Philosophy Forum

Read Topic
Reply

Face to face

Get Email Updates • Email this Topic • Print this Page

I often wondered if the dialog would be largely different if we had to speak to one another face to face... through skype for example. In written form we have more time to think and calculate vs. debating in real time. What is better?

I mean if we were on the street and a Christian for example stops us to share the gospel; we would act very different from writing a reply to a thread.

Some people on here are just amazing thinkers! I mean brilliant. I really enjoy reading Aedes posts for example.

Your thoughts?!

@ROBOTER,

I personally prefer a clair and substantial expression of my thoughts, whatever they are worth. In an age of fastness (fast food, fast cars, fast sex...), it feels good to have an opportunity to think slowly and write slowly, trying to create the best marriage between form and content. But even here there is an increasing tendency towards sloppiness and careless phrasing, and what's more I tend to participate in that; I often regret each posting of me that had less than twenty words. Another point: I have often participated in "Symposia" in students' cafes where bold thoughts and original approaches were mainly induced by consuming gallons of alcoholic beverage. It may be fun, but it doesn't increase the general quality of the conversations, and afterwards nothing is left but the hang-over. Imho it's best to be alone with the word-processor and the question, and have an extensive conversation with yourself before you post. And chew a long time on what you and the others say, this only increasing the quality of the conversation. Besides writing conceals my handicap, spasmodic movements always discrediting the words I speak. No, I prefer it written...

@ROBOTER,

I think the filter between my brain and my mouth is broken the same way that the filter between my brain and fingers is broken.

The responses I post here are almost identical to my responses in person. I know this because I often discuss topics from the forum in RL conversation with friends. I am also not one to let a verbal conversation overtake me. If I need time to think about something, I will tell the person that I need a moment to think about it. This ussually results in an uncomfortable (for them) pause until I can collect my thoughts but does not ususally take that much time. I DO think that written text allows for a more in depth answer as you have the ability to highlight items in a specific way but I also think that vocal gives you the option of inflection which can often be important for proving a point.

@ROBOTER,

My posts are far more composed than I usually manage with my spoken words. The odd thing is that I couldn't even tell you if I could pull off the same lucidity through spoken dialogue.

I almost always dumb down my speech, especially concerning philosophy, for my audience. I honestly have extremely limited face-to-face encounters with anyone who I can genuinely discuss philosophical topics with.

@Mr Fight the Power,

Mr. Fight the Power wrote:

My posts are far more composed than I usually manage with my spoken words. The odd thing is that I couldn't even tell you if I could pull off the same lucidity through spoken dialogue.

I almost always dumb down my speech, especially concerning philosophy, for my audience. I honestly have extremely limited face-to-face encounters with anyone who I can genuinely discuss philosophical topics with.

You should come to Austin. I have finally found a group of people who can generally keep up with any level of eloquence, spoken or otherwise.

@Icon,

Icon wrote:

You should come to Austin. I have finally found a group of people who can generally keep up with any level of eloquence, spoken or otherwise.

Yeah, I knew Austin was a pretty literate community, and were I to cut ties with my current situation it would be on the short list.

@Icon,

Icon wrote:

I think the filter between my brain and my mouth is broken the same way that the filter between my brain and fingers is broken.

The responses I post here are almost identical to my responses in person. I know this because I often discuss topics from the forum in RL conversation with friends. I am also not one to let a verbal conversation overtake me. If I need time to think about something, I will tell the person that I need a moment to think about it. This ussually results in an uncomfortable (for them) pause until I can collect my thoughts but does not ususally take that much time. I DO think that written text allows for a more in depth answer as you have the ability to highlight items in a specific way but I also think that vocal gives you the option of inflection which can often be important for proving a point.

Wow. I envy your confidence. I hope you dont take it for granted. I can hardly focus half the time on what subject is on the table before it shifts. Alot of the time though with philosophy its hard to shift from street vernaculars and quick wit too in depth discussion with reflection. To abide or feel comfortable in either one most of the time doesn't work for me. Balancing the two is mentally difficult and tiring but the challenge is enlightening.

