231–240 of 282 posts
It seems to me that the super-reasonable choice is always the stand to take.
My 2¢: Don't tell someone they're wrong. You'll never convince them, even when you're right. It's not worth the ink (or the blood pressure). Instead, guide them towards the path to figuring out for themselves that they're wrong. Build a foundation of truths and facts they can evaluate their own beliefs against. If they change their mind, great. If they don't learn, you're no worse off than you were before (and your b…
> Instead, guide them towards the path to figuring out for themselves that they're wrong. Build a foundation of truths and facts they can evaluate their own beliefs against. But before you do that , examine the context. Would they care to even find out the truth? In over half the cases, I submit to you that they do not. Assuming that they value the truth as you do makes much of this submission relevant. Very often, t…
If they actively want to lie to themselves you are not gonna easily stop them. But sometimes you still gotta put up the signposts for them to discover. Because guess who is more likely to walk down the wrong path:
A) someone who is never presented with facts that don't fit into their world image
B) someone who sees these facts constantly and from all different kinds of directions
Influencing someone's world view is a incredibly slow process. So even observing the difference one made is hard. And sometimes you don't do it for them, but yourself, because you have to live with not having done enough if they end up drifting into a cult.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Instead, guide them towards the path to figuring out for themselves that they're wrong. Build a foundation of truths and facts they can evaluate their own beliefs against. But before you do that , examine the context. Would they care to even find out the truth? In over half the cases, I submit to you that they do not. Assuming that they value the truth as you do makes much of this submission relevant. Very often, t…
> That's not the path they seek. Nope. But sometimes a good shove down that path is the right thing to do. I've seen a lot fewer posts in an extended family chat about drag shows after posting my own comment about how we were all entertained by Klinger, Mrs. Doubtfire, Bugs Bunny, Monty Python, et.al. Have they changed their views? Not that anybody has said, but the quiet is nice.
So giving up in resignation would rob them of yet another window into a more complex world.
My 2¢: Don't tell someone they're wrong. You'll never convince them, even when you're right. It's not worth the ink (or the blood pressure). Instead, guide them towards the path to figuring out for themselves that they're wrong. Build a foundation of truths and facts they can evaluate their own beliefs against. If they change their mind, great. If they don't learn, you're no worse off than you were before (and your b…
People will learn since you will also be wrong often when you try to state your model of the world. Some implied fact will have turned out to have not actually been implied.
So in a startup where org dynamics are not dominant since the org is small - just go right for the facts that you can both agree on and then find the disagreement fast.
OP article is a bit long winded, though. LLM assisted perhaps?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With you. This is Agreement #2 of Ruiz' Four Agreements[0]. 1. Be impeccable with your word. 2. Don't take anything personally. 3. Don't make assumptions. 4. Always do your best. It's as close to the best 'blueprint' for living I've found. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Four_Agreements
how do you become inpeccable with your words?
They can not tell if the malleable logarithmic casing of the turbo encabulator is surmounted in an optimal fashion, so the technical facts don't matter a lot.
Become the person who is known to say the truth and who explains things in a way your superiors can actually make the choice.
I have seen collegues argue true points in an adversial manner and in the end their superiors made bad choices. That was only because they tried to essentially force them into the right choice by telling them everything else is stupid — they were right, but how could their superiors have trusted them on that? They gave them no choice only a strong opinion.
Now imagine explaining them the options and and what the pitfalls of all choices are (including the one you prefer!). Then tell them that it is their choice, but which one you would pick if you where in their shoes and why you would do so.
If you are trusted to keep your word, don't let things look good when they are not and don't let things look bad when they are not then people will also trust your judgement when you present them with options.
This article reeks of weak sauce. Delivering truth in a "sensitive" manner is a sad testament to the frail sensibilities of modern society. If the unvarnished truth bothers you, that says more about your inadequacies than the person speaking it. Hiding behind convoluted psychological constructs like "hyper-rationality" and "super-reasonability" is a coward's way to avoid hard truths and difficult conversations. The t…
Yes, but the truth is also that there is a skeleton inside you that is wet at all points in time. The true question is how to wield truth — which truth to speak in which context and how to present it? Do you wield it as a weapon or as a guiding light?
Being "the truthful person" is a very strong position to be in within a world filled with people trying to selling each others down a river. It is also a more difficult position, because you have to have the reality to back your words up and you have to know a lot about what is actually happening (or admit you don't).
Someone speaking truth is not something people are used to, so if you care about the outcome of a conversation you definitly need to wonder how they could even trust your word first. You of course know how truthful you are, but how would the other know?
> In the end, it's not about "handling the truth" but about delivering it in a way that inspires growth rather than induces trauma. The truth may be insensitive but we don't have to be.
The fundamental quesion of communication: do you care about the message you send, do you care about the message that will be received or do you just care about the outcome?
Yet it is - apart from perception from people being used to bend meaning with will hitting hard wall on engineers - just a side effect sneaking into other than natural science topics. Because context is important, if deling with people not things the set of objective facts are much much smaller, things become fluid and elusive. Pretty hard to get a graps at individual or small groups level systematically. Those engineers forming undeniable stand on human matters too misusing their abilities in areas unfit.
But even when hyperrealistic reasoning is used in its place on objective truth that is independent from individuals, on matters remaining so if people are taken out of the picture, the reality bending people will still consider them arrogant as not open to wrap the universe around will and personality. Branding them insensitive or such in contexts sensitivity and multitude of pespectives has no place.
The world and other people would pretty well exists and live on without the individual and this seems to be forgotten in today's modern societies where those unabale adapt to the world, unable controlling the one thing fully available for them to control and influece: themselves, try to influence and control everyone else, the feel and need of the self is unhealthily sacred in too many situations grinding away the group by the individualistic selfs.
Dealing with humans sensitivity is important as well as knowing our natural and human context and being able to process it, handle it. Handling the truth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Instead, guide them towards the path to figuring out for themselves that they're wrong. Build a foundation of truths and facts they can evaluate their own beliefs against. If they change their mind, great. If they don't learn, you're no worse off than you were before (and your blood pressure will remain lower). I had a manager who would quietly disagree with things we said, then try to gently steer us toward the an…
Of course poor communication skills will cause problems. It's well worth asking for clarifications in such situations; I have few problems playing the dumb oaf and admitting my lack of understanding if it gets someone to ELI5 their point. And generally, someone who brags about using the Socratic method out loud will gladly display their brilliance you've blundered past. In the end, I'm not advocating for confusing th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Engineers too are human. They have egos and beliefs and care more about the things they build than they should. Their feelings get hurt when people are rude, short, or belittling - or when they perceive that someone's being rude, short, or belittling. The perfectly rational engineer (read: human being) doesn't exist outside of a select few neurodivergant folks. Acting as if every engineer is perfectly rational is now…
It is entirely possible to be direct without being an asshole. Being indirect, Socratic questioning, etc. has its place too. But it can easily just result in someone being a passive aggressive asshole instead of a direct one, or, as others noted in the thread, being confusing and a drag on everyone because they won’t actually say what they think.
You don't have any control over how people perceive things, which is the point. Everyone is an asshole to someone.
This article reeks of weak sauce. Delivering truth in a "sensitive" manner is a sad testament to the frail sensibilities of modern society. If the unvarnished truth bothers you, that says more about your inadequacies than the person speaking it. Hiding behind convoluted psychological constructs like "hyper-rationality" and "super-reasonability" is a coward's way to avoid hard truths and difficult conversations. The t…
That's the very definition of reality.
In other words:
“Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.”
― Philip K. Dick, I Hope I Shall Arrive Soon