| Interview |
|---|
| Banner source: 🔗 https://www.needpix.com/photo/455018/ |
 Click on the image to watch the interview (Youtube video). |
| Interview by Brut: The importance of nuance according to Étienne Klein. |
| Full text in French of the interview in PDF format: brut_interview_etienne_klein_importance_nuance_2021.pdf |
| Full text with my personal translation in English of the interview in PDF format: brut_interview_etienne_klein_importance_nuance_2021_english.pdf |
1. The interview script▲
1.1. The nuance is a bit annoying.▲
Étienne Klein > “Maybe the nuance, excuse me, but it’s maybe a bit annoying. And people who speak without nuance give the impression of being right. Someone who doubts, because nuance has to do with doubt too, with uncertainty, with caution, we say: “That guy, he doesn’t know what he thinks.”
Étienne Klein > “And so, a nuanced statement gives the impression of being weakened by the form it takes and that is what seems to me to be a threat, because we know very well that it is not in extreme positions that we find the truth, but in imbrications, in superpositions, in the nuance, precisely, that it is situated.”
Étienne Klein > “We see it clearly in certain media: someone who has just said something completely stupid on television or on the radio will generate a whole series of reactions that are much more numerous than someone who says something cautious, saying what we know, what we don’t know, explaining the difference between the two, etc.”
1.2. To be able to say that we don’t know▲
Brut > “Why do humans have so much trouble saying ‘I don’t know’?”
Étienne Klein > “Well, I don’t know! No but… It’s a very good question but, I have no trouble saying ‘I don’t know’, but admit that if every time you asked me a question, I answered ‘I don’t know’, would you invite me back?”
1.3. Chatting on social networks▲
Étienne Klein > “I have the impression when I look at social networks that you have to choose your side and, in fact, it is easier to click ‘I like’ or ‘I don’t like’, it is even easier to hate, because there is still a lot of hate on social networks, it is easier to hate than to think.”
Étienne Klein > “But when I talk to people in the street, with friends, I don’t have the impression that people react the way they do on social networks. In other words, when you are physically in front of someone, the nuance comes back. When you are in front of a screen, without there being a limit to your own enthusiasm for this or that idea, it can indeed become radicalized much more quickly.”
Étienne Klein > “I was insulted on social media by people I ended up meeting, they were absolutely charming.”
Brut > “So it’s reassuring, ultimately, that behavior on social networks or through screens differs from normal life?“
Étienne Klein > “This means that it is reassuring in the sense that it shows that we are social animals, we need to meet people to discuss, to learn, to argue too, but it is the physical meeting which is the great characteristic of the social bond and the so-called social networks do not do this social work since, precisely, they lead to the radicalization of positions.”
Brut > “If I follow you, the COVID crisis, in my opinion, is not going to help things too much since, by definition, there is social distancing, as they say. Can we imagine that by dint of being socially distant, we lose nuance?”
Étienne Klein > “I would prefer that we talk about physical distancing rather than social distancing because obviously, it is the space that is concerned, we have every right to discuss remotely, so we can have a social life while being physically distant. But, indeed, confinement, obviously, for everything we are discussing here, for the nuance, it is probably not very favorable.”
1.4. The disappearance of nuance▲
Étienne Klein > “This problem of the disappearance of nuance, in appearance anyway, in our societies manifests in my opinion a crisis of language. That is to say that we speak a lot with slogans, but shouting a slogan and thinking are two completely different things, and so I think that, and I would like to quote Proust if you allow me, Proust wrote somewhere this absolutely brilliant sentence, he says:
J’ai toujours honoré ceux qui défendent la grammaire et la logique, on se rend compte 50 ans après qu’ils ont conjuré de grands périls.
Marcel ProustA personal translation
I have always honored those who defend grammar and logic, and 50 years later we realize that they have averted great dangers.
And I think that we damage language by the fact that sentences are short, that argumentation disappears, that we provoke clashes rather than leaving room for nuance precisely and that the truth is probably not easy to say. I do not believe that there is a simple truth and therefore the truth supposes to be said fairly that the remarks that claim to name it are nuanced, even if there are radical truths. Even a radical truth must be said in a nuanced way.”
