Meaningful conversations can start with two people.

Meaningful conversations can start with two people. Simplifying a topic so that everyone can understand it eliminates specific details and makes the discussion too abstract

• Meaningful conversations can start with two people, and the highest level of topics is at the boundary between one and two people.
• Here communication has a 50/50 chance of success.
• A no one in the community understands.
• B is one person understands and responds, and the dialogue has begun.
• C is what everyone understands, so anyone can respond.
• The most advanced topic on which dialogue can take place is B
• But “what others can understand” is uncertain, so the borderline between A and B is blurred, and it’s 50-50 whether it gets across.
• So “not getting the message” naturally occurs.
• Is “going through” allowed when “not getting the message” is not?
  • When there is an air of “don’t go through with it,” it puts a burden on the receiver.
    • I have to comment on something I don’t understand.
      • When I react in this air, I’m at a loss for an answer.なるほどですねーということを言いそう
      • Listeners express discomfort with what they don’t understand.
    • Seeing this, the speaker slams on the brakes, saying, “Let’s not overburden them.
  • Conversely, it is also a problem when there is an expectation that the speaker will not “go through with it”.
    • Negative feelings about being through.
• What are the vertical and horizontal axes?
  • Vertical Axis: Topic Level?
  • Horizontal axis: Topic?
  • Curve: is the area under the curve the area the person understands?
    • 3 yes - Knowledge Distribution Chart

I think I’ve been able to verbalize why it’s important to have banter that is allowed to pass through.

We can connect it to the need for through-tolerance.

• Because it creates a situation where “no one catches half of what you say.”

T:

• Eliminates the pressure to feel like you have to “guess” someone to make a statement.
• Ah, but if the statement S is based on A, B, and C, then anyone who goes through any of ABC will also go through S, and that seems like a loss!
  • N: Just to confirm, Tachikawa-san’s ABC refers to “thoughts that are components of S” regardless of the diagram, right?
    • T: Yes
• The highest level of the topic is the borderline between one and two people This is just S. You can’t get there without going through and accepting all the logical developments leading up to it.
• What does it mean to go through with it in the first place?
  • see What is through N:
• “You have to ‘get there’ in advance” is only the case with voice communication, which disappears, while with text communication, the process can be traced back after the useful S is created. T:
• In that case, it seems unlikely that S will find it beneficial N:
• There are tons of beneficial things in the world, and we all live our lives unaware of most of them.

next: Positive inertia

relevance - Difference between a two-person conversation and a three-person conversation - I can only accept knowledge that is one step ahead of what I have now.

---

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/有意義な会話は2人から始めることができる using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.