You must Sign In to post a response.
  • Category: Miscellaneous

    Does discussions really clear misunderstandings?

    We often say that one should sit across the table and discuss issues to clear difference of opinions. But is it really possible? The author feels that unless we are ready to accept our mistake if any and to acknowledge the views of others if they are right, there is no point in sitting across the table. What do you feel? Follow this discussion (?) to know more about the topic.

    It is often said that when there are misunderstandings between any two persons, it is better to sit and discuss about it to clear them. But I have often observed that discussions lead to arguments rather than clearing difference of opinion. This usually happens because people don't try to listen to what other person is trying to say and wants to prove his point to be right. Also another major reason is ego of a person to accept the fault and clear the differences and hence a fight starts and even more gap is built between the two. I feel its better to ignore and stay quite rather than discussing and spoiling the relationship even more.
    Do you also feel that there is no point in discussing or do you think discussions clear the misunderstandings?
  • #588292
    In a nutshell, the discussion can clear misunderstanding only if the concerned persons involved in discussion have open mind. If they firmly believe their own argument and don't want to accept others' argument, then endless and lengthy discussuion doesn't bear any fruit.
    Non-violence is the greatest Dharma; So too is all righteous violence.

  • #588294
    Yes I am of the strong opinion that discussions lead to clearing lots of misunderstanding which were the cause of having a rift. Normally persons with too much possessiveness and ego get affected even on slightest remark and that will lead to no talking terms. But they always want a patch up in their mind but again who would bell the cat first will be the egoistic matter in them. In that melee a third person enters the issue and try to have a meeting of both to sort out the difference. One thing is sure, if both the persons want to bury the hatchet and proceed towards peace can only have discussions. Some times such patch up meetings turns even further ugly by trading charges of serious complications and the verbal duel would turn out to be nasty than ever. So discussions can turn out to be thigh breaker if both the persons agree to forget the past and for that a broad minded character is required.
    K Mohan
    'Idhuvum Kadandhu Pogum "
    Even this challenging situation would ease

  • #588300
    I really say NO. Discussions never clear our misunderstandings. Just look at the India- Pakistan discussions. How many times these countries met to discuss and solve their issues. Could they achieve and be successful with their discussions?
    Discussion to clear misunderstanding should have a mediator or a third party involvement for amicable settlement of issues with no misunderstanding. Even then, most discussions fail with no fruitful result. It is the ego to feel great about themselves. If ego goes out, everything will be well understood without any misunderstanding.

    No life without Sun

  • #588313
    I personally do not think that there is no point in a discussion. See, the very meaning of a discussion is exploring various aspects of the topic that is brought to the table. Yes, more often than not there are differences of opinions, but that is exactly the whole point of a discussion - to find out what are the opinions of others. Otherwise why would anybody arrange for a discussion in the first place? Yes, too, that it will likely lead to arguments. That is also a normal part of any discussion isn't it? People will be vehement in trying to put their own views across, which leads to the argument.

    If you are called to be involved in a discussion, then I do not agree that one should be quiet. You were called in for a reason, namely to state your views, so express them. At some point you may feel that you've had your say and don't really want to get involved any more, that is fine. Then you can say so accordingly and let others proceed with the discussion.

    Yes, ego does get into the way very often. The perception of one's own self-esteem can make things go askew in a discussion. It should be the job of the person who initiated the discussion to get things under control and not let anybody's ego, not even his/her own, interfere with trying to understand the topic.

    Yes, no concrete end result may take place. So what? Not all discussions are meant to have a final, definite result. There are some things which just get postponed for further discussion for a later date. Other things may just remain in limbo with no real solution. That is how it is.

    As for misunderstandings in a discussion, I think it depends on the people involved in the misunderstanding. It is really no use wasting time trying to make a stubborn & adamant person see sense, somebody who just won't budge even though he/she knows fully well he/she was in the wrong. In a really beautiful relationship, though, such misunderstandings do get sorted out via discussions. No matter how many times those misunderstandings arise, when the parties involved are flexible in their approach to the situation, they can good-naturedly sort it all out. I have tried it out many a time and it does work!

    When people come at you with their worst, you should come at them with your best (advice given to Selena Gomez by her mother, quoted in Time magazine.)

  • #588314
    I won't go into much details but would like to cite an example in this connection. Suppose your best friend has stopped talking to you due to some misunderstanding. You have two options left. You can either leave it at that or can arrange for a meeting with your friend to find out the problem, discuss the issue and sort it out. It is in this situation that problems like ego etc comes into play. If after finding out the basis of discord, you are able to convince your friend and he is ready to be convinced as to what has actually gone wrong, then the discussion is a success and you will become good friends again. At the same time if both of you try to justify your stand irrespective of who is right and who is wrong, the discussion will be a failure and you will never be able to renew your friendship.
    So, what I mean to say is that, we cannot say as such that a discussion is meaningless; it actually depends on the character and attitude of the persons participating in a discussion.
    Another point is that the nature of discussions vary according to the topic/ issue involved, the persons involved and also whether it is between persons or groups or between nations. The requirements and criteria are different and has to be approached accordingly.

    'Knowing others is wisdom, knowing yourself is Enlightenment'- Lao Tzu

  • #588317
    It does if the listener is actually listening. 3+5=8, but so is 6+2. We all can arrive at same conclusion through different paths. So sharing our paths might give birth to better shortcuts for our destination. But people don't quite listen to you. Surveys say that merely 20% of your whole conversation is remembered by your friends. The majority of your opinions were deleted long ago from their brains. So it is really important to sit and discuss with people about your opinions. They might correct your flaws or get themselves corrected instead.
    The stronger a light shines the darker are the shadows around it.

  • #588322
    In many times it works out but the either party is adamant in his side, the discussion though many times results in vein. But in some cases the discussion in person is wise as the other person would come to a conclusion on the other side person by believing others words or would come to a hasty generalization. sometimes persons will come to a conclusion without hearing the other side by thinking that they are correct always, in such situation personal discussion will be useful.

  • Sign In to post your comments