Étienne Klein > “What is new, and perhaps even a high-ranking anthropological mutation, is that in the past, information was an extremely rare commodity, people were constantly lacking information and therefore information was precious. Today, we are bombarded with information and I think that our brain cannot handle it all at once and therefore must practice the absence of nuance to decide what it will give credence to, what it will reject out of hand, because our brain is not wired to handle so much different information at the same time and I think that in fact the excess of information limits our capacity to process it in a nuanced way.”
1.5. Praising nuance▲
Étienne Klein > “Sometimes I realize that I get caught up in it. You’re waiting for a bus or a subway and you’re looking at your phone and it’s like your brain is constantly demanding to be carried away in a delirium that you can see is delirium, but that has a compelling power that ends up capturing you, you know. And so, it’s good to praise nuance, it’s good to see that we miss it, but it’s also good to learn to like it.”
Étienne Klein > “Salvation would consist in ensuring that moderate people engage in debates without moderation. Without moderation. Moderation must be expressed immoderately, because otherwise it is those who have polarizing and clear-cut discourses who will impose themselves and that will prevent debate. A debate is the complete opposite of trench warfare.”
1.6. What to do if there is a lack of nuance▲
Brut > “We are talking, we are going to make a video, it will be broadcast on Brut and under this video, there will be a lot of rather vague comments. What could you say to the people who will comment on this video?”
Étienne Klein > “Look, I would like to say to the people who are going to comment on this video that I thank them for taking the time to watch the video in question and I would like to let them know in advance that I will only answer comments that are longer than 10 lines.”
Brut > “Nuance is a matter of size?”
Étienne Klein > “Nuance needs length, indeed, time, which does not mean that long texts are always without nuance. You see how nuanced I am!”
2. My personal view on this interview▲
I have retained several passages from the interview on which I have written a personal opinion, a feedback that I share with you in the following paragraphs.
2.01. The nuance, an impression of fragility, of uncertainty▲
Un propos nuancé donne l’impression de se fragiliser par la forme qu’il prend et c’est ça qui me semble être une menace, parce qu’on sait très bien que c’est pas dans les positions extrêmes qu’on trouve la vérité, mais dans des imbrications, dans des superpositions, dans la nuance, précisément, qu’elle se situe.
Étienne Klein, interview by Brut, The importance of nuance according to Étienne Klein. Video on July 21, 2021.A personal translation
A nuanced statement gives the impression of being weakened by the form it takes and that is what seems to me to be a threat, because we know very well that it is not in extreme positions that we find the truth, but in imbrications, in superpositions, in the nuance, precisely, that it is situated.
2.02. To be able to say that we don’t know▲
C’est une très bonne question mais, moi, je n’ai aucun mal à dire ‘je ne sais pas’, mais reconnaissez que si à chaque fois que vous me posez une question, je vous répondais ‘je ne sais pas’, est-ce que vous me réinviteriez ?
Étienne Klein, interview by Brut, The importance of nuance according to Étienne Klein. Video on July 21, 2021.A personal translation
It’s a very good question but, I have no trouble saying ‘I don’t know’, but admit that if every time you asked me a question, I answered ‘I don’t know’, would you invite me back?
My opinion
Saying that one does not know is perceived in our societies as a weakness, as incompetence; it is something that is frowned upon, almost disturbing. We balk as if it were a dishonor, an admission of impotence. However, it indicates the state of progress in knowledge, it factually informs about the factual level of knowledge, for oneself and for the world. It sheds light on the limits, on the boundaries of the world of knowledge. Moreover, from a certain point of view, not explicitly saying “I do not know” can be a lie by omission which can prove seriously detrimental depending on the topic of the discussion or debate. The silencing and muzzling of “non-knowledge” and ignorance is indicative of a deep societal problem regarding our relationship to performance and competence on an individual and collective level.
