When I’m in a conversation often track who the conversation is for. I.e. who is this conversation primerely seving, in this moment.
If I’m ranting, then this conversation is for me, to let me realsease some tension. I will express my self in a way that feels good to me.
If I’m sharing usefull information, then the conversation is for the other person. I will express my self in a way to make the information clear and accessable for them, and also pay attetion to if they even want this information.
I can explain myself becasue I need to be seen, or becasue another person wants to understand me. But these are diffrent things.
Sometimes more than one person is upset and have needs, and then you have to pick who gets help first. Who ever goes first, now the concersation is for them, untill they feel sufficiently better to swich. And if neithr person can set aside their needs, probably you should not talk right now, or bring in help.
I don’t know how freqently or reliably I do this, because it’s not deliberate, i.e. I never decided to do this, I just do it sometimes, because [who is this for?] is often a required imputs for my speach generator.
Do you usually track this? In what types of conversations? Do you think other people usually track this?
Some conversations should be primarily about an object level thing, for its own elucidation (they serve the idea itself, bringing it into the world). A person can have motivations that are not about (emotions of) people (including that person themselves).
A good explanation constructs an understanding in its audience, which is slightly different from describing something, or from making it accessible.
I just checked in with myself what the post above was for. I tink its part rant, part me clarifying my thoughs by writing them, and hopefully getting some reflections back. And it’s also becasue maybe someone will find it usefull, but that’s also maybe secretly about me, to create more conversation partners that track the things I think is important.
If I was writing a proper LW blogpost then [who is this for] should primarlely be the reader.
But in a shortform like this I feel like I’m allowed to do what I want. And also people can take away what they want. Tracking [who is this for] is much more important when people are in a live conversations, becasue that is a more trapped situation, requiring more concideration.
There are also the type of conversation where the other person pretends that it is about me, but acctually it is about their need to feel like a good person. These situatios are afull and terrible, and I will not play along.
When I’m in a conversation often track who the conversation is for. I.e. who is this conversation primerely seving, in this moment.
If I’m ranting, then this conversation is for me, to let me realsease some tension. I will express my self in a way that feels good to me.
If I’m sharing usefull information, then the conversation is for the other person. I will express my self in a way to make the information clear and accessable for them, and also pay attetion to if they even want this information.
I can explain myself becasue I need to be seen, or becasue another person wants to understand me. But these are diffrent things.
Sometimes more than one person is upset and have needs, and then you have to pick who gets help first. Who ever goes first, now the concersation is for them, untill they feel sufficiently better to swich. And if neithr person can set aside their needs, probably you should not talk right now, or bring in help.
I don’t know how freqently or reliably I do this, because it’s not deliberate, i.e. I never decided to do this, I just do it sometimes, because [who is this for?] is often a required imputs for my speach generator.
Do you usually track this? In what types of conversations? Do you think other people usually track this?
Some conversations should be primarily about an object level thing, for its own elucidation (they serve the idea itself, bringing it into the world). A person can have motivations that are not about (emotions of) people (including that person themselves).
A good explanation constructs an understanding in its audience, which is slightly different from describing something, or from making it accessible.
I just checked in with myself what the post above was for. I tink its part rant, part me clarifying my thoughs by writing them, and hopefully getting some reflections back. And it’s also becasue maybe someone will find it usefull, but that’s also maybe secretly about me, to create more conversation partners that track the things I think is important.
If I was writing a proper LW blogpost then [who is this for] should primarlely be the reader.
But in a shortform like this I feel like I’m allowed to do what I want. And also people can take away what they want. Tracking [who is this for] is much more important when people are in a live conversations, becasue that is a more trapped situation, requiring more concideration.
There are also the type of conversation where the other person pretends that it is about me, but acctually it is about their need to feel like a good person. These situatios are afull and terrible, and I will not play along.
I usually don’t, though maybe unconsciously? Plausibly it would be good for me to try to track it explicitly.
cf https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/bhLxWTkRc8GXunFcB/what-are-you-tracking-in-your-head
Thanks for the link. I have read it but it was long ago, so thanks for the reminder. It’s related in a helpfull way.