Posted by twinleaf on April 24, 2008, at 7:24:54
In reply to Re: a collision of verbal styles? » twinleaf, posted by MissK on April 24, 2008, at 5:46:01
I'm not disagreeing with you at all. I would have much preferred it if Dinah had continued with the topic she introduced, and had been willing to describe what it is like for her to feel, in part, not grown up. I was saying that I think the reason she didn't do that may be because these feelings are instinctive. She knows, by instinct, exactly what they are, but she may never have verbalized them completely, or perhaps even not much at all. They remain in the realm of unverbalized knowing- the kind of knowing you can only communicate face to face, as she does with her family and therapist.
My point was that the kind of knowing she is talking about would look (to her) very diminished and approximate if she tried to reduce it to just words. But for the rest of us on this forum, words are all we have, so we- I'm with you here- would have liked to have Dinah's thoughts in words, even though they might be only a rough reflection of the reality she is talking about.
I guess my point to you was that so much of communication in real life is in fact non-verbal, and that we all have to coexist with
so many things which are instinctive, implicit and ambiguous. Some say 95% of face-to-face communication is like that.
poster:twinleaf
thread:824963
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20080423/msgs/825124.html