If you want to be an effective communicator, it may be a good idea to speak to different people differently. Brutal honesty works for some people. Other people will just get so upset or defensive that they'll stop thinking or choose not to associate with you.
I'd suggest that when it comes to manners and you don't know the other party that well, you might benefit from playing your cards as conservatively as you can given the time you have available. You can get ... blunter ... a lot more easily than you can take back hurting someone's feelings.
> Actively fostering a culture of "no filter" is painful at first. But like exercising, the more you do it, the easier it gets. And it's better than the alternative — death.
Supposedly, old Chinese courts used to communicate with the Emperor via the interpretation of heavenly portents. I seem to remember that the fool in some European courts was meant to criticise the ruler too.
Whether true or not, however, in either of those cases you'd be abstracting the filter out into a procedure and avoiding retaliation from the ruler.
If you think that the problem is that people have their egos invested in particular solutions, then I suppose that you could take approaches liable to lessen attachment in the generation stage too.
Anyway, I'm not really sure that the only alternative to no filter is death, is what I'm saying ^^; (Though it seems plausible that the alternative to no honesty is.)
I'd suggest that when it comes to manners and you don't know the other party that well, you might benefit from playing your cards as conservatively as you can given the time you have available. You can get ... blunter ... a lot more easily than you can take back hurting someone's feelings.
> Actively fostering a culture of "no filter" is painful at first. But like exercising, the more you do it, the easier it gets. And it's better than the alternative — death.
Supposedly, old Chinese courts used to communicate with the Emperor via the interpretation of heavenly portents. I seem to remember that the fool in some European courts was meant to criticise the ruler too.
Whether true or not, however, in either of those cases you'd be abstracting the filter out into a procedure and avoiding retaliation from the ruler.
If you think that the problem is that people have their egos invested in particular solutions, then I suppose that you could take approaches liable to lessen attachment in the generation stage too.
Anyway, I'm not really sure that the only alternative to no filter is death, is what I'm saying ^^; (Though it seems plausible that the alternative to no honesty is.)