View Single Post
Old 01-06-2013, 06:41 PM
NovemberRain's Avatar
NovemberRain NovemberRain is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 712

Originally Posted by River View Post
I think it is good that you are aware of this about yourself. It may be that you are somewhere near the low end of the "verbal spectrum," as I informally call it. A "high verbal" person (like myself) is a person who has developed verbal communication skills to a fairly high level. That is, they know a fair bit about how to translate or interpret experience in language. (Language, as I see it, is grounded in experience.)

Being low verbal is not anything to be ashamed of. Nor is it a permanent and unchangable condition. It just happens to be that some people are temperamentally inclined to develop their verbal skills/intelligence to a high level while others are more inclined to develop other skill sets which are not so much verbal.
I had to sit with this quite awhile to respond. I am so not low verbal. I have, as I've aged, become more careful to choose my words. Currently, at work, I have an employee who pretty much suffers from verbal diarrhea. She cannot stop. I have tried saying, 'yes, you told me blahdyblah' and she has to go back to the beginning. She's incapable of adjusting her wordstream to be appropriate to the conversation. It's quite a challenge; and also an illumination for me to be more precise.

I was referring more something like NLP, which describes how a person uses their senses. I am actually highly kinesthetic, which is a feeling sense; and I have a highly developed visual/verbal, because (I believe, because) most of the world operates in the visual, and I am highly adaptive, and have learned (well) to function in a visual/verbal world.

I tend to hang out with people of very high intelligence, and while I am intelligent, I often feel like I'm barely qualified. My formal education doesn't nearly approach the education that my parents had, or my friends. I often feel that I'm just smart enough to not appear stupid. [I've been working on it all my life, it's not a huge deal ~ I'm just trying to show 'where I come from']

Because I'm kinesthetic, and intuitive, I often don't have the words to explain how I reached any given conclusion or point. Hanging out with intelligent people, who are trained in logic and debate, leaves me feeling that I'm less precise. But certainly not less verbal.

Originally Posted by River View Post
Language is rarely "specific or precise," even when weilded by masters. But its masters understand this, and so don't expect or demand the sorts of precision which are inappropriate to the available tools. That said, it can be extremely helpful to try using language to convey one's thinking -- both to one's self and with others. "Convey", here is an interesting word, as it suggests communication and imparting, but also laying down a path in which discovery and understanding may emerge. Here I have a mental image of a "conveyance" (bicycle, car...) and a road or trail. In some respects the conveyance and the road or trail are intertwined, such that each emerge together. Neither quite exists without the other. Verbal thinking is what allows us to understand experience in the verbal form. Dancing is one way to understand non-verbal thinking, somatic thinking.... Visual arts and music have their own modes of non-verbal thinking, etc....

Originally Posted by River View Post
I've dabbled in the study of philosophy, and while dabbling in it I came to understand that the very notion of the possibility of non-cognitive knowledge is controversial among professional philosophers / academics. But I'm actually quite comfortable embracing a concept of knowledge which allows for knowledge to be either cognitive or non-cognitive. (We'll avoid for now the controversy over what the word "congitive" means!) Factual knowledge is presented as facts / words ... sentences..... Anyway, the phrase not-knowing which I used just isn't centered on a lack of factual knowledge, per se. One can both have factual knowledge about a person or a thing and also embody an attitude and awareness of "not-knowing" (which is a sort of modern zen phrase). Not-knowing, in this context, is basically a state of available readiness and openness of mind and body which tends not to be goal oriented. It's a quality of "presence" which embodies openness and wonder. Factual knowledge may be present, but it goes rather to the background as a state of rapt attention and presence emerges in the foreground.
That helped my understanding of the difference.
Love is that condition in which the happiness of another person is essential to your own...
Robert A. Heinlein

Me: female, bi, (formerly hinge of a vee)
with FirstBoyFriend (FBF)(moderately long-distance)
and no longer with CurrentBoyFriend (CBF)(who now lives in a house far away-with stairs I can't climb)
Reply With Quote