Language

[David Gould]

I posted something a little while ago. In the middle of posting it, I realised I was typing out what to me was an understandable way of putting things.

However, I know that this particular way I was putting things has been misinterpreted many, many times on this board previously. As such, I altered what I was typing to avoid such misinterpretations, because I really hate having to deal with them.

Do other people find themselves being more consciously aware of likely audience responses when posting here, or do you just say things any old how and then deal with misunderstandings and cross-purpose discussions as they arise?

 

[CCWoody]

You mean we talk past each other. Say it ain't so.

Yes, it is a part of the Christian Evangelical to learn how to communicate in a meaningful way, just as we are taught by the Apostle Paul:

1Co 9:20-22 GB
(20) And vnto the Iewes, I become as a Iewe, that I may winne the Iewes: to them that are vnder the Lawe, as though I were vnder the Lawe, that I may winne them that are vnder the Lawe:
(21) To them that are without Lawe, as though I were without Lawe, (when I am not without Lawe as pertaining to God, but am in the Lawe through Christ) that I may winne them that are without Lawe:
(22) To the weake I become as weake, that I may winne the weake: I am made all thinges to all men, that I might by all meanes saue some.

Recognize that all true Christians will be Calvinists in glory....

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.​

 

[Exhausted]

No matter how I word it, I never make sense.

 

[joebudda]

I particularly like to use the language the Christians here use. I understand the “emotional draw” yet it tends to be lacking in any coherent meaning. This means I can also use them to mean whatever way I want them to mean.

Some of my favorites are “good and evil”, “truth” and “sin”.

 

[KCDAD]

My concern is that people (read Mods) will misinterpret something and delete a post. If not Mods then other members who read what they expect and not what is intended...
for example, if I say I believe in God some will automatically think of a grey bearded old guy in the sky... others will think of a sadistic little child pulling wings off of flies and others will think of some Q type character from Star Trek. I can't help their presumptions but none of that is what I intended to communicate.

 

[David Gould]

Yes - we talk past one another, and we all have at least some difficulties in making sense.

It is interesting that when we say words like 'God' and 'faith' and 'self' and 'free will' we each think we know what we mean by them, but then we find that what we mean by them is not exactly the same as what other people mean by them.

Are there any particular strategies that you - anyone - use to help smooth the communication process to prevent language from becoming a barrier to communication?

Groovy. Marv. Far out.


edited for communication problem

 

[CCWoody]

Is there any particular strategies that you - anyone - use to help smooth the communication process to prevent language from becoming a barrier to communication?

Groovy. Marv. Far out.

Yeah, the Atheist/ Arminian/ Catholic/ EO/ Pentecostal/ Agnostic that doesn't fly into a rage and stomp off screaming "those nasty Calvinists" is usually the one that I can have a conversation with once we give each other enough time to learn each other's language. Humor doesn't hurt either. Neither does beer.

Recognize that all true Christians will be Calvinists in glory....

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.​

 

[KCDAD]

Are there any particular strategies that you - anyone - use to help smooth the communication process to prevent language from becoming a barrier to communication?

Groovy. Marv. Far out.


edited for communication problem

Parables are good (but I'm not good at them) metaphor... word pictures...
I have thought it would be good to have a Christian dictionary to translate Christianese into English... like "praise God!"...what does that mean?
"Saved": from what for what?
"Sin": whose fault? is it something I said?
"Worship": is it for God or for us? Quo vadis?
"Blessed": what does that mean?

 

[Moros]

I get dyslexic moments which I only recognize a week after I've entered a post.

 

[Danhalen]

I know I miscommunicate often. Usually it is a point I have tried to make but worded poorly. I am usually able to clear the miscommunication up with follow-up posts. I know Christians can, and do, experience the physical world, so they can relate to what I am trying to say (if I am persistent enough).

As far as misunderstanding what some of the Christian posters have to say...
...where do I start?

I use terms I understand. Terms like "spirit" or "see with your heart" make no sense to me. I can only function with terminology which relates to things I have experienced. I suppose talking to me about spiritual things is like describing the color red to a blind man. I don't know if there is a cure for such misunderstandings on my part. If what the Christians experience is real, I suppose I cannot understand it until I too experience it. If it can be explained in terms of the physical realm I can understand it, but until it can be it may as well not exist for me.

