The Undoing of The Art of Authentic Conversation
Here's my final article for English 201 - Non Fiction Writing. 40% of my grade! And yes, I got an A in the class.
Susan Fullmer
ENGL 201
Final Paper
4/27/2017
The Undoing of The Art of
Authentic Conversation
The leadership
researcher, and author, Margaret Wheatley, ED.D said, “Conversation is the natural
way humans think together. When we listen well, and with less judgment, we move
closer together.” I am fascinated with the human connection. I would go so far
as to say that it is a life’s passion of mine. I have always been the
peacemaker in a group; my responsibility and natural default is to make sure that
everyone is playing nice in the sandbox. But not only that, I am a gatherer. I
bring everyone to the sandbox in the first place. For example, I facilitate a
drum circle where people of all varieties gather together. We drum yes, but
more importantly--we talk and we listen. A real-life face to face conversation.
It’s a beautiful thing and something that I fear is ebbing away from our social
experience. The art of authentic conversation is one of the best tools we have
to connect with our fellow human beings.
Celeste
Headlee lists the age-old advice we are given about having a good conversation
with others.
·
Look the other person in the eye
·
Think of interesting topics to discuss
·
Nod and smile to show you are paying
attention
·
Repeat back what you just heard to summarize
Ms. Headlee
then admonishes, “Forget all of that, it’s crap!” Perhaps, it would be helpful
if I told you that she has been a broadcaster for many years and is currently a
talk show host for Georgia Public Broadcasting. Her show is called, “On Second
Thought” and she makes her living having conversations. She has some excellent
things to say on how to talk and how to listen. As far as the “crap” list above, she states, “There is
no reason to learn how to show you are paying attention, if you are in fact,
paying attention”.
And paying
attention does seem to be a common struggle in the art of conversation. The
educator, author, and businessman, Stephen Covey said, “Most of us don’t listen
with the intent to understand. We listen
with the intent to reply.” And the way
we reply seems to be an issue in the demise of the conversation. Many studies
are showing the ill effects that electronic devices are having on human
relationships and interactions (more on that later). Teenagers are more likely
to text than to talk face to face. Rarely do they have the opportunity to hone
their interpersonal communication skills. Celeste Headlee said, “Is there any
21st century skill more important than being able to sustain a
coherent, confident conversation?”
Another
concern that halts a good conversation is prejudice. And one form of prejudice
is the “single story”. “The single story creates stereotypes, and the problem
with stereotypes is not that they are untrue but that they are incomplete. They
make one story become the only story.”, as stated by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie. Ms.
Adichie explains how we so often hear a story about a person, or a group of
people and without taking the time to get to know more information about them,
we only know and believe that one thing--the single story.
Celeste Headlee said that, “We hate each other because
we don’t know each other. We don’t see each other as worthy of respect. We view
people that don’t agree with us not as human beings but as enemies.” She goes
on to say that understating requires interaction. She also quotes an alarming
study that states that empathy has declined by 40%, and points out that empathy
is the basis of our moral code. Dozens of religious practices from all over the
world hold the general belief as stated in the Golden Rule, “Do unto others as
you would have them do unto you.”
So how can we
increase empathy? Ms. Headlee reports that it can be done by reading a novel,
singing in a choir, playing in a band, and volunteering time to help others, but
most importantly of all, we can increase empathy by talking to strangers. Or
better said, listening to strangers.
Learn about their lives. What makes them happy? What scares them? We can talk
to people who are fundamentally different from us and our beliefs, and we can
do it without arguing. Ms. Headlee said, hearing an opposing opinion is not
abusive. It may be uncomfortable, but it’s really the only way we grow and
evolve.” The talk show host, Larry King said it nicely, “You will learn nothing
from what you say today. You can only learn by listening to other people.” And
Randall Stephenson the CEO of AT&T said it not so nicely, “I’m not asking you to be tolerant. Tolerance is for
cowards. Being tolerant asks nothing of you but to be quiet and make no waves,
and to hold tightly to your views and judgements. I’m asking that you not be
tolerant of each other, but to move into uncomfortable territory and understanding of each other.”
