A benefit to me during the years I was a candidate for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree, was that I held the status of a graduate student in the university, but also was a professor of rank in a college. I was admitted not only to student status, but professional as well which permitted me to interact with professors, principally in the fields of rhetoric, history and communications, at both a personal and extended professional level. (I am grateful.) In this context I learned patterns of academic life I had not thought about before. I discovered that many experienced professors held back with students, for the reason that the students were not sufficiently tuned in to the full event of learning. There was an inner and outer distraction in the student that prevented the full experience of education. This may be failure about personal obligation to dedicate some energy and perception to one’s own betrayal of the communication event. It is common to resist giving time to the event: listening in a way to understand what is being communicated; weakening emotional attachment one holds to whatever avoids objectivity; and, underestimating what the outcome of the exchange may mean. Other factors also exacerbate the problems.
Well over fifty years ago, I interacted with Professor Ralph Nichols of the University of Minnesota. Nichols had specialized in the study of listening skills, and almost singlehandedly opened the subject of listening to the general public. He made a presentation at a conference in Oregon that struck the related fields like a bolt. He wrote a book on listening that captured broad attention, and made him eminent for the purpose of improving both teaching and practicing listening skills. We traveled together on one occasion to a Forensic Conference. One could tell that he labored a bit under the disappointment that the students tended toward listening more to respond to win a tourney than to understand the points being made. In that choice they sometimes missed the point, likely ascribing to the opponent their own interpretations. That is the way it is in general society. Studies and articles have appeared on the tendency of persons to find that which they can either agree to, because they already believe it, or they hear what they dislike so prepare to attack the point. The meaning and context of the presentation may be ignored. Recently a therapist, also with the name of Nichols (Michael, of William and Mary), has also written, long after Ralph Nichols, on the subject: The Lost Art of Listening. It expands well on the intimations and interpretations above
My own lectures on listening, used with both Christian and secular audiences, accent the use of questioning in order to determine if the listener has objectively understood what has been said; has taken enough time to evaluate as the exchange proceeds; and accommodated for the emotional features sometimes accented in the way an argument is presented. This last includes the body and voice, the language used, and the use of a vital factor for learning – search for truth. To guess about the matter, about half of the questions I have asked are answered. Persons seem to have already decided all they want to say in the time available.
Communication of the Christian faith, in the search for truth and its declaration has not appeared quite as it ought. Some of the fault is in the hearer, who really has decided (inwardly if not consciously) that he doesn’t want to listen with care. Jesus, when encountering that attitude, moved on to the next village. But the problem is often found in the communicator who is expectant of the best from the listener. He or she is not likely going to get the best. We need to compensate for the human condition, so to be clear, presenting a firm position; practicing an attractive redundancy; holding openness to listen to other persons effectively, even extending exchange so to show objectivity; admitting waived material and remembering the difficulty in applying that which is revealed to mankind under God in faith. That approach seeks truth, and becomes inviting even with human limitations. Success of many gifted advocates (including parents) is lost in their ignorance of what makes persons appealing to each other. We fail in various important contexts of our lives because the sheer quantity of this or that makes us feel that any use of it will be effective. In this droll attitude we foul air and water; we waste time and energy; and, we manage communication (reading and writing/speaking and listening) as though the vast quantity is enough. It isn’t. There is a difference between communicating for declaration, and communicating for proving *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020