As I grow older I collect patterns that I see playing out over and over again in everyday life. Here’s one of them. When someone says something negative about another person, the communication has two parts. The first is the substance of what they’re saying. Maybe it’s an opinion, or a judgement based on facts, or simply a lie. It is what it is, you have to evaluate it for yourself and decide whether you agree. But there’s a second part of the communication, a part that tells you about the speaker. Why did they say that? What did saying it accomplish for them? And if they got their facts wrong, what assumptions does their error reveal, and what does it tell you about their regard for truth?
4 thoughts on “”
Comments are closed.
Andrew Grumet's Weblog 
“Here’s one of them. When someone says something negative about another person, the communication has two parts.”
Andrew: I think that’s true of pretty much anything we say. Particularly when you consider that “positive” and “negative” are often highly subjective labels.
LikeLike
Andrew,
think of what is the significance that you point this out _only_ if someone has said something negative? (As Roger has pointed out, the mechanism is the same if someone says something negative or positive).
… that reveals a lot about you (but ofcourse only you can know what it reveals).
Etienne
LikeLike
Add…
What does it say if the communicator was correct and everybody else was too afraid to speak up?
LikeLike