And all of
this happens through the art of authentic conversation. Am I naive enough to
believe that something this simple could change our world for good? I think
Brene Brown says it best, “Choosing authenticity means: Cultivating the courage
to be imperfect, to set boundaries, and to allow ourselves to be vulnerable;
exercising the compassion that comes from knowing that we are all made of
strength and struggle and connected to each other through a loving and
resilient human spirit; nurturing the connection and sense of belonging that can
only happen when we let go of what we are supposed to be and embrace who we
are.”
Now, let us
talk about what I believe to be the biggest assault to the conversation, and
consequently, to interpersonal relationships--technology. For some time now, I
have been fascinated by the affect that electronic devices have on our human
relationships. According to my Boise State University Communications 101 text
book, by David Worley, interpersonal relationships can be
defined as, “Communication between two persons, usually face-to-face…But with
the advent of social media…it can occur with the assistance of technology even
when the people are not in the same ‘space’.”
My first cell phone
was the size of a brick. Back then, no one really knew what it was or even understood
why I would have one. To be honest, the only reason I put up with the thing was
because I had my own business at the time and I needed to catch my calls sooner
rather than later. But what a hassle. I have watched cell phones morph over the
years from something that most people thought of as odd or even an annoyance,
to something that seems to have taken over everyone’s life, for better or
worse. I find it a rare event these days, to run into someone without a smart
phone. Generally, I see no problem with that. What worries me is that I don’t
see people talking to each other much anymore. Just the other day, when I
walked into my English class, I noticed that there were over a dozen people
already sitting in the classroom and every single person was looking down at
their phone. No one was looking at each other, and no one was talking to each
other. I mentioned this to my teacher after class when I was asking for her
opinion on which direction I should take this article. She said that when she
used to walk into her classroom all the students would be talking to each
other, but not anymore. What’s going on here? Are we missing something? Should
we be concerned?
In my research
for this paper I stumbled upon a book published in 1985 called, “Handbook of
Interpersonal Communication”. I was so curious to see what was happening with
communication before the cell phone/electronic device explosion. It said, that
from the 1970s sprung the first theories regarding communication between
individuals. By the 1980s communication researchers were sitting up and taking
notice of this thing called, “interpersonal communication”. And so, this
handbook was written during the infant stages of examining these issues. It
states that it seeks to, “Identify a variety of temporal aspects of
interpersonal relationships, especially aspects pertaining to communication processes
between individuals.” And indeed, the book goes on to speak of many varied
aspects of communication. None of them surprising nor earth shattering, but it
does talk about the importance of the nuts and bolts of communication such as
spending time together and being face to face. Some things never change.
Is technology
disruptive to interpersonal relationships and communication? Simon Sinek is one
of my favorite speakers on leadership. He also has some very interesting things
to say about technology and how it effects the human relationship. In the TED
Talk, “First Why and Then Trust”, he goes into detail about how great
technology is for things like exchanging ideas and information. It’s also the
perfect tool for finding people, transactions, and resourcing. But on the flip
side, it is a terrible tool when it comes to human connections and
interactions. He states, “You cannot form trust through the internet…video
conferences will never replace the business trip…you can’t get a good gut
feeling when you aren’t in person”.
Mr. Sinek then
goes on to describe what is going on in the brain with mirror neurons. They are
effected when we smile and when we see others smile. They literally help us
feel empathy. As it turns out, mirror neurons don’t light up when we text. He
is adamant that, “Nothing replaces human contact”. He envisions a world where
we have more human interactions because trust is about human interactions.
