Skip to main content

View Diary: "I think" vs. "I believe" (31 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think both are valuable, intellect and (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    etbnc, Larsstephens

    What I'm trying to tease out is how what people say and how they speak is a reflection of their thought processes.
    Also, what sets some people off.

    I'm very slow. It takes me a very long time to figure something out. I believe what people tell me, until it turns out to be a lie and even then I question whether it was intentional. That's because I know some people misperceive their environment, almost as if they were color blind.

    •  Writing out commentary is far more difficult (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      etbnc, Larsstephens

      and laborious than having a face-to-face conversation. ( Duh! ) There are countless times I wished I could have gone back and been more precise, more clear, and specifically left out the words "I think" or "I believe" which are conversational in nature and not really necessary for on-line commentary. Try as I might, they still slip in from time to time despite my efforts to write declaratively.

      Because of my own experience with on-line conversing and commenting, I've become much more relaxed and accommodating with others' writing. I make an effort not to read into people's comments or over-analyze them. This is an imperfect format and the technology a bit clunky. Seriously, we're still having to type this shit. Coordinating the fingers with the brain is far more difficult than simply speaking. So I'm not often interested in whether you "think, believe, or feel" something because I accept the loose conversational nature of those words and I'm capable of discerning the meaning and value of what's being said. If anything, I mourn your time wasted to type those words.

      •  "The single biggest problem in communication" (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        trumpeter, hannah, Larsstephens

        "...  is the illusion that it has taken place."

        (George Bernard Shaw)

        We're attempting telepathy, but even our best attempts to perform telepathy seem unreliable and error prone.

        Text offers little extra context or supplementary information. What we see is all we get to work with.

        Spoken words without visual cues (telephone, radio) provide audible tone and thus more clues to emotional context.

        And as you suggest, face-to-face conversation has all that plus body language. Yet even face to face, our attempts at telepathy often go awry.

        But we're a social species, and we seem  genetically programmed to keep trying.

        Thanks for contributing your perspective.

      •  For a tactile person, typing is a sort of reality (0+ / 0-)

        check. Indeed, I think that's what writing does. By reducing sound to visual symbols with the intermediation of the fingers, there's sort of a triple check.
        Not having to cross things out or erase is such a boon. Imagine the angst experienced by the fellow who carved the rosetta stone. :)

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site