Even on our best days, and in spite of sincere efforts, sometimes, it feels like communicating with others is too herculean a task to bear.

That face you make when after attempting to explain yourself for the fifth time, and the other person still just doesn’t fucking get it

Just as a preface, I was yearning for the days when I use to come home after working overnights, dead tired, and having still challenged myself to some competitive gaming afterwards, somehow found the strength to also write my Words of Wisdom before turning in for the morning, which I am attempting to do now once again. I mention this as I am extremely exhausted, so half of the challenging fun will be in seeing how much sense this ends up making and how much I may avoid being sloppy as well, so here goes nothing.

As someone who greatly enjoys language, I’m always fascinating with the idea of not just communicating with people, but genuinely connecting with others as well Doing both of these things can feel like an impossible task, as even when people are speaking the same language, they seem infinitely separated in their understanding of each other. Which is why I thought I would ponder aloud a little bit, in sharing some ideas I’ve come across that make the act of communication that much easier. Some of them may seem elementary, but I’ve always found that people fail to appreciate the fundamentals, and then get over confident in their own abilities, after a long time of being too comfortable and resting on their laurels, so I think there remains a lot of worth in re-exploring the basics from time to time, so here goes.

One of the aspects of language I remembered while discussing some philosophy with a colleague recently was a citation of Wittgenstein’s “Language Games”, which was a part of his own philosophy of understanding linguistics. While I do not have the time to go into the entirety of the content of said philosophy, a few key takeaways involve, “playing the game”, which is when you understand what kind of style of communication the other person utilizes in their own style of connecting, the kind of “game” they like to play when speaking, and find a way to join in on the game itself. Not only is this a great fundamental concept in matching others energy levels, but in matching their style of interaction as well. If successful in doing so authentically, you will no doubt endear yourself to them, even if on a subconscious level, in feeling.like they really click with you, as you share a mutual understanding through sheer synchronicity alone, in not just how they speak, but in utilizing the same kind of conversational methods they prefer.

Without making this entire Words of Wisdom about Wittgenstein, which honestly, I could and likely should do one day, another aspect of his “language game” philosophy I keep in mind is something I ended up sharing an outlook with Wittgenstein about, as it was an idea that I possessed even before I read his work, and it is “Context is king”, his words, though I found context being key a great help in my own endeavors, as so much of the definition of something changes based on any number of metrics, including time, place, person, dialect, mood, atmosphere, relational context etc, that staying away from the idea of rigidity, will greatly help you “go with the flow”, as it were. A lot of times, being so stuck in your own ways will not really play well with others, and being strictly adherent to something like academic standards or being a rule lawyer will likely just alienate you from others, or end up annoying them entirely, as most people on an everyday basis don’t feel as if they are in a classroom, and do not need to adhere to such standards. In the same way that while rationality and logic are all well and good, some people aren’t wired to think in those terms, so coming at someone from a premise of rationale or logical pretense, may fail utterly and completely, if you end up finding out they don’t use the extreme adherence to those idioms of thought either. Put another way, using math to relate to an artist may fall on deaf ears, much like approaching an irrational thought through the lens of rationality is a futile effort. In this way, being more flexible and malleable, in the way you are able to adopt others standards, will go a long way in ingratiating yourself within their context.

This next one does bare some resemblance to an aspect of Wittgensteins language game proposition we were talking about at the beginning, but from a different walk of thinking life, and that comes from a book I’m reading entitled “A Layman’s Guide to Psychiatry and Psychoanalyis” by Eric Byrne MD, and during one section of the text, he uses a phrase called “Stroke Exchange” when dealing with discussions with others. Very much in line with “aligning interpretations”, as understood through the “language game” model, it is not just about playing by the rules, but matching the player “beat by beat”. So, for example, if someone is more up for casual exchange, and they open their dialogue with “How are you?” They’ve thrown down the notion they wanted to exchange “three strokes”, and are likely looking for you to “join in on their rhythm“. Which means you should give them a close approximation back through the ebb and flow of throwing down three beats of your own, or at least a close equivalent. If you ignore this kind of cadence, and instead, match their three beats with say, 25 beats, you’ve grossly misunderstood the assignment, by giving them far more strokes in this exchange then they were bargaining for, and now might feel betrayed by what could be perceived as a lack of understanding. Using that example as a cornerstone, and extrapolating some further examples from it, one can see just how vital it is, to know “ones exchange rate”, in the “grand market economy of conversational currency.”

And lastly, I will re-appropriate some methodology from another worthy philosopher/teacher in the field, and someone who’s work I follow with great respect, and that is Ellie Anderson, one of the hosts of “Overthink Podcast”. Recently, in doing some rewatches of some of her videos, she brought up the notion of “learning to swim in the waters of the author”, in making digestible the notion of how to more effectively read difficult to comprehend philosophy texts. While the suggestion feels fairly straight forward in principle, there remains a lot of wisdom in this concept, of taking the time to “swim around” in the ideas and thoughts of an author, so you may get comfortable in utizling that ebb and flow process I mentioned earlier, in understanding how to navigate their sea of thoughts more meaningfully. I think this can very much apply to conversations as it does books, as if one goes out of one’s own empathetic way, in understanding what kind of great conceptual ocean that lays bare before them, in the guise of the conversational depths of another, one will similarly be able to find a way to “swim in their waters” too, which will have unfathomable kinds of positive take away, in understanding how one floats on, as it were.

And there we are. A handful of ways that, if acknowledged, respected, practiced, incorporated, and put forth on the regular, will most certainly help you not just understand others, but yourself in the process, and may help a great deal in helping you connect with others in completely gratifying new ways.

As always, take care of yourself, and others.

-Pashford