I read an
interesting article in the New York Times by Sherry Turkle. She has been studying the psychology of
online connectivity for more than 30 years. In her studies, she has looked at
schools, universities and workplaces, and examined families, friendship and
romance. In the article, “Stop Googling. Let’s Talk”, she asks the question,
“What has happened to face-to-face conversation in a world where so many people
say they would rather text than talk?” She reports that college students tell
her that they know how to look someone in the eye and type on their phones at
the same time. They claim that this slight of eye trick of theirs, is not
detectable and is a skill they honed during middle school when they wanted to
text in class without the teacher seeing what they were doing. Now they use
this technique when they want to both, talk to their friends and be “elsewhere”.
Her studies have shown that we now actually feel less of a need to hide when we
are dividing our attention during a conversation. She states, that in 2015, The
Pew Research Center showed that 89 percent of cellphone owners said they had
used their phones during the last social gathering they attended. It’s
interesting to point out that this study also showed that these same people
didn’t feel happy about using their phones during their social interaction. In
general, it also showed that 82 percent of adults feel that the way they use
their phone in social settings impedes the conversation.
Ms. Turkle
interviewed a group of young people who spoke enthusiastically to her about
something they called, “The Rule of Three”. This is done during meal times but
can also crossover to other settings as needed. It goes like this, during a
conversation between five or six people, “you have
to check that three people are paying attention--heads up--before you give
yourself permission to look down at your phone. So conversation proceeds, but
with different people having their heads up at different times. The effect is
what you would expect: Conversation is kept relatively light, on topics where
people feel they can drop in and out.” This is what told Ms. Turkle, “There is the magic of the ‘always available elsewhere’.
You can put your attention wherever you want it to be. You can always be heard.
You never have to be bored. When you sense that a lull in the conversation is
coming, you can shift your attention from the people in the room to the world
you can find on your phone.” Say what? How is that a conversation? I hate to
sound old fashioned here, but I can’t help but think back and compare with the
conversations of my own youth many years ago and long before the birth of
devices.
With that said, there is the argument that
there were unintended harmful media effects during pre-device times. For
example, it has been pointed out by critics that families who dined and spent
their time together around the television set in the 1960s and 70s did not talk
much nor connect on a deep level. I for one have vivid memories of those years.
I remember well our TV trays snugged up against the couch so we could reach our
food with ease and not miss the show. Yes, the entire family was there glued to
the TV set watching the programs we would never dream of missing: Mutual of
Omaha’s Wild Kingdom, The Carol Burnett Show, and Walt Disney’s Wonderful World
of Color. But that wasn’t the whole story. It wasn’t just soundless watching; there
was talk a plenty. It happened while we were making our meal and setting the
stage for our anticipated evening. It happened during the commercials and after
the shows. It happened while we were cleaning and reminiscing over what we had
just seen. Mind you, this was every member of my family, in one single room, during
the whole entire evening. We spent much of that time talking to each other. Deep
or not, it was connecting.
Ms. Turkle
refers to the psychologists Howard Gardner and Katie Davis. When they speak of
the generation that grew up with phones in hand and apps for everything, they
call them the “App Generation”. They claim that a characteristic of this group is
impatience. They expect the world to respond like an app, quickly and
efficiently. It’s as if all interactions should work like an algorithm–-certain
actions will lead to predictable results. They state, “This
attitude can show up in friendship as a lack of empathy. Friendships become
things to manage; you have a lot of them, and you come to them with tools.” So,
is there a solution in learning empathy and reengaging in interpersonal
relationships? Gardner and Davis report, “So here is a first step: To reclaim
conversation for yourself, your friendships and society, push back against
viewing the world as one giant app. It works the other way, too: Conversation
is the antidote to the algorithmic way of looking at life because it teaches
you about fluidity, contingency and personality.
