Part of the reason that humans are notoriously unsatisfactory communicators is that we assume that what we think we’re saying is being heard. In fact, the amount of vague language and subjectivity in our communication pours gasoline on an already lit fire based on how poor humans can be as listeners.
Part of the reason we miss the mark as listeners is that we’re interpreting millions of bits of information per second that we must delete, distort, and consolidate to jam into our mind, which is essentially unfit for the task in that it can only process a handful of bits of information in the same amount of time. We don’t hear what others mean, in part, because we need to translate it first. This translation is biased at best and completely wrong at worst.
How, then, do we communicate?
Maybe we start with a better framework for self-evaluation. Rather than assuming what we intended to say was heard, why don’t we take on a different responsibility? I think the father of Pragmatism, Charles S. Peirce, can help with his view that the meaning of our messages are what we say but rather the behaviors they induce.
Thoughts?
Logan Gelbrich
@functionalcoach
10/26/18 WOD
Then, complete 4 rounds for time of:
10 DB Front Rack Lunges (50/30)
15 Burpees
10 Power Cleans (135/95)