1. Ryan Pederson
Interpersonal Comm.
Response Paper #1
In response to our first self-test provided by the text, I must say, by way of prolog,
that I think it’s a little contemptible to include some statements full of ambiguity and
seemingly sound logic, then call them all false. All for the noble, yet sneaky, cause of
thought provocation. If the bitterness in the aforewritten sentences hasn’t given it away, I
didn’t test at one hundred percent. So, now I digress into my diatribe about why I still
feel I’m right!
The notion that, “good communicators are born, not made”,(DeVito, 2007, p.4) is
an idea I can’t call false. I think a more accurately worded false statement would be,
“good communicators can’t be made”, or perhaps, “gifted communicators can’t
improve”. Like any talent, some ARE just born great, while the bulk of us are born
average, but can with study and practice improve to a respectable level. Then, sadly, there
are some who, like my singing, are forever hopeless and for them, thank God for the
invention of dating websites, so they still have a fighting chance.
All sincerity, brings us to question 2. Devito (2007) questions, “The more you
communicate, the better you will be at it”. (p.4) Devito (2007) answers with an
interesting point, “If you practice bad habits, you’re more likely to become less
effective”. (p.4) My peewee hockey coach used to say, “perfect practice, makes perfect”,
I happen to agree with this notion and find that to be the value of this class at large. The
systematic practice of fundamentals are indeed the only way to truly improve. I’ve also
found modeling the style of communicators I respect and adopting some of their
mannerisms to be of substantive help in my own communication.
The third question is one I have a problem with. The idea that a scenario exists
where is would be a bad guideline to try and empathize with the point of view of another
is something I just can’t wrap my head around.
The fourth almost needs no comment. It defies common sense to think you would
ignore cultural differences when communicating.
Penultimately, is the idea that fear of meeting new people is detrimental. The
book claims that this is false and fear should be managed, opposed to eliminated. Again
2. we find a case where the book claims false and attempts to, in my opinion, slide it by on a
semantic. To manage your fear, in my opinion, is to try and suppress and ultimately
eliminate it. Virtually nothing bad will result in overcoming the fear of meeting people
and can frankly be done easily with some practice.
Finally, I do agree with the idea that conflict is not a sign of trouble in a
relationship. Failure to work on overcoming does.
While it’s fairly evident on which questions the book and I did not see eye to eye,
it’s entirely possible in my continued reading I will be proven wrong. I was both
interesting and of value to explore the issues for this paper. I can truly say, I would never
have given a few of these any level of mental consideration at all otherwise.
