I’m not really certain what word should be used to convey the idea of ‘common sequence’ in conversation. I hesitate to use the phrase ‘logical order’ because in analyzing what other people say, there doesn’t appear to be traditional logic applied. But whatever the word is, the order continues to be a mystery to me. To be honest, I do feel like I’m being repetitive in approaching the communication topic again. But I haven’t yet found the perspective that will reveal a solution.
I use the phrase “common sequence” to indicate a common order of presenting information and, by extension, the fact that such matters when attempting to get another person’s mind to naturally follow the information you present to arrive at your desired conclusion. Communication, after all, seems to be an effort to direct another person’s perceptions to imitate your own, if only to produce a point of departure.
Chronological events that lead to commonly held opinions are simple to accurately convey. Just reiterate the events in order and let the normal brain make its typical observations. But what if you have a point to make that differs from the common opinion? In what order are points interjected to effectively derail the preprogrammed train of thought of another, especially if instead of just disputing information you are introducing even more information? The age-old tactics of logic clearly don’t work as otherwise there wouldn’t exist any on-going debates.
It becomes an even more difficult matter when the point(s) or information you want to offer don’t have a chronological element to dictate what order to present them in. The order has to be some kind of common sequence that another can follow. But what is it and how does it work?
The fact that this is a common struggle for me probably indicates that my real problem might be that what I want to communicate aren’t common ideas. When I pay attention, I very often see things quite differently or more intricately. Rarely is anything simple to me. I can make boiling water complicated. [Don’t believe me? Well, once you get past the concept of mass, shape of pot and boiling points pertaining to how much difference x amount of salt (or something like milk) added can alter the time frame as well as calculating how fast that the material the pot is made from conducts heat, you still have the concepts of selecting a thermal increase strategy, defining the point at which the water is properly boiling and deciding how long the water must remain boiling for an optimal outcome which is a variable dependent upon what you are trying to cook or if you are attempting to sanitize something. So, yeah… not simple at all.]
Back to the topic of the mysteries of conversation, one obvious complication is that I don’t seem to think in the same order as other people so I really don’t know what sequence is going to accurately convey my point to normal people. I don’t know what order they need things to be in to make sense. Obviously the conclusion occurs at the end, but I end up presenting all the various points in a manner that makes sense to me but not likely to anyone else.
And then, of course, things get even more complicated when I often rely on concepts from a completely different topic where a fundamental system (or underlying process), although obscure, is relevant but the actual details are entirely unrelated. It’s like an informational analogy that gets misunderstood as an irrelevant tangent. And yes, sometimes it really is just an interesting tangent.
Today, it has occurred to me that maybe normal people don’t have a grasp on things like fundamental systems. Which would probably be due to the fact that most people don’t analyze the crap out of everything like I am prone to doing.
I’m not pleased at the thought that I may actually be speaking an entirely different language. The words are the same, but their intricate meanings are far more important to what I am saying and most of the fundamental understandings I consider as givens seem to be foreign concepts to most people. Perhaps its a language all of my own. But what use is that?