And you are right about me saying that you feel the responsibility lies 100% with the communicator. I arrived to that conclusion because of your first reply when you said things like “I have to lay the blame for that misunderstanding squarely on my own doorstep.” But when I reread it I saw that you were talking about the responsibility of choosing the right word, not the entire process of communication. You later stated that the receiver has responsibility too.

Thanks guys!

The only thing I would quibble with is you stated my position as being “All the responsibility is with the Communicator” and I would refine that to say “Most or a majority of the responsibility is with the Communicator.” I want to be sure that it is noted that I feel the Receiver has a responsibility also.

I like your turn of phrase “Blame Game” because I recognize that that in fact, happens quite a bit. I would hope some day for a world where all parties can stop, take a deep breath and start over paying better attention and honestly trying to understand what each other is saying and meaning as opposed to constantly looking for the “Gatchas!”

Dirk feels, and I’m paraphrasing so correct me if I am wrong, that all of the responsibility lies with with communicator being that they are the ones with the message to communicate. Even if they choose the “right” words to convey their meaning, it is still their fault (for lack of better word) if the receiver does not understand the message. The communicator should know his audience.

Brittany also feels that the sole responsibility lies with the communicator being that it is never the receiver’s fault when the wrong words are used. But she points out that we all have different associations than eachother to each word. And that is the main reason why there is miscommunication. The communicator should put on his filter

My point I think is somewhat of an elaboration on Britt’s theory and how to handle the situation once a miscommunication arises. First, I agree that a big reason for miscommunication is subjective definitions but I also think that limited vocabulary is another big factor. and because of that I feel that not all of the blame can be laid on the communicator (this is where I differ from you guys). Of course the communicator should ALWAYS try to find the right words for their message and audience but even when they do choose the right words (or the perfect word in their personal vocabulary) it is possible for it to be the wrong word for the receiver. My point is that a communicator can only go so far until he has to give up the power of word definition and hand it over to the receiver. At that point the receiver adds his own associations to the word. If there was an agreed upon definition of every word in every situation in every culture then I can see how it would be the communicator’s responsibility to choose the right word but given that we all have different definitions, the communicator can only find what they believe is the best word and hope that the receiver has the same definition. But if the receiver has a different definition of a word, then it is not entirely the communicator’s fault.

The main reason for my post, which Dirk picked up on, is how to handle the situation once a miscommunication arises. It is the responsibility of the communicator to choose their words carefully and to clarify their meaning; and it is also the responsibility of the receiver to do active listening as well as give the communicator the opportunity the clarify his meaning. If you aren’t going to listen right then don’t listen at all, so to speak. And when one party, either the communicator or the receiver, does not uphold their responsibility then it is pointless for the other party to engage in further discussion.

Just my personal opinion.

I don’t have any huge issues with any of your positions here and I do have to say that is an extremely well written and thought out post.

I am reminded how much our language is a fluid thing that changes almost daily. Today we might say “That is bad!” meaning “That is really good!” A person standing next to you might see your body language and your facial expressions and understand that the words you used are really conveying a different meaning then what Webster defines it as. Further our language changes at different rates in different regions. A person in Wisconsin might talk about getting a drink from a “bubbler” while a person from California would wonder what they are talking about. This all goes back to my point of knowing your audience.

I agree with you that definitions are subjective. But I need to know how my audience will define the words I am using and as the Communicator, I feel, it’s my responsibility to use words and phrases that will best convey my meaning to them. If I fail in doing that then it’s my fault not theirs. I’m the one trying to communicate. I need to do everything I can to do that effectively.

I also agree with your point about the speaker being able to forgive themselves quickly while the listener is not so quick to forgive. I see this kind of thing almost daily. I guess my response would be: If someone wrongs me with words, then comes back and genuinely apologizes and shows an honest effort to correct their words and shows remorse, then I’ll forgive them and move on. Conversely if it’s pointed out to me that the words I used were hurtful (and I wasn’t actually trying to be hurtful) I’ll apologize sincerely, show remorse that my words were hurtful and then try again to communicate the issue that needs to be communicated but I’ll also change the words so as not to offend or cause hurt.

This is a little off track from the subject of the original post but it hits at the point you were making above and that is, I think even more important than the initial communication is the follow up dialog to hammer down what the points of contention and true meanings are. This is a give and take process where both sides get to play both roles of Communicator and Receiver. To effectively play both roles one must be willing to make mistakes and be willing to accept that the other side will make mistakes. This is a very difficult thing for most people to do. I believe as a culture we have this bizarre attraction and like to being wronged. People tend to hold onto that feeling (of being wronged) forever. My guess is there is some comfort in believing where someone stands and it’s easier to close down and hate then it is to open up and take a chance at being hurt again.

