Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

                             DIALOGUE versus DEBATE

               DIALOGUE                                DEBATE

The goal of dialogue is increased       The goal of debate is the successful
understanding of myself and others.     argument of my position over that of my
                                        opponent.

I listen with a view toward             I listen with a view toward countering
understanding.                          what I hear.

I listen for strengths so as to         I listen for weaknesses so as to 
affirm and learn.                       discount and devalue.

I speak for myself from my own          I speak based on assumptions made about
understanding and experience.           others' positions and motivations.

I ask questions to increase             I ask questions to trip up or confuse.
understanding.

I allow others to complete their        I interrupt or change the subject.
communications.

I concentrate on others' words and      I focus on my own next point.
feelings.

I accept others' experiences as real    I critique others' experiences as
and valid for them.                     distorted or invalid.

I allow the expression of real          I express my feelings to manipulate
feelings (in myself and others) for     others; I deny their feelings as 
understanding and catharsis.            legitimate.

I honor silence.                        I use silence to gain advantage.

    
    .1
    
    Richard,
    
    Thanks for entering that ("Dialog vs. Debate") - it states very clearly a
    lot of some stuff I've been trying to articulate lately (but nowhere
    near as clearly) about how people communicate (or don't communicate). 
    Did you write it?
    
    Dorian

    Dorian,
    
    	Author unknown.  I cannot take credit for it.
    
    Richard
    

    
    well thanks anyway,
    
    Dorian

A few thoughts about the nature of Notes:

o  Few questions are ever completely resolved in non-technical Notes.  Some
   may feel some impatience with an exchange which seems to find no end,
   and which covers the same issues and materials over and over again.

o  Notes are far from free of communication difficulties.

o  It's been my experience that Notes are good for sharing ideas, but
   less than satisfactory for seeking good advice.  Too often advisories
   veer off into a debate on some subset of the issue raised.

o  One of the greatest benefits of Notes is to the writer.  Notes offer
   the opportunity to verbalize and give form to thoughts, ideas and
   feelings which perhaps had not been approached or worked through
   previously.

                                                     Richard

Actually, I'm very hesitant about responding to "What's your point?" type
questions.

Here's why:

	1.  If there is indeed a point to be gotten, I figure the reader
is intelligent enough to figure out what it is.

	2.  If there is indeed a point to be gotten, explaining it in public
is at best awkward and tedious, something like explaining a parable or a
humorous anecdote.  If you don't get it, you don't get it.  Maybe next time.

	3.  It's been my experience that if there is indeed a point to be
gotten, the one asking, "What's your point?" usually has a pretty good idea
what it is.  Confirmation is being sought, that's all.

	4.  I often say things to stimulate thinking, rather than having an
answer already formulated from which there can be no variance or from which
no new insights may be derived.

	Please understand, there's a great deal of margin for error built
into this way of looking at the question, "What's your point?" and I realize
that.  So if I'm totally off the wall (For our British readers: An American
expression roughly meaning outrageous, incoherent, non sequitur), I beg your
forgiveness.

Shalom,
Richard

PS  Doncha' just hate it when somebody assigns numerals in their answer?? ;-)

    
    -1
    
      Whats your point? :-)