= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
AnlamK comments on How to always have interesting conversations - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (331)
I don't know. I am hesitant.
I can think of instances in which someone has started talking about an anecdote and the other person wasn't really responsive at all. (And, yeah, more than anything it was I who were telling the anecdote.) I guess it requires social savvy to pick which anecdote to tell.
I don't think engaging someone meaningfully (i.e. "hooking") in a conversation is as easy as making more statements as opposed to asking questions.
Conversation is more of an art than an exact science - 'tis true...
Anybody wants to call me so they can hear my totally irrelevant anecdote?
AnlamK
Exactly.
I agree. But you can make more statements in a short period of time than you can ask questions, so you have a higher chance of hitting something that engages the other person before they tire of the conversation.
Does that seem plausible/implausible?
Dammit, I wanted to hear the anecdote.