Even if you're in a room or even at a party, a great conversation might end abruptly, with hurt or even offended people and nobody wiser for the exchange. Although you could be genuinely interested to understand as well as learn different opinions, you must first acquire the ability of asking open ended questions. You can frequently find these on Bibles like Bibles for Children.
Well meaning individuals can destroy everyone's chances of learning more about a topic of social debate, because they are lacking this competence. Good and careful utilization of rhetoric, coupled with an open ended question strategy, can open the door to a lively as well as thorough dialogue from which everybody benefits.
As an example, say you are at a social gathering, eager to meet some new and interesting persons. Debatable issues are usually, on some degree, sensitive in nature. You have relatives in the breakaway state of Russia and thus have some other points of views of the reality of the recent Russian reputation. You begin a discussion with a history professor with the following statement. "I think it is simply horrible the way the Russians sent troops into Georgia, harming innocent people! What is your opinion?"
Unless you know the opinion or sentiments of that professor, you have put your foot in your mouth. You have opened up the discussion by declaring your opinion up-front. Can you imagine if that professor is a Russian immigrant, with strong feelings on the Russian position? You've basically divested yourself of understanding several valuable historical facts that might shed some light on the scenario. If this educated person gets offended, the conversation could be brief and uninformative.
On the other hand, granted the identical situation, posing an open ended question doesn't imply conflict or prejudice from you. You might ask, "You are a history professor and I was interested to learn more about the matter in the Georgian conflict. What's behind this?"
This alternate method does not express your perspective, except one of ignorance. Even though the professor could have a bias, he or she won't see you being an enemy and will be flattered that you value the things they already know. It's immaterial whether or not this person concurs with you. The target is to learn what they think and also know, how they got to their findings and grow more educated in the process.
Another example of the open ended question, utilized in a purely social context might concern a debatable film. "Have you watched Michael Moore's 'Sicko'? I think that guy's a nut and disgracefully unpatriotic, don't you?" You have stated your point, leaving anybody you are asking in a likely awkward lurch. Few people of the opposite perspective will probably be rude enough to tell you off. A second loss for you!
How about, "Have you seen 'Sicko'? I was interested about his take on the healthcare situation. It's getting a lot of push." These kinds of cases on the use of open ended questions may be a bit heavy handed, but intentionally so. You will see the value of learning, without the need of offending.
Well meaning individuals can destroy everyone's chances of learning more about a topic of social debate, because they are lacking this competence. Good and careful utilization of rhetoric, coupled with an open ended question strategy, can open the door to a lively as well as thorough dialogue from which everybody benefits.
As an example, say you are at a social gathering, eager to meet some new and interesting persons. Debatable issues are usually, on some degree, sensitive in nature. You have relatives in the breakaway state of Russia and thus have some other points of views of the reality of the recent Russian reputation. You begin a discussion with a history professor with the following statement. "I think it is simply horrible the way the Russians sent troops into Georgia, harming innocent people! What is your opinion?"
Unless you know the opinion or sentiments of that professor, you have put your foot in your mouth. You have opened up the discussion by declaring your opinion up-front. Can you imagine if that professor is a Russian immigrant, with strong feelings on the Russian position? You've basically divested yourself of understanding several valuable historical facts that might shed some light on the scenario. If this educated person gets offended, the conversation could be brief and uninformative.
On the other hand, granted the identical situation, posing an open ended question doesn't imply conflict or prejudice from you. You might ask, "You are a history professor and I was interested to learn more about the matter in the Georgian conflict. What's behind this?"
This alternate method does not express your perspective, except one of ignorance. Even though the professor could have a bias, he or she won't see you being an enemy and will be flattered that you value the things they already know. It's immaterial whether or not this person concurs with you. The target is to learn what they think and also know, how they got to their findings and grow more educated in the process.
Another example of the open ended question, utilized in a purely social context might concern a debatable film. "Have you watched Michael Moore's 'Sicko'? I think that guy's a nut and disgracefully unpatriotic, don't you?" You have stated your point, leaving anybody you are asking in a likely awkward lurch. Few people of the opposite perspective will probably be rude enough to tell you off. A second loss for you!
How about, "Have you seen 'Sicko'? I was interested about his take on the healthcare situation. It's getting a lot of push." These kinds of cases on the use of open ended questions may be a bit heavy handed, but intentionally so. You will see the value of learning, without the need of offending.
No comments:
Post a Comment