Why do you converse?

[motorollin]

bloodline wrote:
 :oops: I've just noticed a rather blatant Freudian slip that I made early in my hijacking of this thread :-)

I can't believe I missed it :inquisitive: You going to tell us or make us trawl through you and Karlos rambling on about numbers? :-P

--
moto

[bloodline]

motorollin wrote:

bloodline wrote:
 :oops: I've just noticed a rather blatant Freudian slip that I made early in my hijacking of this thread :-)

I can't believe I missed it :inquisitive: You going to tell us or make us trawl through you and Karlos rambling on about numbers? :-P

--
moto

I noticed as I was thinking how to clean up my explaination of paula's non linear nature... To be fair it's only a single letter transposition and only you would get it ;-)

[motorollin]

Nope, still can't find it :lol: You'll have to quote it since going through those posts word by word is making my eyes go funny.

--
moto

[motorollin]

@Karlos
That song has a very special place in my heart. Any remix would be a travesty in my eyes :-)

--
moto

[Karlos]

motorollin wrote:
@Karlos
That song has a very special place in my heart. Any remix would be a travesty in my eyes :-)

--
moto

Luckily for you then that Radiohead haven't released any acapella versions :-)

[HenryCase]

motorollin wrote:
I wasn't asking only about "small talk", but also about meaningful conversation.

motorollin wrote:
I don't mean communicating with others with some intent, such as sharing or requesting information, rather "small-talk".

Perhaps "small talk" needs a clearer definition. Is "small talk" meaningless conversation or all non-practical conversation?

motorollin wrote:
Interesting points though! I agree that "small talk" can be inhibiting, but it can also be a good starting point for conversation until people find something more personal in common about which to talk.

What if that 'find something more personal' point didn't arrive? Would the "small talk" journey still be worthwhile if it didn't have a deeper conversation conclusion?

[Karlos]

HenryCase wrote:

What if that 'find something more personal' point didn't arrive? Would the "small talk" journey still be worthwhile if it didn't have a deeper conversation conclusion?

If you expect to gain some enriching experience from everything you do then a spot of quirky chitchat about nothing in particular is going to leave you wanting. I've known a few people like that over the years and all of them had social interaction problems since their inability to engage in smalltalk meant people found them unapproachable.

Personally I don't mind a bit of idle chat. It's usually relaxing and often good fun. That should be reason enough for it :-)

[motorollin]

HenryCase wrote:
Perhaps "small talk" needs a clearer definition. Is "small talk" meaningless conversation or all non-practical conversation?

Oops, I appear to have contradicted myself. Ok, I'm going to have to get a bit more technical. Roth & Spekman describe communicative intentions, which can be loosely defined as verbal actions such as requesting, rejecting, drawing attention, answering etc. I'm not really interested in these behaviours since they are usually designed to achieve some specific purpose, like asking "Where's the dog?" or telling someone "Stop that". I'm interested more in the conversation which occurs for no pre-defined purpose other than for the sake of talking. This could be defined as small-talk I suppose.

Hope that clears up my earlier contradiction :-)

HenryCase wrote:
What if that 'find something more personal' point didn't arrive? Would the "small talk" journey still be worthwhile if it didn't have a deeper conversation conclusion?

Well there's obviously no right or wrong answer to that. Personally, if I don't have some goal in mind when speaking to somebody and if I don't find anything to talk to them about other than mundane chit-chat like the weather then I usually attempt to politely end the interaction as rapidly as possible.

--
moto

[HenryCase]

Karlos wrote:

HenryCase wrote:

What if that 'find something more personal' point didn't arrive? Would the "small talk" journey still be worthwhile if it didn't have a deeper conversation conclusion?

If you expect to gain some enriching experience from everything you do then a spot of quirky chitchat about nothing in particular is going to leave you wanting. I've known a few people like that over the years and all of them had social interaction problems since their inability to engage in smalltalk meant people found them unapproachable.

Personally I don't mind a bit of idle chat. It's usually relaxing and often good fun. That should be reason enough for it :-)

You misunderstand me. Not wishing to boast but I'm very good at idle chit chat, can start a conversation with absolutely anyone (and do so often, I am frequently the person that breaks the ice).

