Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,161 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Just wondering what things helps you feel this way.


Been coming to mind how a lot of my posting history is kind of isolated lecturing of my own thoughts as opposed to engagement with others and beginning from where they're coming from.
Think a lot of people are frustrated when it seems like what they have to say isn't getting through or being dismissed.
So wondering how to best avoid that.

So, any examples of what you do or what you've experienced that showed that what you had to say was important to someone?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,819 Posts
Someone who talks back enthusiastically IRL. Like the kind where they have their entire body behind it since I'm very sensitive to noticing cues. But that's in the short term.

In the long term it's all about that action. For example, someone can very enthusiastically claim in response that "yeah, I'd love to do this" or "hey, that's a great idea" .. "ooh good advice" but when it comes actually following through, it becomes clear that it was just lip service. If what I've said matters, it would actually be implemented. Otherwise I'm not being heard. I'm the sort who prefers someone that would just flat out say to my face "nah, i'm not gonna do that" or "nah, you didn't change my mind so I'll hold my opinion"

If you don't like one of my ideas, have the courage to say it to directly and I'll respect you. But if you lack the courage to tell me then it's pretty much a fuck off reaction from me. I'd rather have someone disagree with me and let me know than someone who pretends that they're listening or that they care when they don't.

I have such a strong disdain for lack of follow through that I have abandoned several friendships where it lacked.
 

·
Registered
ENTJ; 8w7; Persian C
Joined
·
9,448 Posts
Looking me in the eyes (as someone that makes high-eye contact (&) stares right through your skull to the blank wall behind you - with selective hearing in spite of in most casual chats), it doesn't make sense really, but I do wish to be acknowledged/engaged by the 'eyes' - and also during the times of our conversation exchange, not [cutting] me off during conversation stimulus suffices -- (other than that) - continuing where I (leave off), (e.g., questions - but more so commentary). I haven't much care whether they agree / are convinced / like/dislike or absord what I say outside of formal contexts, most days informally I am merely thinking aloud and/or practicing something, but usually holding strong attention of the humanoid(s) I engage with offline, which perhaps means, getting someone "out of text" and in face interaction so I feel even more in the path of their attentiveness (e.g., almost impossible to ignore), in some degree, heh, in spite negative connotations that come with it - there are certainly some times I do like being the "center of attention," afterall.

In online localities (and some offline), I intuitively do not engage the humanoid at all, especially those with demonstrably more touch-sensitive buttons to distinct data that trigger sub-optimal responsiveness, or withhold particular types & parts of content completely -- [sometimes I may succumb to get an idea if the capacities are ambiguous] -- but generally, if I have calculated via patternized-online posting histories that engaging in (X)-specimen is unnecessary; and it certainly makes no immediate sense to directly expose a humanoid to content, (or via observed behaviors/engaging on distinct topics within the locality) the specimen at hand will not utilize / read / instinctively has some depositioned interest in, or lacks the basic foundations of knowledge to constructively engage to a degree in which I would feel my (time is well spent) in the proximate moment, it does not imply the specimen is "completely," useless as far as a knowledge-outlet, but rather a switch/adaptiveness of content is necessary, and I may naïvely in some degree, trust that the humanoid has enough general intellectual capacity to seek what knowledge they will as I have if they so choose to educate themselves or grasp the basis of the information if left at their disposal at the primarly level (i.e., reading a new book), & such tasks of upper level to be completed are specs of their own responsibilities (i.e., re-reading the book to study it's content) -- "what about exposure for those that require an 'extra' spark for (X)-curiosities?", I consider rather coincidental than a goal/personal interest for myself, unless I see a pre-interest or receptiveness to new / (X)-content beforehand, and indeed, I usually only engage (certain) specimen(s) in different types of content, or level(s) I perceive them to be - rather than freely talking about coital escapades to the religious-minded; or speaking Français in the science domain, if I am less careless in wanting (X)-content to be considered/acknowledged in a particular way.

