Comments on: In Search of Meaningful Conversation

By: Francis Irving

Francis Irving — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 04:33:29 +0000

One thing nobody has mentioned yet is risk taking. To raise the important subjects, to talk about something that may make you vulnerable, or that is unusual, requires a certain boldness.

By: Barbara W. Klaser

Barbara W. Klaser — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 21:38:02 +0000

I so agree about imagination. Imagination is learned, and like language is best learned early in life. It’s important to teach and encourage children from an early age to exercise their own imaginations, to be creative. It helps them be able to see and create possibilities later in life as well as to nurture their own curiosity. I think the biggest problem in places where poverty prevails is that parents (and sometimes children) are forced to work so hard and have so little means that children don’t get a chance to fertilize their imaginations early in life through story and play (and TV doesn’t count as creative play, because it feeds us complete images). A society that doesn’t nurture imagination in its young becomes stuck and requires outside impetus to get creative again, in order to even solve day to day problems related to survival. Too often, even when help arrives, rather than impetus to create for themselves, they’re fed someone else’s idea of what they need.Imagination is freedom.

By: Moshik

Moshik — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 16:22:47 +0000

I couldn'y agree with you more.Anyone wanna change the world ?no kidding ! :)I'm looking for people who are not afraid of dreaming in large scales, and being creative.anyone who's passionate about that like meplease contact me at: http://www.myspace.com/mosh2nightcheers :)

By: Siona

Siona — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 05:50:53 +0000

Well, if Jon can post three comments, I suppose I can keep unabashedly chatting, too. :)I also found the four paragraph a bit condescending, and can’t help, too, but reflect that the assumptions here would increase the likelihood that ‘meaningful conversations’ are difficult to find. If I meet someone who feels that my thoughts about “work, what to eat for [my] next meal, etc” are “superficial,” I doubt I’ll want to disclose anything deeper about who I am or what I care about–and I do believe that most people can sense that sort of attitude. To my mind, a genuine curiosity about others (and an interest in what THEY consider important instead of whether or not they agree with what *I* consider important) is a critical component of a good conversationalist.And again, I do think good conversationalists are much, much more likely to be “people who love to listen” rather than “people who love to talk.”

By: Jon Husband

Jon Husband — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 22:14:23 +0000

… otherwise, why even have comments capability ?

By: Jon Husband

Jon Husband — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 22:13:26 +0000

I want to clrify my earlier comment. Everyone has their own prersonal and preferred styles of communicatioln and conversation, and Dave has clearly outlined his and the reasons for it / them.My only or main beef with his assertion that conversations are not welll conducted (“clumsy communications media” were the words, I believe) are not necessarily shared by everyone. I participate in some comments threads in blog communities where I believe thst the comments thread gives rise to some might fine and mighty powerful “conversations” … but that’s just one man’s (mine) opinion.But there’s a basic threshold for me .. I firmly believe that a blog author shows respect to readers by replying to (all) comments as a matter of course, even if it is a simple “thanks” or an “I disagree” or even a “go troll elsewhere” (which is more or less a signal of respect for the rest of her or his community of readers).

By: Jon Husband

Jon Husband — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 21:39:55 +0000

I’m going to have to read it again more carefully, and then reflect (as deeply as I know how) but on first read I find paragraph 4 powerfully nuanced in its condescension.Which throws me, because I know reasonably well, respect and appreciate Dave a great deal .. it’s probably my interpretation and (just as likely) my projection ….

By: Siona

Siona — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 20:01:34 +0000

I did think about that, but I had a hard time assessing for myself whether or not I, personally, found myself engaging more in conversations with men or with women. I do know interact on a daily basis with more men than with women, just due to the gender breakdown of my workplace and my friends, but even so I could imagine your observation still holding; perhaps both genders more easily open up to women than they do (other) men. What do you mean by “female conversation”? That sounds like a dangerously broad generalization if I ever heard one… ;)

By: Janene

Janene — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 16:14:46 +0000

Siona –I think you may have hit on yet another gender disparity (I am assuming you are female, if not, smack me :D). I think women are much more likely to have deep meaningful conversations — because we are generally more emotionally open than men. Not naturally, but culturally. So not only are we more willing to talk, other people are more willing to *let us talk* about things deep and meaningful. Of course, as an unusual woman in this regard, I have always felt that most “female conversation” is not as deep and important as most women think. But that’s another story all together……….Janene

By: Siona

Siona — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 15:18:06 +0000

I thought this post was beautiful; thank you. Can I suggest, though, a simpler reason for any dearth of meaningful conversationalist might be simpler? (Or, barring that, could I add another to your list?)No doubt you’re quite aware of this already, but one of the most significant differences between small talk and serious talk is that the latter requires a commitment to deep listening.Listening requires stillness, and the ability to pay attention and to focus and to wait, and to be comfortable with those inner urges to do, and distract, and to take action.It seems to me we as a society are not very good at this.Because I’ll confess I rarely have a hard time discovering those who are interested in deep or meaningful conversations. Perhaps it’s that all meaningful conversations are unique; perhaps it’s that it’s hard to predict what topic or what emotion will strike someone else to dive deep within themselves, or reveal something that matters. In any case, I find the best way to facilitate those conversations is to LISTEN, and not to listen to content, but for emotion.Sometimes it takes a little while, but if the situation is private enough, something will bubble up. But I’ve definitely talked for long enough now. I’ll be quiet. Again… thank you.