So it's not a lack of confidence in small talk, but I find as I can completely rely on idle chit chat to get me through social situations I hardly ever get to discuss matters which mean more to me, and lack confidence in opening up.

Does that make sense?

[motorollin]

HenryCase wrote:
So it's not a lack of confidence in small talk, but I find as I can completely rely on idle chit chat to get me through social situations I hardly ever get to discuss matters which mean more to me, and lack confidence in opening up.

Forgive me for being a little presumptuous, but it sounds to me like you may be using small-talk as a defence mechanism. Small-talk is inconsequential so is easy if you practice it enough, but really opening up is much harder if you lack the confidence to do it.

--
moto

[bloodline]

motorollin wrote:
Nope, still can't find it :lol: You'll have to quote it since going through those posts word by word is making my eyes go funny.

--
moto

Never mind... I accidentally corrupted an well known French phrase, while discussing Audio Units... :-)

Anyway, don't you just hate it when a Band ruins an otherwise good song... it's just a travesty:


clickly clickly

Really shouldn't be allowed.. Eh Karlos ;-)

[HenryCase]

motorollin wrote:
I'm interested more in the conversation which occurs for no pre-defined purpose other than for the sake of talking. This could be defined as small-talk I suppose.

Hope that clears up my earlier contradiction :-)

Yes it does, conversation for conversation's sake, right?! :-)

motorollin wrote:

HenryCase wrote:
What if that 'find something more personal' point didn't arrive? Would the "small talk" journey still be worthwhile if it didn't have a deeper conversation conclusion?

Well there's obviously no right or wrong answer to that. Personally, if I don't have some goal in mind when speaking to somebody and if I don't find anything to talk to them about other than mundane chit-chat like the weather then I usually attempt to politely end the interaction as rapidly as possible.

I wasn't really trying to look for an absolute right or wrong answer, but merely trying to illustrate how those (like myself) who have the skills to engage in idle chit chat do not always enjoy the process as they feel , even though they can make others laugh, etc... that the effort is pointless as they do not get to enjoy more meaningful side of conversation, and therefore start treating all conversation as a chore rather than experiencing the particular type of joy found in trivial conversation.

[HenryCase]

motorollin wrote:

HenryCase wrote:
So it's not a lack of confidence in small talk, but I find as I can completely rely on idle chit chat to get me through social situations I hardly ever get to discuss matters which mean more to me, and lack confidence in opening up.

Forgive me for being a little presumptuous, but it sounds to me like you may be using small-talk as a defence mechanism. Small-talk is inconsequential so is easy if you practice it enough, but really opening up is much harder if you lack the confidence to do it.

Abso-f*cking-lutely, that is exactly what I am trying to say, in that small talk is used for different purposes with different people.

[bloodline]

HenryCase wrote:

motorollin wrote:

HenryCase wrote:
So it's not a lack of confidence in small talk, but I find as I can completely rely on idle chit chat to get me through social situations I hardly ever get to discuss matters which mean more to me, and lack confidence in opening up.

Forgive me for being a little presumptuous, but it sounds to me like you may be using small-talk as a defence mechanism. Small-talk is inconsequential so is easy if you practice it enough, but really opening up is much harder if you lack the confidence to do it.

Abso-f*cking-lutely, that is exactly what I am trying to say, in that small talk is used for different purposes with different people.

I use it to get laid... doesn't work...

[motorollin]

bloodline wrote:
Never mind... I accidentally corrupted an well known French phrase, while discussing Audio Units... :-)

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
Just found it - brilliant! Most Freudian indeed...

bloodline wrote:
Anyway, don't you just hate it when a Band ruins an otherwise good song... it's just a travesty:

Ahh you're alright there - just don't do a bad cover of Everything In Its Right Place ;-)

--
moto

[motorollin]

HenryCase wrote:
Abso-f*cking-lutely, that is exactly what I am trying to say, in that small talk is used for different purposes with different people.

And it's exactly those purposes I'm trying to understand :-)

--
moto