I reckon some humanoids find this arrogant/offensive (e.g., I never discuss (X) with you, because you are not into (X) enough to engage in a constructive manner - not merely being present), to perceive a humanoid as lacking the necessary capacities to engage proactively, however, it is nothing of that matter, and if the humanoid wishes to engage at their own discretion - then I accommodate like so, so they are not feeling excluded [and attempt to do so in the least condenscending way] -- (leaving casual dimensions/opening) for input of the other humanoid, which usually is a temporal appeal to emotion; rather than continuing to punch with rationality; and of course, the "intellects," are opposed to such an approach (re: no, that specimen just needs to learn more "logical-thinking" (or what have it is commonly used)), fair enough (&) indeed, true for the recipient if they wish to engage distinct humanoids, however, I have found, that most humanoid(s) that do not have such skill-sets respond best to emotionally-open coaxing not 'gushy' stuff - rather demonstrable humility and/or a smile or two, with light-handed "logic/rationality" jabs, and vice versa for the humanoids who are more skilled in such a domain. I think repetitive exposure to both thinking-approaches in critiqued/gradual degrees - rather than psychological flooding, strengthens where they struggle/reject, so I do not necessarily dumb my thoughts so far down it looses it's potency - nor make it so complex only %2 of the populace that 'share similar thoughts' to myself will be able to appreciate in full. There is perhaps a demonstrable appealing to not only fixating on oneself - but building the confidence within the individual / audience around recieving (X)-data.

In mass group(s) of humanoids; I tend to keep my thought(s) at general level, which welcomes those of lower capacities to strike curiosity/questions -- and also engage those humanoids of higher levels of knowlede than myself to freely supply input, as a demonstrates I am (open to error/critique -- the intellectuals carrot on a stick, even if I internally feel otherwise.

In addition to the openinig sentences - I reflexively feel my content is 'acknowledged' when I feel I have engaged the (humanoid) best to my abilities from my own end - even if I have analyzed this is demonstrably not actually the case; and I then, there are those "temporal emotions" of disappointment when one realizes the humanoid doesn't quite get what I confidently thought was relatively clear in the [first place], and there are [obvious] times where I wish to be heard by others - and then wish to just hear myself speak while other(s) are present, I reckon most humanoids with healthy egos have conflicts with both.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,734 Posts
The #1 and most potent thing is when out of the blue someone mentions something I said in the past. This is literally the most mind-blowing thing. It's so shocking that I actually kind of psych myself out of it, like I tell myself "No, this is too surreal that someone actually remembers anything I say, it must be an error.. there must be another explanation..." and I rummage through my brain trying to find another explanation for why they would say this.

Example to illustrate: An acquaintance suddenly said "I looked into that youtube channel you mentioned, and blablabla..." ten minutes later he said "I bought myself [object for one of my hobbies] and I've been teaching myself this hobby you enjoy so much, and I must admit I thought you were weird for liking this but it's super fun! Now I'm hooked! Can we play together some time?"
I was so floored that I didn't know how to process this. So the story I concocted in my mind was this:

1. He probably just got recommended the channel randomly by youtube, he couldn't possibly be doing an active search for it just cause I mentioned it, that makes no sense, I'm not that important. Yeah, random recommendation sounds like the most plausible explanation.

2. He probably saw someone else do this hobby -not just me- and whoever he saw, that's the person who inspired him to look into it. It's impossible that anyone would listen to any of my ideas, much less take action to look into them on purpose, that makes no sense. What makes more sense is that he got the idea elsewhere.

How do I deal with the fact that they said "I did this because of you"? I deal by denying in my head and re-arranging words that fit my personal bias. I will delete any "because of you" type phrases because they make no sense, and I will explain this by thinking that the person used the phrase wrong and they meant something else, that they just expressed themselves incorrectly.

It doesn't matter if the person tells me they sourced the inspiration or idea from me, I will actually never believe it deep down. It makes no sense to me that I would be heard or seen, due to Si's archive of past experiences, so doesn't matter how many new experiences contradict the archive, I follow the archive and can't be convinced of a new story because it just doesn't make any sense. And in order to believe something, it needs to make sense in my brain, otherwise it gets discarded and I look for the plausible believable stories.

