We have often derided the despairing, delusional expressions of older citizens: “Those were the good old days.” With the understandable exception of the recollection of better health, physical prowess, and personal appearance, the bleak statement, if cognizable at all, effectively translates to a discontent with one’s extant condition. In more verisimilar cases, such as ours, the “good old days” were empirically characterized by economic need, pervasive insecurity, and social and psychological stress.
Nevertheless, in the ubiquitous mix of such earlier experiences, there existed valued phenomena, which, unlike life’s extant presentation of less-than-desirable temporal physical and social impediments, were redolent of humanistic and aesthetic value; which, in our later years, we find lamentably missing. These are matters of notable value, possessing the potential to add quality and significance to life. In this context, we would highlight the beneficially impactful category, conversation..
Interactive spoken communication, as we perceive the societally existential phenomenon, can be thought of as encompassing two qualitative or substantive categories. (1) Talk and messaging, and (2) conversation. Talk and messaging pragmatically endure as matters of social and psychological necessity.
“Messages” are traditionally short (sometimes, abbreviated), publicly undesignated, and solely informative communications; messages may be expressive of hazard, geographic location, or assertions of ownership. Interactive oral messages are definitionally unlimited in size or purpose, but are limited in context by their nature of purposeful, terse relevance
Talk is a common, voluntary personal interaction, frequently of a mundane and unrehearsed nature, between friends and neighbors, and an existential feature of civilized society. Talk can be serious, informative, entertaining, loving, belligerent, or purely social, but is traditionally a spontaneous interactive expression of personal observation, opinion, news of mutual interest, or merely a plain exchange of familiarity. Talk can be accomplished by phone, albeit more often in person. The subject can be politically opinionated, but is always informally expressed.
While “messages” are empirically vital, “talk” is the essential concomitant of the natural dynamics of society and empirically, constitutes its commonplace interactivity. “Conversation” offers personal enrichment and the necessary confirmation of individual identity and worth; sadly, concomitants of the personally enriching potential of “conversation” have been, to society’s profound detriment, relegated to the dustbin of past human history.
It is referred to as “The Art of Conversation” for good reason. The participants more often than not,s know each other, indeed, are familiar with the views of the other, but enjoy the personal validation and the benefits of meritorious controversy. The parties, more often than not, know each other’s respective points of view, but enjoy the enhancing experience of aesthetic, didactic discussion. It is an admirable and rewarding experience, personally, socially, and intellectually.
As previously written, we worry about the future nature of humanity, its substitution of computer facility for human reason, its preference for video games and ethereal entertainment over good literature, and the beneficial growth of knowledge, in search of wisdom. The tragic death of human conversation is another frighteningly significant sign of the ongoing electronic destruction of humanity and, in our view, a grave insult to Natural Evolution.
-p.
plinyblogdotcom 