2.03. Polarization of positions in social networks▲
J’ai l’impression quand je regarde les réseaux sociaux qu’en effet, il faut choisir son camp et, en fait, il est plus facile de cliquer ‘j’aime’ ou ‘j’aime pas’, il est même plus facile de haïr, parce qu’il y a quand même beaucoup de haine dans les réseaux sociaux, il est plus facile de haïr que de réfléchir.
Étienne Klein, interview by Brut, The importance of nuance according to Étienne Klein. Video on July 21, 2021.A personal translation
I have the impression when I look at social networks that you have to choose your side and, in fact, it is easier to click ‘I like’ or ‘I don’t like’, it is even easier to hate, because there is still a lot of hate on social networks, it is easier to hate than to think.
My opinion
Sadly yes. Ignorance coupled with fear, which comes with new information, can lead to hate. And the result is not pleasant 🙁 This can lead to paradoxical behaviors like being afraid of fear itself, among others. This is why it is important to reflect on one’s personal behavior “when one does not know”.
In another context and for a bit of occasional lightness, this statement reminds me of a quote from a fictional character, renowned for his wisdom, Master Yoda in the Star Wars saga, from whom I share a quote:
Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.
Master Yoda, fictional character of the Star Wars universe, The Phantom Menace.
2.04. The nuance with physical presence▲
Quand vous êtes physiquement devant quelqu’un, la nuance revient.
Étienne Klein, interview by Brut, The importance of nuance according to Étienne Klein. Video on July 21, 2021.A personal translation
When you are physically in front of someone, the nuance comes back.
My opinion
Physical contact provides additional information because the absence of information does not exist in a behavior, which means that a behavior always provides additional information. Thus, doing nothing is a behavior, and therefore information. This additional information often contributes to providing nuance through its existence: the reality of human presence then invites another attitude that allows the register of the discussion to be adapted, the tone to be moderated, the choice of vocabulary to be adjusted, except in the case of a lack of empathy, hence the importance of empathic listening.
2.05. Physical encounter, a major characteristic of social bonds▲
Nous sommes des animaux sociaux, nous avons besoin de rencontrer des gens pour discuter, pour apprendre, pour se disputer aussi, mais c’est la rencontre physique qui est la grande caractéristique du lien social et les réseaux dits sociaux ne font pas ce travail social puisque, justement, ils portent à la radicalisation des positions.
Étienne Klein, interview by Brut, The importance of nuance according to Étienne Klein. Video on July 21, 2021.A personal translation
We are social animals, we need to meet people to discuss, to learn, to argue too, but it is the physical meeting which is the great characteristic of the social bond and the so-called social networks do not do this social work since, precisely, they lead to the radicalization of positions.
My opinion
Indeed, the importance of the social link is undeniable. Does it necessarily involve physical encounters? That is debatable. Étienne Klein will qualify his remarks on this personal distance which is often singled out for social networks by denigrating the nature of the link because of its virtuality, thus minimizing the social role and its real contribution to the social well-being of the person. In addition, I find that the word radicalization is poorly chosen here in its sharing. In this context, we can prefer the term polarization or extremization. Etymologically, radicalization refers to the root and not to an extremity. We can certainly “take (the wrong) root” but here it is rather a question of bipolarity, binarity, “black or white” positions where colored nuances are missing. Radicalization is not bad in itself, it depends on the quality of the root.
2.06. Physical distancing▲
Je préférerais qu’on parle de distanciation physique plutôt que de distanciation sociale parce qu’évidemment, c’est l’espace qui est concerné, on a tout à fait le droit de discuter à distance, donc on peut avoir une vie sociale tout en étant distant physiquement.
Étienne Klein, interview by Brut, The importance of nuance according to Étienne Klein. Video on July 21, 2021.A personal translation
I would prefer that we talk about physical distancing rather than social distancing because obviously, it is the space that is concerned, we have every right to discuss remotely, so we can have a social life while being physically distant.