So at the end of the day, feeling heard and seen lasts about 3 minutes, the time it takes my brain to process what the person is saying, or what the person is doing as an Act of Service to prove that they listened. After 3 minutes I have already found a more plausible story in my archive as for why they're doing or saying this thing, and the story never involves me being seen or heard, it involves that the person got it from another source that is more important than me.

Well doesn't this sound a bit depressing. It actually isn't. It feels normal and logical to me, although I can see with detachment how I'm running archives stories instead of living in the present moment and open for brand new stories. But it's what it is, it's subconscious. I can introspect and explain all of this all I want when I'm in my cocoon in front of a computer, but the proof is in the pudding, and when I'm interacting with life in real time, my instincts are always to deflect praise and attention inside my head. I don't say it out loud, in fact externally I say "Thank you" and "That's cool" because I was taught that it's the polite response. But it's just fake politeness. I don't actually thank them in my brain because there's nothing to thank because I didn't do anything. And if I didn't do anything, then compliments can't be accepted because they have no reason.

So yeah, for 3 minutes I feel heard/seen by someone referencing something I said or did in the past, they fucking remember?! It fucks with my mind. It triggers my Ne that a new story of being important/seen/heard is being concocted. Those minutes are fun because possibilities are fun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
500 Posts
Isn't it quite simple?

When I achieve what I want to achieve.

I mean if you aim to be acknowledged then you will inevitably fail, as you can't make some acknowledge you.

If you aim to help someone, try your best to convince them and succeed, then you would automatically be acknowledged. If I give someone some advice, and they apply, I feel acknowledged.

Am I missing something lol?

And @entheos

Oh you!!!! STAAAHHPP ITT!!! Just shut up and take the compliment! I'm gonna slap you silly and grind you up into a confident lady!! :exterminate:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,940 Posts
Your ability to extrapolate.

Can you take data given by me based on interest sets and rather than recite extrapolate to make good inferences on things that would be included.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
quick and very large texts back that show interest in talking, or in person proximity where they don't distract themselves mid us talking with any outside interaction
 
  • Like
Reactions: changos

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,161 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
In reflecting on myself, I was wondered that when really listening, I have to avoid interjecting too much of myself. If you're creating a space in which they fill, then it is disruptive of me to then bring up stuff about myself. But then its not entirely terrible as it could be considered relevant but it should then be limited if the focus is to remain on the other person and have them feel comfortable flowing with their line of thought than getting fettered with tangents.

Also been trying to think of communication that perhaps sets the ground of an interaction in negative way. Recently thought of being bored and picky on some detail that perhaps isn't much of a concern for a person to argue/justify. Not that such an couched but adversarial questioning is entirely misplaced but its perhaps rude to jump on people and doesn't set them for a productive discussion as great as engaging them on their own terms and teasing out their thoughts.

I guess a side of this emphasizing that people heard is about making connections with people, conversation that seems to actually connect between people rather than feel independent of one another though aimed at one another.
Guess something like what was previously mentioned, is reflecting back what people have shared so that they have a impression/sense that what they've said has been heard and possibly comprehended by them. Clarification I guess, where some people leave that implicit and it seems to feel like being ignored to not have something explicitly acknowledged.
 

·
Registered
ENTP 8w7 sx/so
Joined
·
965 Posts
I could come at this from two directions - the listener and the speaker.

Listener: Like you @Wellsy I have a tendency to lecture. It is partially because I love ideas and knowledge, and partly because I get very excited engaging with people. However, as an extrovert and an NT, I have had to learn to reign myself in so that I don't walk all over the other person. IRL this means not interrupting people (a simple thing but really damaging to others' sense of value in an exchange and their ability to contribute), and pausing to let people finish their thoughts if they stop talking (I often anticipate what they are going to say). I have as an ENTP I think, and maybe because of my looks and personality, gotten away with more than I should have, but at the same time been a poor conversation partner and good ideas have missed me because I was dominating interactions. Simple things like re-iterating things others bring up, asking more about their lives/thoughts/experiences instead of always just answering their questions, and going slower has helped. It's hard, which means I was originally really shit at it.