This is a very interesting discussion

below i will post the blog i wrote a few years back on my phrase “communijunction”.
my theory comes from years of experience with verbal leakage. sometimes that leakage (whether honest or not) is offensive or misunderstood. i do not blame the ears it falls on, ever. but what i do find to be a factor missing in your post is (forgive my simplification) unique brain function. because our neurological maps are all unique. our experience with red is different, our experience with trust is different, our experience with what is real or actual is different.
what i’m saying is that, despite our reliance on them, definitions are subjective. and subjectiveness muddies the communicative waters. and that my dear, is the most active player in the conflict game. and most of the time we have no clue he is even playing. it’s like dark energy, pulling us apart while were blaming gravity or God or space creatures.

okay. enough from the me of today. here is my communijunction post from days past:

A comedian once made an auditorium of thousands laugh by flipping a phrase. I can’t remember specifically what the phrase was, but for example I’ll do my own. My car is parked in the waydrive. See, flipped. He ended with, ” they’re just words, they don’t control us”. But, oh how they do.

Words start wars, break up marriages, cause trust fund babies in reality shows to have public tabloid banter, etc. As the generations become more loose lipped it is harder and harder to keep friends, and keep friends from trashing you when you are away. I don’t think our not-quite up-right ancestors dreamed of a way of communicating so we could use our words as weapons. They already had rocks.

We are self involved to the fullest. We think of ourselves and those directly involved with us all day. The problem is, while we are quick, very quick, to forgive ourselves for what stupid shit may come out of our mouths at any given point, we are not so generous with others. I once, in one way or another told a girlfriend of a close relative that she was a selfish spoiled child, a horrible and immature thing to say. But hey, it was during a very heated argument where she was acting like said child and I forgave myself for the verbal dysentery. She probably has not, understandably. This is the problem, not her, the communijunction; where my meaning meets her interpretation.

Tell me, when was the last time you changed the filter on that mouth of yours? Is everything coming out clear as water? Think of it this way; We all speak a different version of the same language. The word trust may mean ‘complete’ to me, and ‘always’ to you. Try can mean ‘best’ to me and ‘do’ to you. I can say yes but mean no, but also want yes enough to sway. Do you see where things just get lost in translation?

Unless you mean everything you say and say everthing you mean, don’t hold every word against another because he is going to forgive himself and move on.

As a sometimes public speaker, and a frequent public author, I recognize that my words (either written or spoken) can be taken different ways. As a speaker it is absolutely 100% my responsibility to pick and choose the words that best define the meaning I am trying to get across. If there is a majority (or even a small plurality) of misunderstanding from my meaning then I have to lay the blame for that misunderstanding squarely on my own doorstep.

If I say “I like red fruit” and someone hears that and sends me a bag of cherries when I was meaning apples, (I personally detest cherries) then the miscommunication was completely my fault and I have no valid reason for getting angry or upset at the individual for sending me cherries. I did, after all, say I liked red fruit and cherries are, after all, red fruit.

As an author and a speaker I am constantly on the lookout for words and sentences that I use that can be misconstrued to have meanings different then what I intended. I sometimes succeed at finding them before I post or say them but I sometimes fail. The important thing that I have found is when I do use words that are misinterpreted to “fess up” as quickly as possible. Something along the lines of; “Yeah, I just reread what I wrote and boy did that come out wrong. Here’s what I meant…..” or “Did that come out as bad as I think it sounded? Let me rephrase that. This is what I meant….”

My experience is that most people understand that we sometimes communicate poorly or use words with multiple meanings and as long as we admit it was a bad choice of words and attempt to correct the perception all is well. One has to actually admit to using poor language though. Telling others that they are the ones in the wrong for my own poor choice of words or sentence structure is pretty bad form and in my experience will be met with more friction and conflict.

On the other side of the argument though is the Receiver. They also have a responsibility to do their best to try and discern what the Communicator is really trying to get across. Unfortunately they are severely handicapped in that all they have to work with are the written or spoken words. This especially comes into play when the Communicator is a stranger to the Receiver. They have no standard or basis on which to fall back on to apply more accurate meanings and so MUST apply strict definition rules to anything said or written. That’s why, in my opinion, a vast majority of the responsibility of correct communication, falls on the Communicator and not as much on the Receiver. The Receiver still has a responsibility, but that responsibility ends at an honest (and honest is in bold) attempt to discern the Communicators meaning.

Good post. Interesting insight you give.

ADR: You are right I did use the word “chose” and I did it unconsciously. I guess I believe that we all chose to believe or not to believe. Personally I don’t know DEFINITIVELY that God exists but I chose to believe that he does based on what has happened in my life up until now. I am the type of person who believes is right in believing in God’s existence but is not judgemental at all in other’s disbelieving his existence because of two reasons:

1. we can never really know. I fully accept the possibility that I am wrong and there is some other god/non-god out there that “created” the universe

2. I believe in living our lives with love and morality. Whatever it takes for a person to live their life that way doesn’t matter to me, so long as they have found the path in their life that feels right to them and encourages them to be good

The question that always gets me when discussing God’s existence is: If God is omnipotent, can He create a rock that is so heavy that He can’t lift it?