I have some probability on me being the confused one here.
In conversations like this, both sides are confused, that is don’t understand the other’s point, so “who is the confused one” is already an incorrect framing. One of you may be factually correct, but that doesn’t really matter for making a conversation work, understanding each other is more relevant.
(In this particular case, I think both of you are correct and fail to see what the other means, but Jessica’s point is harder to follow and pattern-matches misleading things, hence the balance of votes.)
(I downvoted some of Jessica’s comments, mostly only in the cases where I thought she was not putting in a good faith effort to try to understand what her interlocutor is trying to say, like her comment upstream in the thread. Saying that talking to someone is equivalent to feeding trolls is rarely a good move, and seems particularly bad in situations where you are talking about highly subjective and fuzzy concepts. I upvoted all of her comments that actually made points without dismissing other people’s perspectives, so in my case, I don’t really think that the voting patterns are a result of her ideas being harder to follow, and more the result of me perceiving her to be violating certain conversational norms)
In conversations like this, both sides are confused,
Nod. I did actually consider a more accurate version of the comment that said something like “at least one of us is at least somewhat confused about something”, but by the time we got to this comment I was just trying to disengage while saying the things that seemed most important to wrap up with.
Nod. I did actually consider a more accurate version of the comment that said something like “at least one of us is at least somewhat confused about something” [...]
The clarification doesn’t address what I was talking about, or else disagrees with my point, so I don’t see how that can be characterised with a “Nod”. The confusion I refer to is about what the other means, with the question of whether anyone is correct about the world irrelevant. And this confusion is significant on both sides, otherwise a conversation doesn’t go off the rails in this way. Paying attention to truth is counterproductive when intended meaning is not yet established, and you seem to be talking about truth, while I was commenting about meaning.
Hmm. Well I am now somewhat confused what you mean. Say more? (My intention was for ‘at least one of us is confused’ to be casting a fairly broad net that included ‘confused about the world’, or ‘confused about what each other meant by our words’, or ‘confused… on some other level that I couldn’t predict easily.’)
In conversations like this, both sides are confused, that is don’t understand the other’s point, so “who is the confused one” is already an incorrect framing. One of you may be factually correct, but that doesn’t really matter for making a conversation work, understanding each other is more relevant.
(In this particular case, I think both of you are correct and fail to see what the other means, but Jessica’s point is harder to follow and pattern-matches misleading things, hence the balance of votes.)
(I downvoted some of Jessica’s comments, mostly only in the cases where I thought she was not putting in a good faith effort to try to understand what her interlocutor is trying to say, like her comment upstream in the thread. Saying that talking to someone is equivalent to feeding trolls is rarely a good move, and seems particularly bad in situations where you are talking about highly subjective and fuzzy concepts. I upvoted all of her comments that actually made points without dismissing other people’s perspectives, so in my case, I don’t really think that the voting patterns are a result of her ideas being harder to follow, and more the result of me perceiving her to be violating certain conversational norms)
Nod. I did actually consider a more accurate version of the comment that said something like “at least one of us is at least somewhat confused about something”, but by the time we got to this comment I was just trying to disengage while saying the things that seemed most important to wrap up with.
The clarification doesn’t address what I was talking about, or else disagrees with my point, so I don’t see how that can be characterised with a “Nod”. The confusion I refer to is about what the other means, with the question of whether anyone is correct about the world irrelevant. And this confusion is significant on both sides, otherwise a conversation doesn’t go off the rails in this way. Paying attention to truth is counterproductive when intended meaning is not yet established, and you seem to be talking about truth, while I was commenting about meaning.
Hmm. Well I am now somewhat confused what you mean. Say more? (My intention was for ‘at least one of us is confused’ to be casting a fairly broad net that included ‘confused about the world’, or ‘confused about what each other meant by our words’, or ‘confused… on some other level that I couldn’t predict easily.’)