Speaker: In my personal experience as a speaker or in "being heard", there is the public and personal sphere where this affects me. I would echo what @entheos said, ironically for the latter. I talk a lot, but almost never about personal things. I also don't expect anyone to pay attention when I am in need of support. For someone to notice that I am stressed or mention something in passing that I am stressed or upset about (usually as a joke) and then address it is huge for me. I am shocked. I am generally shocked if someone like a friend or partner remembers something I mentioned months ago in general (you remember that?), but if someone offers to support me it is major because they were listening mostly to body language or something mostly unsaid. In public, being heard is mostly for me action that follows words. When I talk to someone, I expect that they back up what they say. I get very frustrated with empty promises, emotional congratulations, or other conversational tactics that are unrelated to the conversation at hand. If someone asks me a question, I answer or ask for something, and then it doesn't happen, I find it a waste of both our time. If we are having different conversations (help lines with pre-prepared lines that have nothing to do with why I called are the ultimate worst in my book), then I feel actually disrespected. I think it is important to look at intent often, rather than semantics or picking at little things or small battles.

At any rate, very interesting topic and responses from everybody. I am certainly working on the same thing you are, and it is a work in progress.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,765 Posts
Regarding the title:


  • Facial expression
  • Comments that match the topic
  • Questions to expand or to better understand the conversation

But anyone can do that, so:


  • Not so obvious questions about the conversation, meaning the other person is actually understanding the context
  • Questions on ANGLES. Every situation has angles and possibilities, it's also about what, when, who, how, also how do you feel, what did you do, did you do what you wanted to do? why did you do that? that helps for better understanding
  • I can also ask questions. It was until I had a conversation with a friend (psychologist) who actually told me you never really know what the other person is thinking, you can say "love hurts" and people tell you "you are right" when they could be thinking about how they hurt on purpose or "punish" people when they don't give what they want. Sometimes specially on critical topics you not just CAN you MUST ask the other person to verify if you both are on the same page.


Been coming to mind how a lot of my posting history is kind of isolated lecturing of my own thoughts as opposed to engagement with others and beginning from where they're coming from.
Think a lot of people are frustrated when it seems like what they have to say isn't getting through or being dismissed.
So wondering how to best avoid that.
  • This forum has good examples of people posting... refusing to engage (never reply, never confirm any kind of understanding) it's just a monologue. Same with conversations.
  • You can also see people only interacting making jokes (that's ok) but never confirms if they understood the conversation, same with 1 on 1 conversations.
  • ME me me me, there are threads where people don't understand the OP, just turn it into "ME, so this is what happened to me" and you can see a great number of "I was... I did, I said... I I I I I".

You can also consider two things, (1) sometimes people don't want the truth, like when the thread makes obvious that person has issues (evasion, denial, very bad education etc) and still complains when the problem explained has roots on them and (2) when people post great truths but most of the readers aren't ready to understand the meaning.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,822 Posts
I have a tendency to overreact when I'm upset because I'm pessimistic and always fear the worst. I find I feel the best when someone hears my concerns, despite how alarmed I sound when I voice them, and tells me (A) I'm not wrong for being worried (even if they secretly think I'm making a bigger deal about the issue than I need to. I just need to know that they acknowledge there IS an issue. If they just tell me to calm down, all that does is make me think they aren't listening) and (B) they aren't worried because yadda yadda.

It helps me know that they've heard me, but that there's also a reason for me to not be worried anymore.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,765 Posts
The #1 and most potent thing is when out of the blue someone mentions something I said in the past.
So true.


Your ability to extrapolate.

