Misunderstanding versus intentionally not getting it
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-08-2015, 05:51 AM
RE: Misunderstanding versus intentionally not getting it
(27-08-2015 02:54 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  
(26-08-2015 06:14 PM)7R0MM3L Wrote:  Miscommunication is a problem we all encounter, & I find myself frustrated when even factual statements like, "there is no proof of an afterlife, " are misconstrued to mean something I didn't actually say.

It may not be a case of miscommunication but of entirelly different worldview. When you're uttering such statement to someone who believes in afterlife there is no wonder that he could hear "you will never again see your departed loved ones". To be fair it means just that but I would say problem lies not in the communication but in a way in which believers see the world.

(26-08-2015 06:14 PM)7R0MM3L Wrote:  Selecting the correct tone, & vocabulary range, for your audience can help a great deal, but it's unlikely all possible precautions will result in every person understanding.

Sure.

(26-08-2015 06:14 PM)7R0MM3L Wrote:  "You can't please everyone," comes to mind. Unfortunately I do think personal bias, against the person making the statement, will play quite a roll in such cases, & education alone is not enough, for some at least, to combat bias.

Sure but also person who is making statement could be biassed. It works both ways .

I would say it's not case of misunderstanding but differing worldviews, backgrounds, etc. You're saying one thing but person listening to you could hear something different and from that person point of view his interpretation could be valid.
So you're not misunderstood but rather understood in context of someone else life experience and biases.

Hope it makes sense.

I follow what you're saying here, & it leads me to a question: is a person's worldview considered part, or some kind of totality of, their personal bias(es)?
Is the person making the statement bias if expressing a statement of fact?
I'm really not sure at the moment, & will be pondering these at work. Weeping
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-08-2015, 06:04 AM (This post was last modified: 27-08-2015 06:25 AM by Szuchow.)
RE: Misunderstanding versus intentionally not getting it
(27-08-2015 05:51 AM)7R0MM3L Wrote:  
(27-08-2015 02:54 AM)Szuchow Wrote:  It may not be a case of miscommunication but of entirelly different worldview. When you're uttering such statement to someone who believes in afterlife there is no wonder that he could hear "you will never again see your departed loved ones". To be fair it means just that but I would say problem lies not in the communication but in a way in which believers see the world.


Sure.


Sure but also person who is making statement could be biassed. It works both ways .

I would say it's not case of misunderstanding but differing worldviews, backgrounds, etc. You're saying one thing but person listening to you could hear something different and from that person point of view his interpretation could be valid.
So you're not misunderstood but rather understood in context of someone else life experience and biases.

Hope it makes sense.

I follow what you're saying here, & it leads me to a question: is a person's worldview considered part, or some kind of totality of, their personal bias(es)?
Is the person making the statement bias if expressing a statement of fact?
I'm really not sure at the moment, & will be pondering these at work. Weeping

I would say that biases are part of worldview - like lenses filtering information.

As for fact - I was going to use example of date of begining of WWII - 09.1939 - but isn't it polonocentrism? Or europocentrism considering situation in Asia or USA? So while I'm not entirely sure I could say that even facts can contain bias. Or it's just different perspective which has nothing to do with biases.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-08-2015, 06:23 AM
RE: Misunderstanding versus intentionally not getting it
(26-08-2015 08:11 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  ....

How would I know the difference between misunderstandings, and intentionally not getting it? Assuming in your examples the situation is brought along by a person's biases, which they themselves might not even be aware of it, can we say it's intentional?

I often think that others are intentionally not getting it, as opposed to merely misunderstanding me. Yet I find myself accused of the same thing by others. Then I think if I'm not "intentionally not getting it", than perhaps they're "not intentionally not getting it". That it just us accusers interpreting the others not getting it as "intentional", as opposed to unintentional misunderstandings.

I'm assuming there have been numerous occasions in which you've misunderstood somebody, has there ever been an occasion in which you "intentionally did not get it"?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-08-2015, 08:00 AM
RE: Misunderstanding versus intentionally not getting it
(27-08-2015 06:23 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(26-08-2015 08:11 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  ....

How would I know the difference between misunderstandings, and intentionally not getting it? Assuming in your examples the situation is brought along by a person's biases, which they themselves might not even be aware of it, can we say it's intentional?

I often think that others are intentionally not getting it, as opposed to merely misunderstanding me. Yet I find myself accused of the same thing by others. Then I think if I'm not "intentionally not getting it", than perhaps they're "not intentionally not getting it". That it just us accusers interpreting the others not getting it as "intentional", as opposed to unintentional misunderstandings.

I'm assuming there have been numerous occasions in which you've misunderstood somebody, has there ever been an occasion in which you "intentionally did not get it"?

Did you even read the picture in the OP?

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
27-08-2015, 08:37 AM
RE: Misunderstanding versus intentionally not getting it
Tomasia - You're forgetting that most of us grew up in strong faith-traditions, as dedicated believers. If you're implying that we nevertheless "failed to understand" our own beliefs, despite all the studying and years of prayer and deeply-held faith in the doctrines of our various churches, then it implies that perhaps no one does. Except you, of course.

We often mock the beliefs by putting them into a satirical form that shows how ridiculous we find the belief, but it's not from a lack of understanding. What we're trying to do when we do that is to shake the believer, who blindly accepts concepts that they would see are silly if they stopped to actually consider what they blindly accept, into stopping a moment to do so.

