How would you define "communication problems"?

1. 80

   dashingscorpioposted 6 years ago

   How would you define "communication problems"?
   
   I believe it's nothing more than a lack of comprehension or clarification that causes a misunderstanding. However there are many who would say {if they're not getting what they wanted, or there aren't any "changes" made or no "action" taken} it means they have a "communication problem". I believe it's possible to be (heard and understood) without the benefit of change. There's a difference between "incompatibility issues" and "communication problems". Just because one doesn't get what they want doesn't mean there's a "communication problem" or "misunderstanding". What do you think?
   
   

   replyreport
2. 85

   tsmogposted 6 years ago

   That is the problem with 'or' in definitions. Communication means imparting 'or' exchanging information. If I speak a message and it is heard there is communication. The means are voice and hearing. Even if the message is gobbly-gook there is communication. In other words, a TV communicates with us if seen or heard. Everything else is key to the message, which opens many doors; intent, language, clarity, and comprehension as pointed out.That may be considered literal.
   
   Figuratively it could mean a reply or action is 'always' necessary. It may be taken to the extreme that something must be carried out explicitly like buying the product in the commercial. If not done then there is a communication problem. In that case, do we consider a problem with the message itself is part of communication?
   
   Colloquially I think of the scene in the movie Cool Hand Luke with Paul Newman. The quote from that scene is "What we we've got here is a failure to communicate". In my view it is a resutl of two messages with meanings that are both understood, yet one is not accepted as a truth. Thus, one decides there is no communication.

   replyreport
   1. 80

      dashingscorpioposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      "Communication means imparting 'or' exchanging information." Excellent point!
      I remember "Cool Hand Luke" and the failure to communicate line essentially isn't about Newman not "understanding" but his refusal to comply/conform.

      replyreport
   2. 85

      tsmogposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I agree Newman did understand what was communicated, thus there was communication.

      replyreport
3. 69

   ionestevensposted 6 years ago

   Incompatibility and communication are two different things, but they can go hand in hand. For example, if a husband and wife are having an argument about how he never wants to go out and do things with her, that's an incompatibility issue. She's outgoing and he likes to stay home. So if the wife brings up how this is a communication problem, the husband gets confused. They ARE communicating, he's expressing how he doesn't want to go out. Her stating that they have a communication problem based on how he doesn't want to go out doesn't make any sense him. In this case, she's not focusing on how they can create a compromise despite their incompatibility issue. She's focusing on how they don't communicate enough to know what her husband prefers to do with his spare time. If she knew what he liked to do, they could find a happy medium and then the issue would be solved.

   replyreport
   1. 80

      dashingscorpioposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Sometimes (acceptance) is better than a forced or unhappy(compromise).
      There's nothing wrong with a couple having different interests as long as they agree on what's important for their relationship. Friends & family can fill some voids.

      replyreport
   2. 69

      ionestevensposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I see what you're saying. Acceptance is definitely important in every relationship. However, I believe that there are happy and unforced compromises. In the end, it all depends on what works for the couple.

      replyreport