Communication

The first “hack” I bring into topic, is a revamp of general sharing of information.

Communication is a skill developed by many living beings. As of today, the human race is the virtuoso of communication methods, creating visual, sound and synesthesical systems which eventually led to the creation of languages. Examples of the fantastic and complex languages created by humans are:

-Drawing

-Letters

-Numbers

-Music

-Mimic

The extensive number of different languages and languages created cultural niches, and at the same time, cultural barriers, culminating into different communities of humans, with different communication methods, different costumes and habits, leading ultimately to our “globalized” present time.

And, how does our methods of communication, extensively complex and efficient, fare today? Our present time, where we're constantly showered with information through many mediatic vehicles, where the simple act of looking is constantly busy, and where we ourselves throw huge quantities of information into the environment.

Is it efficient??

After answering myself, in a flash reaction, my skull computer processed that little awesome code. Then I suddenly remembered about Semiotics. According to this remarkable science, for communication to occur, the following 3 things need to (co)exist:

A speaker or mediator - The information itself - A receiver or listener

I put here in a very crude and resumed way of explaining, but it's obvious and easy to understand. Having those 3 things together is the common ground of communication. Assigning a problem to such wide concepts won't give me any clues for this conundrum. So, where lies the inefficiency of communication? Is it too much method availability? Is it too much deceiving? Is it too much different people? Is it everything?

Is it... me?

Like a tenacious Buddhist (where the fault always lies within myself), the little code started to question everything. After re-reading about Semiotics and all the main branches of language studies, soon enough, I tried to break down to the simplest form all capabilities of generating and passing information. In my apparently(surely) procrastinating mind, 3 simple words appeared.

Thoughts, Words, Actions.

And, suddenly, the volatile element was clear as Chloromethane!

Thoughts are generated into your mind based on your experience and knowledge acquiring. Since thoughts tend remain into your head (lexically, at least), they are not subject to deception, due to incomplete communication. Actions are part of a full semiotic cycle. Regardless of their nature. they can be (re)traced, and misunderstanding and misguiding are very possible, but the uncovering can happen much faster.

So, the problem lies on words, or, speech, if you prefer a down-to-earth, realistic bullshit pointing word. The spoken, written, declared or even sung words are, credibility-wise the most volatile, free-flowing piece of information. And, in this highly competitive, wild and ruthless world, one may just wonder that a level of deception might occur.

If you think of how words work for us, in terms of survival (our main code), they can be used as advantage, by controlling the true nature of a thought, or an action(or happening). It's a helpful 2-way tool, efficient for “good” and for “bad” motives. This seems very similar to something used a lot today for profit, called:

Marketing.

This rain of apparent obvious thoughts was pouring on the plains of my ravaged cortex. And it was an awesome thing, comparing propaganda with common spoken gestures, analyzing the nature of some constructed phrases and (awkward) situations, re-realizing that accuracy of information is not a primary requirement, and that the receivers of information would have a hard time trying to figure out all of these s....

Wait...

That got me thinking about the listener as well, which is not a lifeless sponge of data. Quickly, I broke the listening of info in few stages, just like the mediators:

Listening, Pondering, Judgement.

Those 3 words have a certain correlation with the mediator's 3 words. But, in the listener's case the most problematic element is judgement. For listeners, especially ones who know about the nature of words and marketing, the phase of pondering gets careless (due to lifelong experience) and judgement becomes an almost unchangeable entity. When dealing with lies, deception, malice and other confidence-destroying terms (main subjects of future posts), judgement acts as a shield-bearer for the listener, standing tall and firm, very close to intolerance and pride.

It's no wonder listeners become skeptical towards bullshit, and it's no surprise speakers tend to buy confidence with actions, instead of words. And since everyone are speakers and listeners at all times semiotic warfare is rampant and seems remotely prone to change. Unless...

We hack our brains!

No absolutist and romanticist behavior like “Thou shalt not lie” or “Never trust anyone” is needed.

My proposal is simple, but is not something common to do. Some mental training might be required to get it right.

“Make the meaning of words lighter”

“Volatilize the semantics”

Or, simply

“Don't take things too personally”

It seems awfully simple and unrealistic, but tell me:

How many of you feel offended by certain words?

How many of you feel happy by certain comments?

How many of you feel trusted by certain displays of respect or affection?

Everyone, right?

So, there lies the constant! The constant that makes smart mediators control people's feelings and even actions. The constant that makes stubborn listeners act like complete assholes to protect themselves. Quick judgement, based on experience of growth and insufficient pondering! 

In order to defend our character from the beasts known as (goddamn) humans, we learn to identify and judge everything that brings our spirits up and down, for our own sanity and steadiness of mind. A.K.A: growing up. So, due to confidence, created by past experiences, the process of pondering becomes almost nonexistent, just like when we face obvious statements! A fountain of opportunity for people with good command of languages.

By pondering first the nature of a statement (thinking before buying, literally), one may not need to go overboard reaction-wise, if he grasps the intent of the mediator. The intent is a shard of the might be concealed truth (and most of the time, our brains have the ability to shape the whole thing). Trying to identify it, without losing focus to offensive or praising remarks is the best way to learn good language and communication skills, and thus effectively hacking your brain (who usually is on dog or cat mode, facing certain statements).

Basically this allows you to “play chess” with information. To read moves before they are played. To avoid confrontation and raise self and mutual awareness. To understand subtle messages. To lose the need to threat or deceive. To judge words or propaganda correctly, based on their intent and not their literality, To respect everyone. To have true self-confidence.

That, my friends, help me all the time with everything I think, speak, do, listen, ponder and judge!

For a practical example, I ask you to read the text again, now with this method on mind. Just try, and remember to use the little question a lot.

Some little hints: try to guess if the use of the word “language” on the 2^nd paragraph was a typo or not. Or why did I never actually wrote “three”. Or even why did I used italic for a certain word every time it repeated.

And lastly...

Try to figure out how did I answer the question in the first part of the text. :)