Some Thoughts about Objective Communication

[dream_weaver]

ARI has an audio course called Objective Communication.. It was the first time I had purchased any of their materials. It came on a set of cassette tapes. From the outset, it was made emphatically clear that the course was about objective communication, not Objectivist communication.

 

This writing is going to take into consideration three points.

1. Consider the demographics of your audience.

2. Raising issues that can’t be easily addressed.

3. Selecting the essential element to respond to.

 

When expressing an idea, if it is important enough to make, it should also be important enough to consider your audience. Whether you are speaking to a group, or an individual – what do they know? What can the be expected to know? What do you want to accomplish?

 

In most cases, talking to an known individual, past history provides some of the answers to these questions, varying from individual to individual. What you broach and talk about can be vastly more diverse than in most cases with a total stranger.

 

When communicating with a group, the same considerations apply. Are you using a megaphone to speak to anyone that happens to be in the area? What about a group of businessmen or scientists? What about an Internet forum?  What about this forum?

 

If you are directing your communication to an Objectivist audience, it is likely there is familiarity with Objectivism. If you are direct your communication to individuals not familiar or not as familiar with Objectivism, how might the form of the message need to be altered?

 

This can transition into raising issues that cannot easily be addressed. Objectivism takes time and effort to grasp and apply. Different issues can be tackled, depending on the scope of familiarity of the participants involved.

 

Raising a point can raise legitimate questions. Sometimes raising a point can generate a question not anticipated. In such a case, it may need to be looked into to come up with an appropriate response.

 

Often, topics get raised here that participants get passionate about. Rather than delineating responses into narrower addressable form, a dozen points may get raised in a single post. Depending on the level of passion, a response to each point seems mandated.

 

In such a case, it may be prudent to sit back, evaluate the material in front of you, and try to isolate the essential point. If the essential point is identified correctly, it can address several of the issues raised without having to break down each one independently.

 

According to the communications course, addressing these issues usually involves moving hierarchically in the philosophy’s structure. Political points rest on ethical ones. Selecting the right ethical principle can reveal the epistemological principle underlying it.

 

Once the philosophic root is exposed, how it is dealt with should help to ascertain what should come next.

 

Thank you for reading this.

[Atlas51184]

http://www.amazon.com/Objective-Communication-Writing-Speaking-Arguing/dp/0451418158/

[dream_weaver]

That version would distract me while trying to drive and absorb its content at the same time.