@ROBOTER,

My arguments would be much shorter in person because I often have to go back to the posts of others to remember exactly what was said. I can also maintain a line of thought better when I've written it down than when I'm just working in my head.

Also, honestly, I'd probably be much more reserved and less willing to throw out various ideas in person than I am on the forum.

@Joe,

Joe wrote:

Wow. I envy your confidence. I hope you dont take it for granted. I can hardly focus half the time on what subject is on the table before it shifts. Alot of the time though with philosophy its hard to shift from street vernaculars and quick wit too in depth discussion with reflection. To abide or feel comfortable in either one most of the time doesn't work for me. Balancing the two is mentally difficult and tiring but the challenge is enlightening.

I have found that the easiest path through life is to stay as constant as possible. When you are in person, on a forum, on the phone, on a chat or any other form of communication, it is important to "stick to your guns" and not represent yourself in the falsehood of perception.

Quick wit and in depth discussion are often one and the same. It all comes down to how you relate ideas in your own head. In my natural thought processes, my thoughts are generally (not always) open ended to the point of no conclusion. This presents a very unique chance to come to conclusions through conversation. In other words, I am not presenting my solution, only my view on the direction a solution might be found. This allows for quick wit and deep discussion to be one and the same.

As far as confidence, is there any reason why one should not be confident in their own skin? You may be wrong and you may be right but you'll never know until you try it out. Someone may view you as an idiot but at the same time, they cannot erase your words once they have been spoken. Therefore, they must atleast consider them before they can make a judgment which means they may become inspired regardless of the level of validity.

@Icon,

Just wanted to add a little observation, and I think it's significant nobody noticed that until now: not all are native english-speaking here! In writing I can think about the "right word" as long as I need, in (english) speach I often have to compromise between speed and accuracy. Often resulting in hm "bad thinking", to say the least. Please see the world, folks.

@Catchabula,

Catchabula wrote:

Just wanted to add a little observation, and I think it's significant nobody noticed that until now: not all are native english-speaking here! In writing I can think about the "right word" as long as I need, in (english) speach I often have to compromise between speed and accuracy. Often resulting in hm "bad thinking", to say the least. Please see the world, folks.

Very good observation. This is true. I speak a few other languages but english and russian are the only two that i would feel confident "keeping up" in conversation of this sort.

Thank you Catchabula

My german, french, spanish and greek are no where NEAR as developed.

it should also be mentioned that english is one of the harder languages to communicate in simply because there are no real rules... only guidelines. Every rule in english has an exception which is not always aparent. This is actually why I prefer other languages to english when discussing ideas in a philosophical sense. Less importance on symantics as many other languages are very concise in definition.

Still, I wonder if you would feel as comfortable speaking on these topics in your own language as you would conversing here on the forum?

@Icon,

@ROBOTER,

ROBOTER;44032 wrote:

I often wondered if the dialog would be largely different if we had to speak to one another face to face... through skype for example. In written form we have more time to think and calculate vs. debating in real time. What is better?

I mean if we were on the street and a Christian for example stops us to share the gospel; we would act very different from writing a reply to a thread.

Some people on here are just amazing thinkers! I mean brilliant. I really enjoy reading Aedes posts for example.

Your thoughts?!

There are times that the question is so 'good' that I have spent 4 or more hours in critical thought (exhausting) crafting a response.
This cannot happen in our mundane day to day knee-jerk "more nachos please" 'reality'.

On the other hand, I do maintain the same general degrees of honesty and compassion no matter the context.

@Catchabula,

Catchabula wrote:

Please add this to the suggestions and feedback thread. I will also bring it up to the rest of the moderating staff.

Read Topic
Reply

Philosophy Forum

Face to face

Quick Links

My Account

able2know