Can you take data given by me based on interest sets and rather than recite extrapolate to make good inferences on things that would be included.
and interpolate, so true (not the same as coming to fast conclusions or assumptions)

quick and very large texts back that show interest in talking, or in person proximity where they don't distract themselves mid us talking with any outside interaction
In reflecting on myself, I was wondered that when really listening, I have to avoid interjecting too much of myself. If you're creating a space in which they fill, then it is disruptive of me to then bring up stuff about myself. But then its not entirely terrible as it could be considered relevant but it should then be limited if the focus is to remain on the other person and have them feel comfortable flowing with their line of thought than getting fettered with tangents.

Also been trying to think of communication that perhaps sets the ground of an interaction in negative way. Recently thought of being bored and picky on some detail that perhaps isn't much of a concern for a person to argue/justify. Not that such an couched but adversarial questioning is entirely misplaced but its perhaps rude to jump on people and doesn't set them for a productive discussion as great as engaging them on their own terms and teasing out their thoughts.

I guess a side of this emphasizing that people heard is about making connections with people, conversation that seems to actually connect between people rather than feel independent of one another though aimed at one another.
Guess something like what was previously mentioned, is reflecting back what people have shared so that they have a impression/sense that what they've said has been heard and possibly comprehended by them. Clarification I guess, where some people leave that implicit and it seems to feel like being ignored to not have something explicitly acknowledged.
You lost me there. The thread starts asking about the mechanics, but this sounds more personal (more like "about you"), kinda get that you feel weird when the conversation doesn't exactly engages with you, but anyway I could be wrong, I see a lot of words but can't come with a exact (precise?) meaning.

Connections? it depends. Conversations happen between humans, emotional and rational people, but sometimes the conversations are about situations and do not demand (or apply) for focus on the persona but on what this person did, not to confuse this with lack of empathy. It's not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,161 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
You lost me there. The thread starts asking about the mechanics, but this sounds more personal (more like "about you"), kinda get that you feel weird when the conversation doesn't exactly engages with you, but anyway I could be wrong, I see a lot of words but can't come with a exact (precise?) meaning.

Connections? it depends. Conversations happen between humans, emotional and rational people, but sometimes the conversations are about situations and do not demand (or apply) for focus on the persona but on what this person did, not to confuse this with lack of empathy. It's not.
It is, as what motivated this threads creation in the first place was the mechanics in order to create certain feelings, as way people behave creates an effect. I see a lot of my posts are being of the lecturing sort with a information overload that seems abstract and doesn't make a lot of sense to others beyond myself. So what I'm trying to consider if pathways in which I more meaningfully engage people, to properly consider what they say as it seems an important part of getting anyway in an interaction.
Not sure that I have been really getting to people in what they say, I want to raise the quality of how I interact with people and the effect I have on them.

The thought that drives me is how am I interacting with people on here? What is the impact I make? And how can I improve that?
What seems important to me is that the mechanics of communication give rise to a positive effect, even if one disagrees, good communication can have people leave a interaction in better spirits than when they entered, that it was still fulfilling.
I got to get out of my own head and properly consider the other person instead of just trying to spew forth what ever comes to my mind I think.

And I was just bumping the thread to get more responses hahaha So there is definitely a disconnect between the OP and latter post as been quite some time between thoughts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,420 Posts
Just passing by because I missread the topic and I thought it said: What makes you feel hard
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tropes and Wellsy

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,161 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
I could come at this from two directions - the listener and the speaker.

Listener: Like you @Wellsy I have a tendency to lecture. It is partially because I love ideas and knowledge, and partly because I get very excited engaging with people. However, as an extrovert and an NT, I have had to learn to reign myself in so that I don't walk all over the other person. IRL this means not interrupting people (a simple thing but really damaging to others' sense of value in an exchange and their ability to contribute), and pausing to let people finish their thoughts if they stop talking (I often anticipate what they are going to say).
Yes, so relatable XD
Fortunately some people have been kind enough to say that they enjoy seeing me get excited at those times.
Sometimes hard though because you're about to explode because they tickled some connection between things and it's so good.
On the plus side, in effectively doing this, can avoid arguments and simply pissing people off if they feel what they're saying is very important. That I think takes patience in not trying to rush ahead of people and let them have their say I guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,765 Posts
It is, as what motivated this threads creation in the first place was the mechanics in order to create certain feelings, as way people behave creates an effect. I see a lot of my posts are being of the lecturing sort with a information overload that seems abstract and doesn't make a lot of sense to others beyond myself. So what I'm trying to consider if pathways in which I more meaningfully engage people, to properly consider what they say as it seems an important part of getting anyway in an interaction.
Not sure that I have been really getting to people in what they say, I want to raise the quality of how I interact with people and the effect I have on them.

