Consider whether you need to change your frame. Are you using big words? Talking in abstracts? Yelling or dominating (an excellent point needs no violence to assist it). Relating to an emotional person on logical terms OR vice versa? If you are, then you need to weave their language into yours so they can understand you.
8) If you are right and you have listened, understood the other person (even if you do not agree), discussed during reasonable times, checked your flag planting, looked for common ground, etc then understand whether this is a "will thing or a skill thing". All humans, even Outliers, are prone to bias and creative problem solving regarding cognitive dissonance. However, sometimes it is not that a person won't understand your point, it is that they honestly can't. Their minds cannot make the connections that you made. In that case, go back to number 6 and just hang out there.
No comments:
Post a Comment