Where people exchange information or opinions either physically or on social media.
It’s to exchange information between two or more bodies, or for social bonding between two or more bodies.
It's where communication gets exponentially harder if there are more people involved. This is why, usually, at school, in “group projects,” from my observation, it’s just one person who does 1-2 slides, etc, barely any communication (oftentimes, school is an energy-saving game due to lack of incentive to work harder than needed). Having many people working on one slide would lead to lots of conflict, and humans, of course, don't like it!
2 is ideal for me, 3 usually leaves one left out, 4 or more is usually chaos. 2 is usually the best.
This is because, in fact, the truth basically ends discussion, which humans really like for some reason, even when they are wrong, and some humans cannot really deal with harsh truth properly, like children, because they take it as a personal insult sometimes, even when it’s totally a real thing not intended to offend.
One of them is that a speaker’s words should be relevant to the
intent of the conversation, not just the dictionary definition.
Quantity, quality, relevance, and manner, proposed by philosopher
H.P. Grice, outline how people cooperate in conversation to achieve
effectiveness: by being informative, truthful, relevant, and clear.
People aim to make their conversational contributions as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the exchange.
Can be language, can be culture, can be lack of language to describe
things clearly, could be preference of speech style (Brief? Detailed?
“Softened” or “harsh reality”? “Kind” or “Cold”?)
Of course, human communication takes time, especially for philosophical or psychological concepts. In
fact, talking is slower than reading words.
Philosophical ideas rely on having long and accurate conversations.
Some people lack an attention span due to social media, and may cut in
midway through my talking. I believe this cuts into the incentive for me
to talk to them, to make them understand ideas and concepts.
And also, there is no "future referral" to the physical communication
event like it can be online. Thus, sometimes, there are indeed crazy
things said in person that they can get away with there.
Interrupting breaks the chain of analysis or logic. It is more likely to happen
with more people due to probability; more potential causes means more
risk (school
assemblies are a famous example).
Plus, talking is actually slower than reading or typing.
I generally prioritize in this way: Accuracy > Briefness > Politeness.
This is because it would be disastrous not to explain what I think thoroughly, as it would cause chaos.
However, at the same time, the people involved in talking (including the person speaking) also have limited patience I would say, so it can be a good idea to shorten as much as possible.
See the problem here? They conflict with each other (!!)
To ensure that the communicative partner doesn’t misunderstand anything you say. Don’t get angry; just rephrase when they ask you to repeat, for the sake of clarity. Otherwise, mishearings may be the cause of misunderstandings and trouble. Ways to do this include facing the person when talking, being loud enough, and speaking slowly.
People can know what you say quickly if the person prioritizes pragmatic meaning. It can be done to show trust in giving other people ideas. However, sometimes, it can indeed be a bit rude to avoid using softening words.
Most physical communication, like small talk, is extremely brief and thus (practically) mostly insignificant in terms of information gain. Being detailed wastes lots of time, which might make people feel impatient (especially with shortening attention spans in society). I prefer talking in detail.
Short and has to apply to everyone to prevent disappointment.
Sometimes when I speak of a problem, they just say to "talk to a trusted person about this". It is a problem when the problem that deflected it was a person I trusted! Now it is thus only "used to" trust for everything.