The thought that drives me is how am I interacting with people on here? What is the impact I make? And how can I improve that?
What seems important to me is that the mechanics of communication give rise to a positive effect, even if one disagrees, good communication can have people leave a interaction in better spirits than when they entered, that it was still fulfilling.
I got to get out of my own head and properly consider the other person instead of just trying to spew forth what ever comes to my mind I think.

And I was just bumping the thread to get more responses hahaha So there is definitely a disconnect between the OP and latter post as been quite some time between thoughts.
It depends who you are addressing. IMHO there are lots of words that can be cut from your post and make it more easy to read (and connect with the ideas), the use of words is technically ok (sort of) but the style can be better. BTW I've been a writer (not in English) and I had diff schools of training. What I want to address here is you can interact quite well with your friends because somehow they are already used to your style (writing I mean) or they fit the same group in some way. But... when it comes to writing to people you don't know or never interacted with them for long time, that's something different and there are diff styles.

So, back to "training", there is no universal training for this, diff groups = diff styles, then the web came along and a lot of people just can't understand more than X words per group at a time. There are techniques to change the writing and move the most important words to the beginning of the sentence. What I mean is... forum? lots of diff people, you can only achieve general approaches. Interesting enough some people will get confused by your writing style.

BTW on the end of your post, I've seen how some people do that but... don't, it messes up the line of the thread (if you want clear communication). Some people open threads where the title is on a diff continent from the original post. And... something a lot of people do here too is turning the threads into nonsense and jokes. That's OK!, but if someone wants to keep the thread in line then it's not, the thread kinda ends looking as if many are interacting but it's just chit chat (and that's ok if that's what people want).
 

·
Registered
Mature Sage
Joined
·
6,217 Posts
If you can both remember what I say, and show evidence that you really understood me, as opposed to coming back several days later saying "Yeah, but you said...." when I had said no such thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,765 Posts
After that conversation with my friend psychologist, about "asking the other person what she/he understands about what you said" I learned amazing things.


  1. Some people are not understanding a bit, a single bit because they can't. What you say is beyond their understanding (lack of experience, perhaps more about lack of interest) and you are just wasting your time, to be precise: I was wasting it there.
  2. Some FAKE their understanding to please you or to avoid thinking because they are LAZY, so they learned to say "hmmm oh... ok, amazing" but they can't remember shit because they are not listening. So I did what David Lee Roth did on some contracts: messing up the info and including things that don't make sense (just to explore what I just learned). So in the middle of the conversation I talked about a dinosaur on my backyard, some people don't notice it!!!.
  3. Manipulation... There are some who are just selecting the information they want, like "oh interesting, so when X woman did this to you, you felt Z", but they don't care, it's just something that caught their attention so they focus on that, why? because in their head it means "push this button and this person does this thing".

I was 30 something when I learned this and felt confident enough to "test it", testing felt bad in my head but what the hell, I did it. So the GF I was dating couldn't understand shit of some things, specially agreements where we had mutual commitments, she only focused on what I supposed to do for her. So that was the beginning of the end... of the relationship.




There is another side for this, where your communication is bad, where you start (example) a conversation with a supposed title but the content is different, that's interference and means work to understand it, or more precisely: it means you confuse your friends and partners. A lot of people begin talking about a problem they want to solve, but they just then talk about how they felt, not the mechanics of the problem. It's ok if you want to whine or express yourself, but not to solve anything.

And we also should put work on choosing our listeners, some people can't deal with a post like this, instead they can just deal with something like "it's complicated, people don't hear me out", that's not just being lazy, it's also a limited brain capacity.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top