The Two Reasons Why We Want Words To Come Out Our Mouths

There are two reasons why we communicate. Just two. Every time something comes out of our mouths, if we track back the incentive for doing this, can be categorised into two boxes:

1. To make someone think something (to convey information).
2. To make someone feel something.

If we're really good, we can do both at the same time. Martin Luther King informed us about discrimation and unfairness whilst creating a strong emotional attachment to this information as well.

This realisation got me thinking about what most of us talk about in every-day lives. Our romantic conversation, the conversations down the pub, the conversations with our co-workers. I realised that I have a very strong tendancy towards wanting to always communicate for the use of conveying information: I'm a thinker a lot more than a feeler. I prefer intellectual stimulation rather than being moved emotionally when talking.

This explains a lot - it explains why I've always hated banter. I've always said that banter is boring as it can only go two ways if you want to be successful: someone insults you and you insult back, or they insult you and you play along. If you want a quick demise, you get upset by what they say. But this filter that I use to deconstruct information completely removes the emotional side of the conversation. No wonder I find it boring.

It also got me thinking about the correct use in applying conversation for intellectual stimulation, and applying it for emotional stimulation. If I'm on tinder, I've always found it weird that not many people want to talk about their ambitions and goals: it's too close to the planning, intellectual side of using our brain. Elon Musk once joked that he went on a date with someone and just asked, "what do you think about electric cars?" Understandibly - it didn't go down too well.

Sadly - for me - it turns out that a lot of people don't enjoy using conversation for intellectual stimulation. Given the amount of people I've met, I'd say that I was able to engage with only about 10% on an intellectual level. The rest just weren't that bothered. They'd only want to use that side of things for work, and then move back to the emotional side of things. As the philsopher Edward De Bono said, "the purpose of thinking is to abolish thinking". We go to work and think so that we can pay for ourselves not to think for the rest of the day. Maybe they're on to something.