Unless they’re deliberately lying, people always believe they’re saying what they mean.
I don’t think this is true at all. I think such people believe they’re saying something close enough to what they actually mean, and that social conventions don’t require them to take care to make their language as unambiguous as possible. This last part is the problem.
I think the default is something like believing that what one says is close enough to what one means, and the other person is obligated to pick up on what one means.
I think the default is something like believing that what one says is close enough to what one means, and the other person is obligated to pick up on what one means.
“If they don’t they clearly lack ingroup connections, social awareness, status and are less likely to be the kind of people that are valuable allies. I should shun them.” (For example.)
“If they don’t they clearly lack ingroup connections, social awareness, status and are less likely to be the kind of people that are valuable allies. I should shun them.”
Yup. Not consciously, of course. I wonder if, generally, speaking, people don’t instinctively distinguish between not knowing something and not caring about it. Hence ignorance of facts being conflated with stupidity about a topic, as well as the instinctive avoidance of people who don’t already know the social rules of a community.
I wonder if, generally, speaking, people don’t instinctively distinguish between not knowing something and not caring about it
That’s plausible—it would also explain way sometimes people try to increase motivation (reward, punishment, pep talks) without explaining how to do whatever it is.
I think the default is something like believing that what one says is close enough to what one means, and the other person is obligated to pick up on what one means.
I agree. I also think this is the source of the stereotypical male/female communication problem (“he never thinks about what I want” “she never tells me what she wants”), which I’ve posted about elsewhere.
I think the default is something like believing that what one says is close enough to what one means, and the other person is obligated to pick up on what one means.
“If they don’t they clearly lack ingroup connections, social awareness, status and are less likely to be the kind of people that are valuable allies. I should shun them.” (For example.)
Yup. Not consciously, of course. I wonder if, generally, speaking, people don’t instinctively distinguish between not knowing something and not caring about it. Hence ignorance of facts being conflated with stupidity about a topic, as well as the instinctive avoidance of people who don’t already know the social rules of a community.
That’s plausible—it would also explain way sometimes people try to increase motivation (reward, punishment, pep talks) without explaining how to do whatever it is.
It can work that way. Or “If I keep repeating the same words, they’ll get it.” Or “If I yell at them, they’ll get it.”
I agree. I also think this is the source of the stereotypical male/female communication problem (“he never thinks about what I want” “she never tells me what she wants”), which I’ve posted about elsewhere.