In the above example, we clearly understand the concept of how a blood-sacrifice religion became an "atonement by the sacrifice of a sinless substitute" religion, but in the end, it still demands an answer to the question of why the Almighty wanted anything killed on any altar for any purpose. Stop a moment to really consider that. Take all the time you need.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
27-08-2015, 10:51 AM
RE: Misunderstanding versus intentionally not getting it
(27-08-2015 08:00 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(27-08-2015 06:23 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  How would I know the difference between misunderstandings, and intentionally not getting it? Assuming in your examples the situation is brought along by a person's biases, which they themselves might not even be aware of it, can we say it's intentional?

I often think that others are intentionally not getting it, as opposed to merely misunderstanding me. Yet I find myself accused of the same thing by others. Then I think if I'm not "intentionally not getting it", than perhaps they're "not intentionally not getting it". That it just us accusers interpreting the others not getting it as "intentional", as opposed to unintentional misunderstandings.

I'm assuming there have been numerous occasions in which you've misunderstood somebody, has there ever been an occasion in which you "intentionally did not get it"?

Did you even read the picture in the OP?

I did, but it seemed the question was in the title of the OP, as opposed to the one in the picture? Of whether or not the examples in the OP, and other parallel examples are misunderstanding, or "intentionally not getting it"?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-08-2015, 10:52 AM
RE: Misunderstanding versus intentionally not getting it
(27-08-2015 10:51 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(27-08-2015 08:00 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Did you even read the picture in the OP?

I did, but it seemed the question was in the title of the OP, as opposed to the one in the picture? Of whether or not the examples in the OP, and other parallel examples are misunderstanding, or "intentionally not getting it"?

It's pretty fucking straightforward. The title of a thread, relates to the substance of the OP.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-08-2015, 11:48 AM
RE: Misunderstanding versus intentionally not getting it
(27-08-2015 08:37 AM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Tomasia - You're forgetting that most of us grew up in strong faith-traditions, as dedicated believers. If you're implying that we nevertheless "failed to understand" our own beliefs, despite all the studying and years of prayer and deeply-held faith in the doctrines of our various churches, then it implies that perhaps no one does. Except you, of course.

I wasn’t exclusively speaking about interactions with atheists, or even discussions about religion. Nor was I thinking of atheists understanding of any particular religion. But to say something briefly on the topic, some atheists do a have a remarkable sense of understanding and nuance when it comes to religion, like Nietzsche, Slavoj Zizek, John Gray, George Santayana, etc.. and some not so impressive, like Dawkins and company.

Quote:We often mock the beliefs by putting them into a satirical form that shows how ridiculous we find the belief, but it's not from a lack of understanding. What we're trying to do when we do that is to shake the believer, who blindly accepts concepts that they would see are silly if they stopped to actually consider what they blindly accept, into stopping a moment to do so.


Yes, it’s like a shock and awe tactic. It’s means of ridiculing to make religion seem outdated, uncool, trying to rid religion like one does a stale fashion trend. But for those not craving what's currently in vogue, it’s likely to be ineffective. And for those outside of a some fundie evangelical traditions, the shock value is likely to be non-existent.

Quote:In the above example, we clearly understand the concept of how a blood-sacrifice religion became an "atonement by the sacrifice of a sinless substitute" religion, but in the end, it still demands an answer to the question of why the Almighty wanted anything killed on any altar for any purpose. Stop a moment to really consider that. Take all the time you need.

No you don’t, because there is no universally agreed upon atonement theology. The Catholic church leaves the question open, and they’ve had two thousand years to figure that out. And the Evangelical community, has been slowly making the same Catholic concession, that all atonement theologies are bound to be incomplete. That it’s easier to talk of the effect of the cross, rather than mechanics of it. It might be a surprise for some atheists to learn that none of the four Gospels formulated an atonement theology.

But if we’re talking about the prevalent myths of sacrificed divine figures or their stand ins, found in a variety of religions the world over, I don’t expect to find many atheists offering even a remotely competent account of this. There are no works on parallel with Rene Girard Violence and the Sacred.

While atheists might proudly boast of how they know a bit more than Kirk Cameron does, but they’d have to pardon me for not finding that impressive.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-08-2015, 11:53 AM
RE: Misunderstanding versus intentionally not getting it
(27-08-2015 10:52 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  It's pretty fucking straightforward. The title of a thread, relates to the substance of the OP.

I'm not too sure what the problem here is?

The OP picture refers to the examples as misunderstandings rather than "intentionally not getting it".

What "intentionally not getting it" means, which is your term, and one used in the title of the thread, is not evident. My questions were primarily about a clarification, as to where the "intentional" component fits in. If misunderstandings are caused by one's unconscious biases could we say they are intentional?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-08-2015, 12:15 PM
RE: Misunderstanding versus intentionally not getting it
(27-08-2015 11:53 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(27-08-2015 10:52 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  It's pretty fucking straightforward. The title of a thread, relates to the substance of the OP.

I'm not too sure what the problem here is?

The OP picture refers to the examples as misunderstandings rather than "intentionally not getting it".

What "intentionally not getting it" means, which is your term, and one used in the title of the thread, is not evident. My questions were primarily about a clarification, as to where the "intentional" component fits in. If misunderstandings are caused by one's unconscious biases could we say they are intentional?

You are a good example of the issue at hand. Context matters and you clearly don't understand the implied context of the example picture and have instead decided to interject your own line of questioning into that doesn't relate.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: