Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Church of Interruption (2018)

sambleckley.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 100 posts

Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)

#81

Post by pjc50 »

ggm wrote: post #24

Serial Offender, fallen off the wagon many times over the decades. I've seen some amazing pushback. A researcher who bellowed "I HAVE NOT FINISHED" so loud, it was like the MTV man-in-a-chair reaction from everyone else. I wasn't the guilty party that time but I could have been. It's often said people believe women do most interrupting when the stats are very good 75% or more in mixed dialogue, is men's speaking time…

> A researcher who bellowed "I HAVE NOT FINISHED" so loud

I've seen this happen once, to the person in our group of friends who was the most "barker". In that context we all had a laugh about it (when he had in fact finished) and it was a useful correction to the group dynamic.

I've also done the "soft" version of this myself: if someone interrupts you, simply up your volume to the highest projection you can without reaching the level of shouting. The interrupter will realise that you're not giving way and trail off, disoriented, within a few words. It does require being able to signal with your tone that you're not losing your temper, you're simply louder than they are and ignoring the interruption.

Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)

#82

Post by kayodelycaon »

myrryr wrote: post #72

I think people are sometimes forced into one position or another by brain chemistry. If you have ADHD, and can't hold a thought long enough that when it is your turn to talk comes around, then you are forced into a position of interrupting, or, that thought is lost. Depending on how important or useful it is, you can be put in a lose/lose position. So, how I interact with people, depends a lot on what they have going…

I have ADHD and it is quite frustrating to have these limitations.

I struggle with real-time processing and I can’t offload audio to some other part of my brain. If I try to write a note or hold a thought in my head for more than 10 seconds, the audio starts dropping out.

So I tend to interrupt when possible. I try not to be rude about it but some people just won’t shut up long enough for me to say something while it’s still relevant.

I got in a lot of trouble for “talking back” and “not paying attention” as a kid.

Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)

#83

Post by brightball »

canadev wrote: post #31

An interesting article. Something interesting maybe none or few you will likely experience: Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, Cocaine Anonymous meetings, presumably any 12-step meeting. Say what you will about the 12 steps, and the belief of god that is associated with them. Feel free to disagree with the dogma. As a member I openly do that from time to time. The real beauty of these meetings is that when so…

For what it's worth, the notion that God controls everything isn't something that I have ever seen reflected in the Bible. In the Bible, God directly intervenes at specific instances, and there are patterns to the circumstances around those.

I realize this isn't the more common popular take, but I believe the characterization that you're using projects God as some type of puppet master who's going around giving people cancer, making people rich, etc. I have simply never seen it reflected in any part of the Bible and because of that, I think the notion is a bit dangerous.

God changed my life when I was at an absolutely low point after 2 years dealing with something that I finally had to admit I could not control about myself. I asked for His help when I had exhausted everything that I, as a man, could do to overcome it myself. And He fixed me as easily as flipping a light switch in a way that left me with absolutely no doubt.

To this day I wonder if I had to get to a point where I had to put aside my pride to realize I couldn't do it on my own.

Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)

#84

Post by mannykannot »

QuarterReptile wrote: post #38
canadev wrote: post #31

An interesting article. Something interesting maybe none or few you will likely experience: Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, Cocaine Anonymous meetings, presumably any 12-step meeting. Say what you will about the 12 steps, and the belief of god that is associated with them. Feel free to disagree with the dogma. As a member I openly do that from time to time. The real beauty of these meetings is that when so…

>I do not believe in an all powerful and loving god because there is simply too much needless suffering in the world I'm suspect that's not the only reason, but I'll ask just in case: how much can suffering be reduced without the abrogation of free will?

How much could the opportunities for the exercise of free will have been expanded through the application of modest constraints on it in relatively few cases?

Not even God can have omniscience, omnipotence, an unwavering commitment to free will, and an intimate concern for the wellbeing of individuals, without compromise. Personally, it's the tendentiousness of the arguments made to reconcile this conflict, not some logical flaw, that renders me skeptical, as they can be debated endlessly without resolution.

Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)

#85

Post by WaitWaitWha »

robmoore121 wrote: post #33
ggm wrote: post #24

Serial Offender, fallen off the wagon many times over the decades. I've seen some amazing pushback. A researcher who bellowed "I HAVE NOT FINISHED" so loud, it was like the MTV man-in-a-chair reaction from everyone else. I wasn't the guilty party that time but I could have been. It's often said people believe women do most interrupting when the stats are very good 75% or more in mixed dialogue, is men's speaking time…

RE: "correct" In some Asian vernacular Englishes (e.g. Indian, Singaporean), this is means "yes, right" / "I agree". I used to experience your reaction to people saying "correct" to me while I talk (i.e. "fuck you") but since then, my understanding has increased, and I interpret it to mean "yes, right" / "I agree". Additionally, it may be that people who say this aren't native speakers of an Asian vernacular English,…

To add to the "correct", I have noticed that a "yes" gets often chewed up by background noise or someone talking over, specially in teleconferencing. To me a "correct" gives a clearer acknowledgement.