My opinion
Étienne Klein sheds light on the notion of social distance, or social proximity, by highlighting the distinction between physical distancing and social distancing. This is an important nuance because social networks allow us to connect people across the world, enrich our personal world, provide support, comfort. It is total isolation, the total absence of social ties that causes social distancing. The important thing is to be able to nourish close or distant ties in one way or another, in the adequacy of the nature of the link and the satisfaction of each person. For a fair social proximity.
2.07. Knowing how to tell a radical truth▲
Je ne crois pas qu’il y ait de vérité simple et donc la vérité suppose pour être dite de façon juste que les propos qui prétendent la nommer soient nuancés, même s’il y a des vérités radicales. Même une vérité radicale doit être dite de façon nuancée.
Étienne Klein, interview by Brut, The importance of nuance according to Étienne Klein. Video on July 21, 2021.A personal translation
I do not believe that there is a simple truth and therefore the truth supposes to be said fairly that the remarks that claim to name it are nuanced, even if there are radical truths. Even a radical truth must be said in a nuanced way.
My opinion
I agree. Even the equality 1 + 1 = 2 must be explained! In fact, one must be able to distinguish between the different levels of information by personal assessment of its veracity. The same goes for one’s personal knowledge and insights.
Here is a non-exhaustive list of these levels:
- an acquaintance: a knowledge that one knows to be true (“one” = other people and oneself) and that one is able to explain, to formulate in one’s own words the truth of this knowledge to make it an acquaintance,
- a knowledge that we know is true but we have forgotten why it is true, that is to say we have lost control of it,
- a true knowledge that has become false or whose framework has evolved and we know how to formulate in our own words why,
- a knowledge of which we do not know if it is true, we accept it because we do not have time to check it and therefore to use with a prudence proportional to the stakes,
- a piece of information whose veracity does not need to be evaluated because it is not produced knowledge,
- a dubious piece of information: there is distrust of the data because the statement is extraordinary, calling into question several pieces of knowledge considered to be solid,
- a false piece of information, that is to say that we know why it is false, we are able to formulate the explanation of the falsehood,
- a misleading piece of information, that is to say false and dangerous information because it appears to be true (but only in appearance),
- a “fake news”, an April Fool’s joke: a false pice of information that is known to be false and which is widely disseminated,
- etc.
By default, any new received piece of information should automatically be classified as “a piece of information, a knowledge for which one does not know whether it is true or false and for which one is not able to formulate a valid explanation in one’s own words.”
If we do not take the time to explain or understand, then we turn the piece of information into a belief, which is serious when the subject raises a major issue. Furthermore, if we are not able to reformulate in our own words, then this means that we have not understood and that we cannot claim to master the subject.
Sonia Kanclerski, Pause-café chez Sonia, article The importance of nuance, May 12, 2024.
What is important to take into consideration is that we can make beliefs with true knowledge! It is the posture, the attitude that we adopt in relation to the pieces of information that will make these pieces of information become an acquaintance, a true knowledge of which we know why it is true, or a belief, information of which we cannot say anything about its veracity, whether this knowledge is true or false.
As this topic is of certain societal importance, I participated in a conference in French in February 2015 on this theme, entitled Espace et croyances contemporaines (Space and Contemporary Beliefs in English), with several conferences dealing with this subject. I share some definitions that I have retained, the notion of belief, the verb believe and a direct impact on us:
La croyance est toute idée prise pour vrai sans examen, sans avoir même aucun élément objectif pour la justifier.
Eric Lowen, definition taken from a conference in French entitled Espace et croyances contemporaines (Space and Contemporary Beliefs in English), February 27 and 28, 2015. Cercle Zététique de Toulouse.A personal translation
Belief is any idea taken as true without examination, without even having any objective element to justify it.
Croire, c’est l’attitude qui consiste à prendre pour vrai une notion sans action de réflexion, sans processus de réflexion, et, dans certains cas, en dépit de l’absence totale d’informations objectives, d’éléments objectifs pour l’étayer.
Eric Lowen, definition taken from a conference in French entitled Espace et croyances contemporaines (Space and Contemporary Beliefs in English), February 27 and 28, 2015. Cercle Zététique de Toulouse.A personal translation
To believe is the attitude of taking a notion as true without any action of reflection, without any process of reflection, and, in certain cases, despite the total absence of objective information, of objective elements to support it.
