How do far less intelligent people fascinate you? Is it because they know something that you don't, and/or are able to see things in ways that are new to you? Or perhaps they are less concerned about evaluating the level (in anything) of the other party?
If I was sitting next to Tiger Woods I would probably talk very little about golf, knowing that we share little in common in that area and would make for a very one-way conversation. Perhaps, then, it would appear that I have interesting things to say, although the whole time I am a golf idiot (or sports idiot, or math idiot, whatever).
If I was sitting next to Tiger Woods I would probably talk very little about golf...
If I sat next to Tiger Woods I would talk about the weather and the menu for a minute or two, but then I'd certainly introduce the topic of golf and see what happened. It could be that Tiger loves nothing more than to talk about golf. He is freakishly obsessed with golf, after all.
The result might turn out to be a "one-way conversation". So what? People really like to talk about the things they love. If you listen intently and ask questions that indicate you're following along, they'll love you for it, even if the questions are basic.
The secret is to be alert for signs that your conversation partner is trying to change the subject. If I ask Tiger about golf and he responds with a few quick sentences and then asks about the music that's playing on the radio it's probably time to talk about something else.
I was drawing an analogy though, to pick on cperciva's post. It isn't so hard to see that the contradiction he writes about isn't so much of a contradiction, which is surprising to read from someone who is obviously very intelligent.
Comments
How do far less intelligent people fascinate you? Is it because they know something that you don't, and/or are able to see things in ways that are new to you? Or perhaps they are less concerned about evaluating the level (in anything) of the other party?
If I was sitting next to Tiger Woods I would probably talk very little about golf, knowing that we share little in common in that area and would make for a very one-way conversation. Perhaps, then, it would appear that I have interesting things to say, although the whole time I am a golf idiot (or sports idiot, or math idiot, whatever).
Or is it something different?
If I was sitting next to Tiger Woods I would probably talk very little about golf...
If I sat next to Tiger Woods I would talk about the weather and the menu for a minute or two, but then I'd certainly introduce the topic of golf and see what happened. It could be that Tiger loves nothing more than to talk about golf. He is freakishly obsessed with golf, after all.
The result might turn out to be a "one-way conversation". So what? People really like to talk about the things they love. If you listen intently and ask questions that indicate you're following along, they'll love you for it, even if the questions are basic.
The secret is to be alert for signs that your conversation partner is trying to change the subject. If I ask Tiger about golf and he responds with a few quick sentences and then asks about the music that's playing on the radio it's probably time to talk about something else.
Touche.
I was drawing an analogy though, to pick on cperciva's post. It isn't so hard to see that the contradiction he writes about isn't so much of a contradiction, which is surprising to read from someone who is obviously very intelligent.