My personal tick is "sure". A sure will nearly always prompt me to bark back a "does this mean a clear yes, or a 'sure I guess, if I have to, if there is nothing better'?" This drives me bonkers when we are talking about non-reversible decisions.

Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)

#86

Post by WaitWaitWha »

pjc50 wrote: post #81
ggm wrote: post #24

Serial Offender, fallen off the wagon many times over the decades. I've seen some amazing pushback. A researcher who bellowed "I HAVE NOT FINISHED" so loud, it was like the MTV man-in-a-chair reaction from everyone else. I wasn't the guilty party that time but I could have been. It's often said people believe women do most interrupting when the stats are very good 75% or more in mixed dialogue, is men's speaking time…

> A researcher who bellowed "I HAVE NOT FINISHED" so loud I've seen this happen once, to the person in our group of friends who was the most "barker". In that context we all had a laugh about it (when he had in fact finished) and it was a useful correction to the group dynamic. I've also done the "soft" version of this myself: if someone interrupts you, simply up your volume to the highest projection you can without…

a more ... active aggressive would be to instantly halt talking, and then as soon as they are done continue with "..continue where I got interrupted"?

Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)

#87

Post by atq2119 »

tdeck wrote: post #57
korlja wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are easy, non-offensive, non-interrupting methods of communicating while another person is talking. Signal yes/no, dissent, agreement? Thumbs up or down, Nod or shake head. Applause? Deaf people's clap (raise both hands, oscillate quickly around z-axis). Want to say something? Raise one hand. Want the speaker to get on with it? Circular motion with the tip of the index finger around the y-axis. Strongly disagre…

> Want the speaker to get on with it? Circular motion with the tip of the index finger around the y-axis. If someone did this to me I'd find it pretty offensive, much more so than being interrupted. Unless that person was explicitly asked to help keep time beforehand. Details aside, all of these examples are basically substitutes for 1-3 words. Hardly anyone is interrupting to say just a word or two, and such interru…

As usual, different cultures. It's better to not jump to conclusions that somebody is trying to offend you.

Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)

#88

Post by nickelcitymario »

scythe wrote: post #50
canadev wrote: post #31

An interesting article. Something interesting maybe none or few you will likely experience: Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, Cocaine Anonymous meetings, presumably any 12-step meeting. Say what you will about the 12 steps, and the belief of god that is associated with them. Feel free to disagree with the dogma. As a member I openly do that from time to time. The real beauty of these meetings is that when so…

>I do not believe in an all powerful and loving god Correct me if I'm wrong, but AA just requires you to believe in some kind of higher power, does it not? Saint Anselm's interpretation of God is not required. I don't know if you could stretch it all the way to Einstein's God, but you could probably get away with Zeus.

The way I was taught in the program: a higher power can be anything that you have the ability to believe can help you.

For many atheists and agnostics, that higher power becomes their particular 12 step group. Not the program as a whole, but literally the collective wisdom of the people they fellowship with. It could also be a door knob, if you can bring yourself to believe in the power of the door knob.

The logic is fairly straightforward:

1. Recognize that your best thinking got you here. If you were wise enough to fix it yourself, you wouldn't be in a program.

2. Since you can't fix it yourself, you have to develop faith that SOMETHING other than you can fix it.

3. This is easiest if you believe in a religious deity, since once you assume there is an all-powerful being who loves you, it's not a stretch to think that deity could give you the strength, courage, and wisdom needed to persevere. But it also works if you can simply believe that the group (or even your sponsor) is better able to guide you than you are able to guide yourself.

At least that's how I understood it and found it worked for me.

Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)

#89

Post by QuarterReptile »

Kbelicius wrote: post #59
QuarterReptile wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I do not believe in an all powerful and loving god because there is simply too much needless suffering in the world I'm suspect that's not the only reason, but I'll ask just in case: how much can suffering be reduced without the abrogation of free will?

A lot... the only suffering that would require abrogation of free will is the one we do to each other.

I think that's a huge amount of all suffering, especially if you'll allow me to include suffering we impose on ourselves (most likely unknowingly.)

Re: The Church of Interruption (2018)

#90

Post by QuarterReptile »

scarier wrote: post #55
QuarterReptile wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I do not believe in an all powerful and loving god because there is simply too much needless suffering in the world I'm suspect that's not the only reason, but I'll ask just in case: how much can suffering be reduced without the abrogation of free will?

Why are you so sure that free will exists?

Assuming otherwise precipitates a collapse of the world to meaninglessness. There is too much intelligibility in the world for me to reconcile with that.
Post reply on HN