I also share a direct and heavy impact on behavior without minimal reflection on information:
Les informations que l’on nous donne peuvent être vraies mais si on n’y réfléchit pas dessus, si on se contente de les prendre pour vrai parce que le professeur, le maître, le conférencier, le ‘magister dixit’, le gourou, le maître à penser, le pape, le théologien, la personne que l’on aime le dit, à ce moment-là, on fait une croyance.
Eric Lowen, definition taken from a conference in French entitled Espace et croyances contemporaines (Space and Contemporary Beliefs in English), February 27 and 28, 2015. Cercle Zététique de Toulouse.
A personal translation:
The piece of information we are given may be true, but if we do not think about it, if we simply take it as true because the professor, the master, the lecturer, the ‘magister dixit’, the guru, the mentor, the pope, the theologian, the person we love says so, then we form a belief.
A piece of acquaintance that I personally enjoy recalling is the truth of the equality 1 + 1 = 2. Everyone agrees that it is true. If we cannot prove it, it does not matter because there is no major repercussion: in fact, it will not prevent us from using our calculator as usual or buying our baguette at the bakery. Thank you mathematics! However, in a more restricted framework, is it so certain? How can we prove that the equality 1 + 1 = 2 is true? How do we go about it?
First, I share web links to four sources that allow us to assert that the equality 1 + 1 = 2 is true with a rigorous approach.
•••
🔗 Link to original image
Public domain
•••
🔗 Link to original image
Public domain
•••
🔗 Link to original image
Public domain
I now share three more secondary sources, in French, that discuss proving the truth of the equality 1 + 1 = 2 based on the previous primary sources.
So, how do you answer the question "Why is the equality 1 + 1 = 2 true?"?
It is sufficient to answer that the equality 1 + 1 = 2 is true within the framework of Euclid's mathematics based on the five postulates (or axioms) of Book I of his work entitled Elements, the one that we learn at school at the time when we also learn to read, write and count. It is the precision of the framework, here of the postulates used, that makes the equality true.
2.08. The problem of too much information▲
Notre cerveau n’est pas câblé pour gérer en même temps autant d’informations différentes et je pense qu’en effet l’excès d’informations limite notre capacité à la traiter de façon nuancée.
Étienne Klein, interview by Brut, The importance of nuance according to Étienne Klein. Video on July 21, 2021.A personal translation
Our brains are not wired to handle so much different information at once, and I think that too much information limits our ability to process it in a nuanced way.
My opinion
This is why it is highly recommended to use tools, filters in communication to be able to cope with the mass of information. This problem did not exist a few years ago, at least not to this extent, because information did not spread as quickly and information on societal issues did not directly impact people as it does now. This problem arrived with the advent of the Internet and the instant sharing of information across the world. This therefore makes this use of tools, filters almost obligatory under penalty of being manipulated or misunderstanding the information received.
2.09. Praising nuance▲
C’est bien de faire l’éloge de la nuance, c’est bien de constater qu’elle nous manque, mais c’est bien aussi d’apprendre à l’aimer.
Étienne Klein, interview by Brut, The importance of nuance according to Étienne Klein. Video on July 21, 2021.A personal translation
It is good to praise nuance, it is good to note that we lack it, but it is also good to learn to like it.
My opinion
I agree. We must praise nuance. It is nuance that allows us to create diversity, to bring out complexity. We can only see the imbrications, the superpositions, the subtleties in a text, in pieces of information if we use or manage to perceive nuance. Otherwise we are condemned to see the world in black and white, to create for ourselves a simplistic projection far removed from the reality of the world.
2.10. A story of moderation▲
Le salut, ça consisterait à faire en sorte que les gens modérés s’engagent dans les débats sans modération.
Étienne Klein, interview by Brut, The importance of nuance according to Étienne Klein. Video on July 21, 2021.A personal translation
Salvation would consist in ensuring that moderate people engage in debates without moderation.
