How Our Intelligence Makes Us Bad Listeners

The more intel­li­gent we are, the more we (think) we under­stand peo­ple. The more we are able to under­stand what they say. The more we are able to antic­i­pate what they are going to say. The more we are like­ly to stop lis­ten­ing because we have not only fig­ured out what they are going to say, we have already for­mu­lat­ed our response pre­emp­tive­ly.

This is a trap I some­times find myself falling into, even sev­er­al years after try­ing to imbibe Seek First To Under­stand, Then To Be Under­stood.

There are usu­al­ly four lev­els of lis­ten­ing:

  • ignor­ing
  • pre­tend­ing
  • selec­tive lis­ten­ing
  • atten­tive lis­ten­ing

What most of us fail to do on a reg­u­lar basis is the high­est form of lis­ten­ing – empa­thet­ic lis­ten­ing.

Even after study­ing about empa­thet­ic lis­ten­ing as the pil­lar of human com­mu­ni­ca­tion, we some­times stray away from it. The prob­lem is often our intel­li­gence.

Our intel­li­gence dic­tates that com­mu­ni­ca­tion is intend­ed for com­pre­hen­sion. In real­i­ty, most com­mu­ni­ca­tion in close rela­tion­ships is intend­ed to con­vey emo­tion.

Our intel­li­gence, work­ing like an over­clocked CPU, becomes hyper­ac­tive in antic­i­pat­ing what oth­ers are say­ing, rel­ish­es the dis­cov­ery of our antic­i­pa­tion prov­ing cor­rect, gets high in nar­cis­sis­tic self-approval while the resid­ual part of our brain spits out our already for­mu­lat­ed response. By this time, our intel­li­gence is already antic­i­pat­ing prob­a­ble respons­es to what we have spit out, and ready­ing our respons­es to it.

Intel­li­gence is often lethal to empa­thy.

There is a high­er intel­li­gence that can help us iden­ti­fy sit­u­a­tions where com­mu­ni­ca­tion is not intend­ed for com­pre­hen­sion but to con­vey emo­tion. There is a high­er intel­li­gence in under­stand­ing that com­pre­hen­sion con­sti­tutes only 10% of the com­mu­ni­ca­tion; 30% of it is in the tone, 60% of it is in the body lan­guage. Our intel­li­gence can cause myopia in focus­ing on that 10% of ver­bal com­mu­ni­ca­tion.

We need to teach our intel­li­gence to under­stand that it can be a very inef­fec­tive tool for human com­mu­ni­ca­tion, unless its pow­ers are har­nessed not for com­pre­hen­sion but for more empa­thy.

This entry was posted in psychology and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • Gau­ri

    Spot on. It’s the clas­sic “Most peo­ple lis­ten with the inten­tion to reply rather than to under­stand” trap. I’ve told friends from IIT/Stanford and the likes on sev­er­al occa­sions that their intel­li­gence gets in the way of them under­stand­ing what under­stand­ing real­ly is. Remote as it may sound, this is also the root of why athe­ists aim­less­ly vocal about their athe­ism (as opposed to gen­uine­ly edu­cat­ing an audi­ence) sound cog­ni­tive but imbe­cile, instead of ratio­nal and empa­thet­ic.
    That said, there are folks out there who have a very well-devel­oped right brain and emo­tion­al intel­li­gence to com­ple­ment (or should I say in spite of) an extreme-right IQ. These are peo­ple who watch qui­et­ly even when they know the right answer.
    Thank you for writ­ing this 🙂

    (As an aside, intel­li­gence is over­rat­ed. It’s a fine asset to have, but it’s still over­rat­ed; it real­ly is.)

    • …their intel­li­gence gets in the way of them under­stand­ing what under­stand­ing real­ly is”
      This does not sound remote, this is what the post is about 🙂

      I am tired of these athe­ists you describe 😉 Thank­ful­ly, I think my life is far removed from those ear­li­er days of hav­ing to con­front the atheist/believer debate.

      Yes, there are folks out there. “They watch qui­et­ly, even when they know the right answer.” These are the folks who watch qui­et­ly, but have An Unqui­et Mind.

      Thank you for read­ing and com­ment­ing. Your com­ments are pre­cious, as always.

  • Agreed ! Infact it’s too tough to cre­ate and update a con­cur­rent mul­ti thread for each process with­in our con­scious mind !

    • Thanks. The trick is *not* to cre­ate mul­ti-threads, and have only one to lis­ten! 🙂

  • Atul Sab­nis

    Love­ly post. That para­graph where you describe the “mechan­ics” of how we antic­i­pa­tion works, is spot on. If you find your­self often com­plet­ing sen­tences for oth­ers — that’s a good indi­ca­tor of your intel­li­gence and (impa­tience, there­fore) get­ting in the way of lis­ten­ing.

    • Thank you. After “Tele­scopes” in April, I’m hap­py to have a post where you com­ment! 🙂

    • From “Tele­scopes”: Each of these human beings is a tele­scope, if only one were will­ing to watch through the eye­piece. The eye­piece, in this case, is the human abil­ity to lis­ten, which we most often abuse — or in oth­er words, don’t use at all.

  • Pingback: Social Media Makes Brands Care More About Their Brand Than Their Customers by @ScepticGeek()

  • Pingback: Sequence | An Unquiet Mind()