 

[David Gould]

CCWoody, you make a good point about politeness.

One rule I try to follow is this: if I think someone is being nasty to me, I assume that there is a communication problem on my part. In other words, I try to give others the benefit of the doubt.

I have found that this works pretty well.


KCDAD,

That is a brilliant idea. We should have one for atheists, too, and one for Moslems, and Wiccans and the Ba'Hai - one for everyone.

Of course, this would not solve the problem of individual interpretation, but it would give us a baseline to go from.


Another strategy that I use - although I am finding that this annoys some posters, as they think that I am being a smart ale, so it is not as universally applicable - is to ask people what they mean when they use a particular term. If people are happy to supply this, conversation moves much more smoothly.

 

[CCWoody]

Parables are good (but I'm not good at them) metaphor... word pictures...
I have thought it would be good to have a Christian dictionary to translate Christianese into English... like "praise God!"...what does that mean?
"Saved": from what for what?
"Sin": whose fault? is it something I said?
"Worship": is it for God or for us? Quo vadis?
"Blessed": what does that mean?

You gonna give the Wesleyan Arminian (Methodist) meaning of those terms or the Calvinist ones? You see, take grace for instance. Did you know that we have 2 entirely different meanings for that word?

Recognize that all true Christians will be Calvinists in glory....

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.​

 

[Timmothy]

I particularly like to use the language the Christians here use. I understand the “emotional draw” yet it tends to be lacking in any coherent meaning. This means I can also use them to mean whatever way I want them to mean.

Some of my favorites are “good and evil”, “truth” and “sin”.

I know what you mean, Iam a Christian and when Iam asking a question, to another Christian, I get a good response, but the meaning of the response, na not there, just a real good planed out bs speech. I dont know if anyone else feels the same way at times?

 

[StainedClassKing]

I posted something a little while ago. In the middle of posting it, I realised I was typing out what to me was an understandable way of putting things.

However, I know that this particular way I was putting things has been misinterpreted many, many times on this board previously. As such, I altered what I was typing to avoid such misinterpretations, because I really hate having to deal with them.

Do other people find themselves being more consciously aware of likely audience responses when posting here, or do you just say things any old how and then deal with misunderstandings and cross-purpose discussions as they arise?

I'm a bit of a student of language and communication. I can speak and understand some different languages (Thai, Mandarin, some Japanese) and I have made a point of learning a somewhat large vocabulary in my primary language (English).

I do my darnest to be as clear as I possibly can. I try to speak, and type, as simply as I can and avoid using words that have no clear definition. Also, I try explaining the same thing several different ways. I've tried defining words as precisely as I can, using alagory, analogy, asking the other person to define their terms, etc. You name it, I've tried it. On the rare occasion, I've been able to actually have a decent conversation with someone on here but for the most part, it seems pretty hopeless.

I personally think a big problem is that people are projecting onto my words what they want them to say instead of actually reading what they actually say. An example that I encounter all the time is I say I don't believe in god because I don't know what a god is. People interpret this mean that I believe that there is no god, that I don't want their to be a god, that I reject god because I'd rather go my own way, and a number of other ways that are not the correct way to interpret it. The correct way to interpret it, I would think, is very simple. I don't know what a god is so I don't believe in it. I think that is a very simple way to say it but very rarely does anyone ever actually treat it and interpret it as simply as just the words that I give and nothing more.

I guess maybe that a more accurate way of putting it might be I don't know if I believe in god or not because I have never been offered an understandable, coherent definition for the word 'god.'

I've been told by a number of people that I'm usually very clear and easy to understand. In fact a lot of people I know IRL think that I possess a clarity of mind to a degree that is much better than what I actually do possess (I'm often drunk, stoned, or sleep deprived and so my mind is actually often not clear at all. I just find a way to make my thoughts coherent before sharing them so that people never actually get a good clue of just how chaotic it is in there). I find that I don't usually have many communication problems at all when it comes to just about anything other than science and religion. When it comes to these two areas, I run into all kinds of problems.