My opinion
In my opinion, social networks are not the ideal place, the right space for debate. For discussion, yes, for debate, with great difficulty. Indeed, to achieve an enriching debate, which advances the level of knowledge of all, it is necessary to sit down to be able to pool all the arguments at hand, look at their quality together, exchange with serenity and in the right proximity. Being able to do this on social networks therefore seems very difficult to me. The ideal would be to use digital discussion forums, but these have never really been popular on the Internet compared to social networks, with a few exceptions, because it is precisely because you have to take the time to sit down. While the idea is laudable, in reality, few people, particularly in the associative context, make the commitment to sit down regularly to debate in a digital forum. And even in this context, slip-ups can occur despite moderation.
The qualities of animation, facilitation and moderation are essential: animation provides material, facilitation provides fluidity and moderation provides serenity and security.
Sonia Kanclerski, Pause-café chez Sonia, article The importance of nuance, May 12, 2024.
If these roles are not taken into account in the debate, then it will be short-lived. The personal relationship to space and time in our societies must also be adjusted in depth. Social networks allow for discussion and rapid exchanges, but for high-stakes subjects, prefer other frameworks with structured moderation that effectively regulates the sharing and comments of Internet users.
3. Facilitating tools in communication▲
In this part, I list methods, tools, principles that I personally use to discuss, exchange, debate or form a personal idea of knowledge, information that I receive: the scientific method, Sagan’s principle, Ockham’s razor, Hitchens’ razor, Socrates’ sieve, empathetic listening. This personal list is not exhaustive: it is about using adequate tools that allow you to adapt your personal behavior, attitude, and posture.
3.1. The Scientific Method▲
This is a proven method. If we can doubt the results, we must question the reliability of the data and the rigor of the scientists, of the people applying the scientific method and not question science itself. The dangers and fallibility come from the human being, from the person himself and not from the process of applying the scientific method even if the framework must always be questioned and it is not immutable.
Personally, I was originally influenced by these following philosophical reflections and actual approaches to the scientific method:
•••
🔗 Link to original image
Public domain
•••
🔗 Link to original image
Public domain
•••
🔗 Link to original image
Dominic Mayers
🔗 CC BY-SA 4.0 Deed
There are many other philosophical currents dealing with the rigor of the scientific method whiche are mentioned in the Wikipedia article about the Scientific method.
3.2. The Sagan Standard▲
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence (ECREE acronym).
Carl Sagan, American scientist and astronomer (1934-1996), Cosmos TV show, 1980.
This aphorism highlights a fundamental principle of the scientific method and skepticism and can be used to determine the validity of a claim.
To learn more about this standard, here are some web links on Wikipedia pages:
3.3. Occam’s razor▲
Occam’s razor (also spelled Ockham’s razor or Ocham’s razor; Latin: novacula Occami) is the problem-solving principle that recommends searching for explanations constructed with the smallest possible set of elements. It is also known as the principle of parsimony or the law of parsimony (Latin: lex parsimoniae). It is frequently cited as:
Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
William of Ockham (v. 1285 – April 9, 1347), an English Franciscan friar, scholastic philosopher, apologist, and Catholic theologian.
(Entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity)
In everyday language, Ockham’s Razor could be expressed by the following sentences:
It is vain to do with more what can be done with fewer
Other formulations for Ockham’s Razor, article Wikipedia EN.
A plurality is not to be posited without necessity
Whenever possible, substitute constructions out of known entities for inferences to unknown entities.
Note: This is one of the fundamental heuristic principles in science, but it is neither a starting principle nor a scientific result.
Web links on Ockham’s Razor:
•••
🔗 Link to original image
Public domain
•••
🔗 Link to original image
Moscarlop ♦ 🔗 CC BY-SA 3.0
3.4. Hitchens’s razor▲
Hitchens’s razor is an epistemological razor asserting that the burden of proof regarding the truthfulness of a claim lies with the one who makes the claim ; if this burden is not met, then the claim is unfounded, and its opponents need not argue further in order to dismiss it.No free assertion.
