In a message dated 2/16/2000 1:36:29 AM Pacific Standard Time, kpj@sics.se
writes:
<< Both statements point at the same phenomenon (have the same denotation)
but may generate different emotional overtones, subjective interpretations,
socio-cultural values, and ideological assumptions in humans reading them
(have different connotations). >>
Yes, indeed, each person comes with a lot of pre-formed concepts, wide range
of experience! Good point, interpretations vary highly!! The trick is to be
aware and avoid miscommunication!
I think you are talking about a wonderful skill called "Interpersonal
Communications".
<<
Extropians should learn to avoid the connotational traps, so they can
infect the optimum number of humans with their Extropian ideas.
>>
Not only that, but "Extropians" can (and should) have varied ideas.
Convincing someone else of my ideas is not my idea ; ) of a pleasant debate.
I have said this before and I will say it again. I go into conversation to
learn, to think, and to express myself. Not to "infect" people.
I also believe have a good Meme Immune System. It is insulting to tell me
otherwise. Even if it was true, one would have to start out presenting ones
ideas first, exposing some of the flaws in my perceptions, and carefully and
kindly (perhaps with humor or loving ways) - finally allowing me to see it
for myself.
Listen:
I look at the source of the idea, the ideas *behind the idea* so to speak.
It is not inappropriate to judge the character of the person giving the idea,
as well as the so called "rationale" behind it. If I find that a person's
thinking is rude, rigid, uninformed, or perhaps just unskilled at
"interpersonal communications" I will think that they are not a good source
-- or that their argument is based on personal bias.
No matter how well they argue, it will be harder for them to 'convince' me.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:03:49 MDT