What dialogue is #1: A Map of Conversation Types
What dialogue is #1: A Map of Conversation Types
“How do I know what I think, until I hear what I say” - E. M. Forster
As you’ll see, when I’m thinking about and talking about “dialogue” I mean generative dialogue. Much of the time I’m wanting, or encouraging or hoping for “conversation” I’m thinking of the best possible conversation, which to me is a generative dialogue.
In previous posts about dialogue and what it is not, I’m trying to point out that much of the time our conversations or any back and forths we’re participating in are on a spectrum somewhere between low quality and the highest possible quality.
When I was in undergrad I think I came to develop a feel for when a class, and all classes were discussion-based, was good or not. When we really got down into the text we were talking about. When we broke new ground, stayed focused on understanding the author’s message or project rather than flitting about topic to topic or hearsay to hearsay or when one person dominated with their unrelated opinions or assumptions. Some classes were really good. I’d leave with a feeling of wow. I really understand this topic or book or reading better than when I had just read it alone. I’m experiencing new understanding. New learning. I’m growing. This is fun.
It is like unwrapping a gift. I didn’t know what was covered. Now I do. Unfolding a text or a topic to uncover newness is like that too.
While I developed a sense for learningful conversations like this over my 4 years at St John’s, it wasn’t until I read William Isaacs’ Dialogue: The Art of Thinking Together that I really saw someone lay out explicitly and intricately what I had been sensing all along.
Towards the end of Isaacs’ first chapter in his book he has the following map of conversation types:
I love it because, only through contrast does anything ever really become clear to me. I always need my opportunity cost to be super clear to really get it.
In subsequent posts I’ll walk each of these paths to explore them in more depth. At the moment what I want to emphasize is that all conversations are not the same. And just because, all too often, too many of your conversations seem to lead to tension, beating down, or just generally power struggles rather than new understanding, doesn’t mean that must be the case always. With this map you can begin to intentionally choose the path you prefer to the kind of conversation you wish to have.
What does all this have to do with my reading life??? Everything. As the quote by EM Forster points out, what better way to digest a book and come to realize what I think about the book and the author’s message than through conversation. If I’ve only had defensive conversations or debates, I’m likely not having the kind of conversation I need to have to be really digesting what I’m reading. When I say talk about what you read, I mean something very specific. I mean getting somewhere new in a “Generative Dialogue”.