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.
Christopher Hitchens, a British and American author and journalist, God Is Not Great: How religion poisons everything, book published in 2007.
En latin : “Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.”
For more information, here are some other links:
•••
🔗 Link to original image
Public domain
3.5. The Three Sieves Test▲
The three-sieves test is attributed to Socrates, a Greek philosopher of the 5th century BC, but there is no direct evidence of authorship. Since he left no writings, this attribution is based on his reputation for wisdom.
The three-sieves test is usually shared in the form of a story similar to this:
One day a man runs up to Socrates and said:
- I have to tell you something about your friend who...
- Hold up, Socrates interrupts him and asks:
- About the story you’re about to tell me, did you put it trough the three sieves?
The man was not familiar with the three sieves, so Socrates continued:
- The first is the sieve of Truth. Are you sure that what you are going to tell me is true?
- To tell the truth, no, I just overheard it, said the man.
- What about the sieve of Goodness. Will you tell me something good or positive about this man?
The man shook his head.
- Now, what about the last sieve. Is it necessary to tell me what you’re so excited about?
When the man bowed his head in shame, Socrates smiled and said:
- Well, if the story you’re about to tell me is neither true, good or necessary, just forget it and don’t bother me with it.
We can mainly remember the conclusion of this test which is objectively clear:
If what we want to say is neither true, nor good, nor useful, why want to talk about it?
The Three Sieves Test (truth, kindness, usefulness), attribution to Socrates, Greek philosopher of the 5th century BC.
3.6. Empathetic listening▲
This form of listening allows us to discuss and exchange in a calm, constructive and soothing atmosphere. On social networks, with the physical absence of the person, we may forget this practice, but I think on the contrary that we must take even more care with what we communicate or transmit since we have less information: the emotions that would be visible on the face or in the voice, for example. I share definitions of empathy already written in my blog article entitled On becoming a person.
Definition of empathy from Le petit Robert, a French dictionary
First, let’s look at the etymology: from en- “inside” and -pathy “what one experiences”. en- Element, from Latin in- and im-, from in “in”, serving, with the noun stem that it precedes, in the formation of compound verbs which becomes em- before b, m, p. -pathy, -pathic, -pathe Suffixal groups, from the Greek -patheia, -pathês, from pathos “what one experiences”. Then, let’s read the definition itself: “In philosophy, in psychology: ability to identify with someone, to feel what they feel. “. I find this definition quite vague and imprecise and can apply to other words such as identification or even compassion.
Definition of empathy by Carl Rogers
“Empathy involves grasping, as accurately as possible, the internal references and emotional components of another person and understanding them as if you were that other person. Without ever losing sight of the ‘as if’.”
Psycho café The declines of empathy, animated by Françoise Mariotti, May 16, 2013.
My personal definition of empathy
And, now, I share mine, constructed after several readings and after choosing ‘my words to say it’ and translating them in English:
“Empathy is the ability to put oneself in the place of another person, thus discovering their personal universe, their emotional state, their way of thinking, their being in its entirety, with their own frame of reference, by putting their ego aside and without being affected by this connection.”
Sonia Kanclerski, article On becoming a person, Pause-café chez Sonia, April 30, 2021.
To learn more, read my blog article about the book On becoming a person by Carl Rogers.
When we talk to someone, we must keep in mind that we are dealing with a person, not a machine or a robot. We do not always know how to assess the state of form or state of mind of the person. It is therefore advisable to always be at least a respectful person, with a minimum of consideration towards the person we are talking to. Whether we are a stranger or an acquaintance. It is a question of human dignity that is often ignored on social networks. Empathy allows us to seek to be in the right proximity with the person during the discussion. It is certainly not easy, delicate, which is why empathetic listening is part of the training of health professionals, for example. But let’s try anyway! If we make a mistake, we can always apologize for having misunderstood and, for example, send flowers to the person, but if we do not practice empathetic listening, then the exchange risks ending badly and seriously going off the rails. On the importance of trying…
One of the major risks in a discussion is incongruence: inappropriate timing, inadequate health, unshared goals, unsatisfactory personal distance, lack of tact, etc. The list can be long.
