← Back to Kinfonet

Why do people talk together?

Why do people talk together?
There is a lot of talk. Can we put aside, for the moment, thinking there is a purpose or reason, serious or casual, for talking together?
I might not be intending to talk together with anyone, but think I have something to say. Where is this coming from? Is it a habit of verbally and socially interacting between each other? And does this habit suffer from presenting a limited viewpoint; the comparative circumstances being not well informed or not being verbally effective? I’d say fundamentally there is no special need to talk together. We are all human beings on a planet.
We have come to believe at anytime, we have to exchange points of view, give opinions, to inform and educate, and to adopt, obey, or defer, and ignore any directives, looking for our own way.
Sitting together on common ground, not saying anything, we don’t have to resolve anything, nor establish any meaning, nor exercise the intellect in any way at all.
This is not an ideal. Sitting together on common ground is not imaginary or fanciful. There is no requirement to meet some prescription. It is a natural quality of sharing not requiring any specification. When grounded in the togetherness, there is exploring, discovering, it is new, fresh, not limited to anyone. Then there can arise an understanding not based in thought.

1 Like

Imagination, communication and imitation are our super-powers.

Why do cats chase moving objects? (they also lie around in the sun a lot)

Can I learn by thinking about what I think, and say? Or is it just a repetition of polite, and impolite, general nonsense we all talk about?

The serious is met with the bemused. The right is met with the indifferent. The false is met with skepticism. The question is met with the comparative. The clarity is met with rebellion. On and on.

It seems to be entertainment in the form of debate, conversation and explanations. We do it because we enjoy doing it, it makes us feel good.
The hope is that something we say may be of use when faced with the violence of our own self-centeredness.

Why are you posting here? Are you trying to communicate with us? If so, is what you are trying to say very difficult to express clearly and simply - due to its self-referentiality perhaps?

You had me up through “may be of use.”

Yet you can’t stop doing it. How do you feel about this conflict? Do you really believe there is “fundamentally no special need to talk together”, or do you just wish you could quit?

Why do we not think about a question for ourselves, and look into it, and only think about it attached to some other person, some other circumstances? Is it the nature of self to always be defensive, argumentative? We may have all kinds of strategies which we think are valid, but fundamentally not looking together.

1 Like

But we do not talk together. We talk with ourself most of the time. Even when we are projecting our voice outwardly.

Talking is a way of exchanging experiences. It is an application of language technology to transfer, multiply and store information and knowledge.

I hope this is clear, how language has an undeniable value in “building things”.

What I wonder is why do people talk to others when they are looking for a relationship, comfort and care. Language cannot offer anything which is present and actual.

And why do we talk “inside our head”, creating theories, analyses, conclusions and the rest of it, when we feel lost and insecure. Language cannot offer any security for our condition.

What takes place when I drop language from my “being”. Ask yourself that. And the question what to do in this life becomes so simple it’s terrifying. And stay with that terrifying, because it is who you are. And that is OK.

1 Like

What is probably not understood, is that this familiar condition, which we take for granted, to be normal, is the anxiety, discomfort, fear, etc. We live with it unwittingly. Then we have all kinds of strategies to deal with the symptoms, using various activities, protocols, polite customs, etc, and going to see a doctor, or escaping into some belief system, etc. The lives we live are the terror. From some trauma, for example, we may discover there is this basic condition of fear which has become normalised throughout the world.

1 Like

I don’t understand, how does this work? I like the idea of dropping language, but how does this become terrifying? I interpret this as meaning that silence and terror can exist at the same time - but maybe, hopefully this is not what you mean.

PS - reading your statement again - I see my mistake : its the questions you ask yourself that become terrifying.

1 Like

Life is relationship and talking is a way to communicate and relate to each other. I don’t mean in here but in real life. Internet is relatively a new thing. Without intellect and the ability to question everything life becomes boring and meaningless . Language has been developed over thousands of years and to use it correctly is an art. Imagine if krishnamurti couldn’t talk English , where would we all be!?

As you said we are missing brevity, leading to miscommunication in most situations around us. I feel it is hard to get to that point, where one can use language in an artful way. How it is possible to Jiddu?
:grinning:

If K had not been able to “talk English”, do you think his talks, dialogs, and writings would not have been translated into English?

If K merely sat silently and didn’t talk like some gurus do what would happen,? Nothing for us. K spoke English and not Indian so that there won’t be a middle man translating and interpreting his talks. Even though he spoke simple English some of us still don’t get what he says.

Some of us? How do you know if anyone got what he said?

How do you know is a wrong question. If there was a system to know something then that knowledge is not true. K explained the problem with the word “how” .

If there was a system to know something then that knowledge is not true.

The system we use to “know something” is called “belief”. We are conditioned to be believers, i.e., inveterate liars.

If each one of us understood the teachings therefore appreciate it then do you think we would have so many contradictory opinions in here. You may ask how do you know that we have contradictory opinions out here? You see we have trick questions, wrong questions, and right questions. The right question is the right answer.

Then I rephrase my question: Did anyone “get” what K said?