With science, the communication problems are usually a result of someone being badly misinformed but under the delusion that they are not, and straight out refusing to acknowledge that they might be completely wrong. So they'll misuse words (the word evidence comes to mind) or they'll try to talk about a subject of which they have no knowledge of as if they were an expert (the theory of evolution comes to mind).

A person could say that the problem might be with me and not them. I would say that that was valid except for a couple of things: I own up to my own ignorance, I own a number of different kinds of dictionaries and science books (both popular and technical) and I refer to them any time that there is a disagreement, I am only a few hours shy of having a BS in both physics and mathematics, and I will bend over backwards in either trying to explain myself or trying to understand the othe person, including looking up definitions, information, asking question after question.

When it comes to religion, I think the problem is that religious people often simply just refuse to accept that I mean no more than what I say. For example the "I don't know what a god is" example. Another example is someone says, "God is real" and I say, "I don't believe what you are saying because you have not provided any evidence. And I don't know what a god is." They take this to mean, "I don't believe God and I demand that God proves himself." I would think that that is clearly not what I meant but I have said so more times than I can count. I don't know how to make it any more clear than that. But it still gets misinterpretted.

I'm not saying that I'm flawless or the ultimate communication expert or anything like that. Just that I usually do what ever I can to either not be the cause of a communication problem, or if I am, to clear it up and correct it. I don't think that most other people do through. And that frustrates me to no end sometimes because if the other person insists on interpretting what I say in a certain way and refuses to even acknowledge that they might not be hearing me right or interpretting me right, there is really nothing more I can do about it.

I want to be understood but it's a two way street. If someone simply refuses to actually listen to what I'm saying, then it makes communication impossible. It frustrates me because there is nothing I can do about that. It's up to them.

 

[KCDAD]

You gonna give the Wesleyan Arminian (Methodist) meaning of those terms or the Calvinist ones? You see, take grace for instance. Did you know that we have 2 entirely different meanings for that word?

Recognize that all true Christians will be Calvinists in glory....

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist

Woody.​

But we can't know what the meaning is in Calvinism... we can only "account" for our understanding and wait for the judgement. The meaning is predetermined but we can't know it.

 

[Soul_Searcher]

Hi David,

"Do other people find themselves being more consciously aware of likely audience responses when posting here, or do you just say things any old how and then deal with misunderstandings and cross-purpose discussions as they arise?"

I just try to be respectful in my posts, whether starting a thread or replying to someone. I also strive to spell things correctly, and find myself correcting spelling of the person I'm responding too. But I'm not obsessive/complusive.

 

[KCDAD]

Stained Class King: I want to be understood but it's a two way street. If someone simply refuses to actually listen to what I'm saying, then it makes communication impossible. It frustrates me because there is nothing I can do about that. It's up to them.

EXCELLENT!!!!!!!! This whle post was wonderfully honest and open... well communicated and thought provoking.

 

[TheBear]

 

[vajradhara]

Namaste all,

interesting thread, David.

i suppose that i would have to say that i do purposefully choose words which, i think, will be known to my audience. of course, that does not mean that they will or that, if they do, they have the same understanding of term.. but that is my primary filtering process.

the discussion of Buddhism often intersperces particular Sanskrit, Pali, Chinese, Japanese and Tibetan terms throughout our English discourse. many of these terms are not really translateable directly into English, rather, whole English phrases are used to define the term.

this feature, alone, can make meaningful conversation difficult.. especially if the beings involved have certain agendas which they are trying to achieve.

by and large, i try to use a conversational style of writing whilst keeping the use of Buddhist specific terms to a mimimum... i am, clearly, not always successful at this

in the final analysis, in my view, successful communication requires a certain level of dedicated comittment to the process, taking the time to understand what the other being means by a term and so forth, by all parties invovled in the discussion.

i often feel that it isn't in the area of strict language that the issues arise, rather, it is in the area of the cultural assumptions such terms engender that tend to create the most friction. i am sure that we have all had the experience of dialoging with a being that was very impatient and frustrated that our understanding of a term is not the same as theirs.

in any event, i look forward to reading the rest of the replies.

metta,

~v

 

[KerrMetric]

Yes, it is a part of the Christian Evangelical to learn how to communicate in a meaningful way, just as we are taught by the Apostle Paul:

The most ironic post I have seen in ages. Well done!