Not a lot of people online at 2 am, so I was glad to be having a rousing chat with NT over in swissyland. Tonight's topic boiled down to communication issues. It was pretty thought provoking and stayed with me as I went on another moonlit run.
My feeling is that a lot of communication issues stem from assumptions (correct or not) of how your partner will respond to your message. If the receiver is categorized as an opponent, we might adjust our language to falsely imply a zero-sum situation (eg. threats, ruses), which can negatively affect the delivery. Whereas if the receiver is treated as an ally, the same message can be shaped in a way that gets the point across in a more effective, less confrontational way.
So as I was running, I started going through the cases (yes this is what I do when I go running):
If I assume you're nice and you're nice: Message 100% received! Yay us!
If I assume you're nice, but you're a jerk: I don't feel listened to. Sucks to be me.
If I assume you're bad, but you're nice: You may hear me but definitely feel disrespected. Sucks to be you.
If I assume you're bad and you ARE a jerk. Communication is barely possible, AND we're both miserable.
I tripped up a little when I realized that this is just the "Prisoner's Dilemma". Hah, how funny. Will definitely have to think about this more. Update: NT says this post is too abstract. Heh, probably is. I tell her I blame dehydration.
Share this miniURL: http://densetsu.net/x/DV
