From: TT (transtigger@aol.com)
Date: Mon Sep 16 2002 - 07:35:30 MDT
[quote from: Harvey on 2002-09-16 at 06:09:03]
[... If we try to discuss these root assumptions, we find that we don't even
agree on what they are. Then we disagree and argue. I think this happens all
the time on this list and leads to the inevitable heated discussions. We can
talk fine in the abstract about \"great things in the future.\" But when we
get to root assumptions, we have various viewpoints and cannot agree on the
basic underpinnings of reality... ]
--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
Principal Security Consultant <www.Newstaff.com>
This would seem to be a very important issue. If the base assumptions of
each party were not exposed prior to communication, then it would, almost
inevitably result in miscommunication, and no progress can be made. This is
particularly the case with cross cultural and polarised group interfaces.
If the aim is to communicate effectively, should we not bring to the open our
basic assumptions regarding the subject being contemplated? If the answer is
'yes', then how do we know we have really exposed those assumptions, and that
there are not even deeper assumptions buried somewhere in our Psyche? Is it
possible to 'look around ones own corner' if one wanted too?
Personally I have a hard time bringing my assumptions to the surface, as they
often crumble the moment I begin to analyse them. It is often quite a shock to
have ones unacknowledged assumptions exposed, let alone challenged. I think
that's where a lot of the emotional discord arises when discussing political
topics.
Wouldn't it be nice is such communication could be more mathematical in
format...?
J.
---- This message was posted by TT to the Extropians 2002 board on ExI BBS. <http://www.extropy.org/bbs/index.php?board=61;action=display;threadid=53184>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:04 MST