Irritation

[aesmael]

Originally published at a denizen's entertainment. You can comment here or there.

I get annoyed when people use "I want to understand" to mean "I want your explanation to compel me to possess your perspective". An intellectual understanding should be sufficient.

Frex: "People dislike 'it' used as a pronoun often because that word is typically used as a term for inanimate objects or non-humans and people find it dehumanising, which they find unpleasant" should be sufficient. The explanation doesn't need to convince you to agree with other people, only to know what their perspective is - else it will never be 'sufficient' in your view.

At least in cases where it is a matter of differing personal preference, or of respecting another person's difference. One needn't convert eir perspective to that of the other party, only accept that the other party is accurately representing emself.

Comments

[cmcmck.livejournal.com]

I'm right with you on this!

I get so frustrated when people say: 'people (or alternatively 'they'- I pondered long and hard as to just who 'they' are :o) won't like this/won't approve' when what they mean is: 'I don't like this/don't approve'!

[pazi-ashfeather.livejournal.com]

Often it seems like when people say "I want to understand", they're trying to defend the line of inquiry, and simply presume on a subconscious level that any right explanation will induce that transformation of perspective -- hence, since they haven't experienced that, you're not doing it right.

[pazi-ashfeather.livejournal.com]

I think in part this is because there exist known cognitive biases toward thinking we came to our current conclusions as the result of careful and rational pruning of possibilities over time, whereas in point if fact it's much easier for us to tack on anything that accords with our existing feelings and beliefs, because it doesn't generate cognitive dissonance. When we encounter something that conflicts, even when it's presented as straight, unambiguous fact (with no controversy), our odds of accepting it depend greatly on the degree to which we feel cognitive dissonance, or actively threatened.

I've seen studies that suggest the best way to get someone to update a belief is to give an affirmation prior to a presentation of neutral, unambiguous fact.

Which, needless to say, isn't terribly applicable to most conversation in which this failure mode occurs. :\

[allieflowlight.livejournal.com]

I definitely struggle with this a lot. It helps to see the dynamic so clearly put into words like this; now I understand it a little better. Thank you. :)

In fact, you two may have just inspired a new Deninet post...