Personal aside
However, I confess that, personally, I prefer to communicate than keep silent and regret not sharing what I know, especially if it is a question of life, of well-being. I know that it is not generally well understood but the feeling of helplessness that I feel makes me act this way. For me, the regret would be in the “not doing” and I know well that I always disturb in this kind of situation, tact or not, especially if there is seriousness, otherwise in practice there would be no need to mention this said situation. But even misunderstood or hated I always do what seems right to me. Ah! The richness and… the importance of nuance in human communication 🙂
4. What I’m trying to do▲
4.1. Learning to learn▲
In this interview, Étienne Klein invites us to learn to like nuance.
In my opinion, in general, we should question our personal way of learning and also, (and above all?) learning to unlearn.
Sonia Kanclerski, Pause-café chez Sonia, article The importance of nuance, May 12, 2024.
It can be difficult to fill in the gaps but at least we see the hole, a metaphor for ignorance, but false knowledge, knowledge that appears to be true, then it is impossible if we do not question what we think we know, especially what we hold to be certain. This is why I have always devoted time to working methods, to approaches that allow us to think about what we learn and how we learn it, to be critical of different types of knowledge. Yes, it is tedious but, in fact, in the end, we save time because we do not get lost… but we must first agree to sit down and take this time.
The work of “learning to learn” allows you to create a knowledge map, mentioning what you know and what you don’t know, also allowing you to navigate with a compass to avoid pitfalls. It is therefore a valuable work.
Sonia Kanclerski, Pause-café chez Sonia, article The importance of nuance, May 12, 2024.
I am sharing two web links dealing with what I have just mentioned: Apprendre à apprendre (Learning to learn in English), a useful book written by André Giordan and Jérôme Saltet that I highly recommend and which has a good place in my library and a web link on epistemology.
•••
🔗 Link to original image
Public domain
4.2. A conversational filter▲
In everyday life, we can quickly see that applying the Sagan standard and the scientific method all the time is not realistic because it is very tedious. As Étienne Klein says about the nuance, it is annoying. With the mass of information and data of all kinds that fall on us every day, it is impossible to be able to check everything all the time, especially with a heterogeneous personal level of knowledge depending on the field considered. That’s true but it is not inevitable. To get around this problem (not a problem, at least not for me), I personally use a conversational filter that turns out to be very reliable in practice that I describe with this formulation:
The more the issue under consideration has significant implications with substantial consequences, the more the evidence and explanations must be solid and consistent, with the ideal being that the position results in a scientific consensus or satisfactory agreement.
Sonia Kanclerski, Pause-café chez Sonia, article The importance of nuance, May 12, 2024.
The behavioral consequence of the person is therefore as follows:
To proportion one’s energy, time, concentration to learn, understand, master at a level necessary and sufficient in relation to the importance of the consequences of the decisions, of the positions which are at stake.
Sonia Kanclerski, Pause-café chez Sonia, article The importance of nuance, May 12, 2024.
We can therefore see that the less expert we are in a field, the less data or knowledge we have, the more time and energy we need to take a position on a given subject.
If the amount of evidence and explanations is not sufficient or unsatisfactory in relation to the importance of the subject, one must suspend one’s opinion and the personal position then corresponds to the state of progress of the reflection, no more and no less. I repeat, no more and no less.
Sonia Kanclerski, Pause-café chez Sonia, article The importance of nuance, May 12, 2024.
5. To conclude▲
It is not easy to apply the principles, methods and other existing tools to fully understand what is transmitted to us and to be critical with one’s personal knowledge, but it is the price to pay if one wishes to be a free and enlightened person and not sink into obscurantism without realizing it. To illustrate my point, I share the key quote from an association of which I am a member, the UPP ALDERAN association in Toulouse:
Plus l’Être Humain sera éclairé, plus il sera libre.
VoltaireA personal translation
The more enlightened the human being, the freer he will be.
.jpg?uselang=en){kind=link}