That seems
like a good first step in reuniting with the human race. But is anyone out there
doing it? Is anyone interested in doing it? I was chatting one day with a
fellow student of mine and mentioned what I was writing about. As she started
to tell me her story, I knew I had to interview her for this article. Here is what
Melissa had to say. (Not her real name by the way)
I didn’t figure this out on my own. It was my husband
that told me I had an addition to my phone. I told him, “No, it’s fine because
I can multitask”. But I’m taking an Interpersonal Communications class and
through an assignment, I realized that I wasn’t really listening to him. It
also showed me that I wasn’t making eye contact. He called me out on it and
said, “You need to pay attention to me”. I had been somewhat aware of this but
I hadn’t realized that it was bothering him until he pointed it out. It hit me
that he is very important to me and what I was doing on the phone was not! I
was just entertaining myself with my phone, that’s all it was. We discovered
with time, that what we needed in our conversation was eye contact, feedback,
and validation that we had heard each other. I’m actively putting down my phone
now, before having a conversation. It’s still hard. And I work from home so I’m
on the computer a lot which makes it a challenge to not be on it too long. And
then there’s the “ding”. I’m so conditioned to pay attention when the ding tells
me a message has come in. But the outcome of my change in behavior has been
well worth it. Our conversations are richer and more in depth. And I’m saving
several hours a day now, not being on my phone! I have an app that keeps track
of that. (We both burst out laughing)
So, what is my story? I told you in the beginning
that I am extremely interested in this topic and I have been thinking about it
for a long time. I have had my own aha moments when I realized that I had been
sitting in a trance like state in front of a screen for much longer than I care
to confess. I have realized that I have lost countless hours…days in front of a
TV screen. And I have realized that I found myself checking-out of a good conversation
much too often, thinking instead of what I might be seeing on a screen if I
were to just sneak a peek. One of my painful realities I uncovered in this
process, is that I engage in these activities to keep the silence at bay.
Interesting and emotional things happen in the quiet. Sherry Turkle said, “If the conversation goes quiet, you have to let it be. For
conversation, like life, has silences--what some young people I interviewed
called “the boring bits.” It is often in the moments when we stumble, hesitate
and fall silent that we most reveal ourselves to one another.
I am learning to unplug and get quiet. It
has been a profound experience of discomfort and ultimately blissful connection
with myself and with others. A man named Robert Kertzner who is a writer,
psychiatrist, and an associate clinical professor of psychiatry at Columbia
University responded to Ms. Turkle’s article. He said, “(The distraction of electronics)
undermines a personal reckoning with life as we grow older and seek to
cultivate a more idiosyncratic, interior state of mind. Aging will never be
trending; there’s no app to deepen an understanding of our lives. This is a stealth liability that
tech-dependent young adults will confront when their phones stop buzzing.”
Works Cited
Adichie, Chimamanda. “The Danger of a Single Story.” TEDTalks,
July, 2009,
Anonymous (“Melissa”). “Personal Interview” Apr. 14, 2017
Brown, Brene. “Catalyst.” Leadershape,
Leadershape, 2017.
Covey, Stephen.
“Catalyst.” Leadershape, Leadershape, 2017.
Headlee, Celeste. “Help Make America
Talk Again.” TEDxSeattle, 20 Dec. 2015
Headlee, Celeste. “How to Have a Good
Conversation.” TEDxCreativeCoast, 7 May 2015,
King, Larry. “Catalyst.” Leadershape, Leadershape, 2017.
Knapp, Mark L. Handbook of Interpersonal
Communication. Beverly Hills, CA, SAGE
Publications, Inc., 1985.
Sinek, Simon. “First Why and Then Trust.” TEDxMaastricht, 6
Apr. 2011,
Stephenson,
Randall. “Catalyst.”
Leadershape, Leadershape, 2017.
Turkle, Sherry. “Stop Googling. Let’s Talk.” The New York Times, The New York Times,
26
Wheatley, Margaret. “Catalyst.”
Leadershape, Leadershape, 2017.
Worley, David. Communication. Fourth, New York, NY,
Pearson Education, 2017
Comments
Post a Comment