Who said it's funner to interpret people so you can agree with them?
October 15, 2008 3:10 AM Subscribe
QuotationFilter: Who said it's more fun to construe people so that you can agree with them, than to argue with them? (I believe this was couched as a private mental game useful for dealing with boors.)
Response by poster: Thanks, but that's not it. It is Sarah Palin's primary debating strategy, however...
Can anyone else help? AskMeFi, don't fail me now!
posted by rwhe at 11:16 AM on October 15, 2008
Can anyone else help? AskMeFi, don't fail me now!
posted by rwhe at 11:16 AM on October 15, 2008
Best answer: I wonder if you're thinking of George Miller, frequently quoted in various contexts by Suzette Hadin Elgin.
Psychologist George Miller long ago said something so important that I call it Miller's Law; he said, "In order to understand what another person is saying, you must assume that it is true and try to find out what it could be true of." That is, when somebody says, "Hey! My toaster talks to me!", your proper response is a neutral "Oh? What does your toaster say?" Followed by careful listening, with your full attention. You're not accepting as true the statement that the person's toaster talks to him or her; you're assuming temporarily that it is true, and then you're listening carefully to find out what the statement could be true of.
posted by tangerine at 1:30 PM on October 15, 2008 [4 favorites]
Psychologist George Miller long ago said something so important that I call it Miller's Law; he said, "In order to understand what another person is saying, you must assume that it is true and try to find out what it could be true of." That is, when somebody says, "Hey! My toaster talks to me!", your proper response is a neutral "Oh? What does your toaster say?" Followed by careful listening, with your full attention. You're not accepting as true the statement that the person's toaster talks to him or her; you're assuming temporarily that it is true, and then you're listening carefully to find out what the statement could be true of.
posted by tangerine at 1:30 PM on October 15, 2008 [4 favorites]
Response by poster: tangerine, that wasn't the quotation, but it's pretty close in concept and spirit to the one i was thinking of. The quotation I have in mind was a bit more playful, and I think it implied you ought to construe the speaker's remarks as true even if you can't obtain feedback from the speaker.
Thanks!
posted by rwhe at 3:10 PM on October 15, 2008
Thanks!
posted by rwhe at 3:10 PM on October 15, 2008
Response by poster: tangerine: On second thought, bingo! I googled Miller's Law and found the more concise and witty version I remembered:
"In order to understand what another person is saying, you must assume that it is true, and try to imagine what it could be true of."
You made my day. Thank you very much!
posted by rwhe at 3:15 PM on October 15, 2008
"In order to understand what another person is saying, you must assume that it is true, and try to imagine what it could be true of."
You made my day. Thank you very much!
posted by rwhe at 3:15 PM on October 15, 2008
Response by poster: Um, if I had read your answer more carefully, I would have seen you used the same quotation I did. I got lost in that stuff about toasters.
Sorry, and thanks again!
posted by rwhe at 3:18 PM on October 15, 2008
Sorry, and thanks again!
posted by rwhe at 3:18 PM on October 15, 2008
Of course, some people think it's more fun to do much the opposite.
posted by eritain at 4:46 PM on October 15, 2008
posted by eritain at 4:46 PM on October 15, 2008
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by acro at 5:54 AM on October 15, 2008 [1 favorite]