The Principle of Communication As Communal-Creation and "Gap-Filling"

At some point in life there comes a time when interests wade into the realm of the romantic and, all aflutter with the maelstrom of neurotransmitters, find a realm of uncertainty as to what someone meant by a comment, what the intent was behind someone’s action and often frustrated by the lack of information due to the absence of good or complete communication. Granted, as some are no doubt now bristling at this impossible standard, there is indeed no way to communicate in such a way as to remove all doubt, all potential for error. I’ve written before about how we exist in others’ minds as internalized projections of our own narratives, reshaped and molded through the lens of the worldview and assumptions of the other person. The same applies to all communications, both bodily and verbal/written. Troll through any bar or social gathering and the sometimes painful reality of this situation is glaringly obvious even through the haze of alcohol and wafting scent of hormones run amok. We simply do not exist the way we think we do for other people. However, before frantic protests of “but he/she knows me!” become shrill, the situation is not nearly so dire as my melodrama is making it sound. Obviously in light of numerous examples from healthy relationships of both friendship and romantic to peace treaties and negotiations of all types there is plenty of room for good and accurate communication, where understanding of one party is at least close enough to what is being by the other to make life manageable. So what is going on?

I’ve previously mentioned a philosophical notion of which practical example I’ve taken to calling “gap-filling.” (Mentioned in entries “Absence of Knowledge Is Not Presence of Truth” and “Filling in the Gaps: Communication Failure in Relationships”) This behavior is shown when an absence of knowledge is identified and current methods of interpreting that absence are not providing the needed substance, leading to the supposition that by necessity another form of knowing must be used. I used this notion to indicate how some, often based on a misunderstanding of science combined with ignorance of the current facts at hand, declare the absence of certainty grounds for declaring their mystical or intuitive truth (most notably Evolutionary Theory, which is not a belief itself but a theoretical system of postulates which are provable and have been repeatedly), I also noted that the practice can be applied to personal relationships as well. In relationships “gap-filling” most often occurs when something has been said but it doesn’t quite match what is assumed to be true and so other knowledge, only tangentially related to the current situation, is identified to fill in the gap between what is said and the assumption. This is done rather than asking questions to clarify, undoubtedly because of concern that in fact the assumption is not true. Examples abound if one takes but a moment to ponder the numerous situations in which a friend comes crying to you hurt over the now known fact of someone’s lack of interest and you ruefully shake your head having known all along. Not to place myself above the fray here because I too have done the same thing, it’s certainly not exclusive to a specific gender. In any case, there is much room still despite the ubiquity of examples showing it can be done to work on making better communication.

I identify with polyamory as a relationship style or way of living. For those who don’t know, polyamory essentially boils down to loving multiple people at the same time. Since this quite basic definition could be used to describe nearly anyone who uses the term “love” to mean more than the romantic type, I will note that where poly differs is the intent of the follow-through. Where most will stick to pre-established societal distinctions, poly will explore love to the fullest extent that a connection can go, regardless of the number of people involved. Number means less than the quality of the connection being pursued and that quality is established based on the connection between the two or more parties involved. To say that this requires epic levels of communication would be an understatement equivalent to whatever immediate example just floated through your consciousness. Now, just as the pursuit of connections within poly takes on a more deliberate conscious intent than in the rest of society, so the same applies to communication. This is where I want to distinguish communication as an act and as a principle, hence the title of this entry.

“Gap-filling” applies to the communicative act, the substantive interchange between two or more people supplying information to one another. As Daniel Siegel notes, relationships are a combination of energy and information flow, a definition that in no small part can apply to consciousness as well with the addition of the individual felt experience. Communication is at core about, as even the root word notes, communion or the interchange of thoughts/emotions. Another way to look at communion is the union of community, where community means any group beyond an individual. Here is where the incredible nature and power of communication is known, where the interchange of information is combined with the flow of energy between two or more people in an existential union. In other words, when you engage in communication with another you are joined in a created world, the making of which is a product of the individual means of interacting with information and the energy patterns associated with the history of experiences and their recall for everyone involved. Thus, communication is not just an act but a principle of living and we engage in it haphazardly at our peril. Yes, yes, I’m being melodramatic again, but I really can’t overstate this point. Communication is not two separate and context-free individual entities lobbing words at each other, it is an interplay of energy and information within the context of a context-full reality. Have you ever looked at a couple and marveled at the way they finish their sentences or simply seem to “get” one another and yet others don’t grasp the exchange? This is why.

Lest people feel vindicated here in declaring to others “you can’t understand,” especially when in the context of others noting the trouble of the connection, I want to add that this knowledge is not incapable of being subject to criticism. We are all of us human and so all knowledge open to one is, albeit in a different level of nuance, knowable to another, but the difference in shading is not enough to make a completely different picture. This is where “gap-filling” comes in again, as it is one among many errors in communication that may indeed feel and is quite real to the person employing the behavior and in fact the knowledge may even be opaque to others for a time, but it is not outside of knowability. Often when someone declares “you just don’t know” it’s out of fear and a deep need to dwell in some delusion concerning themselves or the connection in question (but that’s another topic). Point being, if it is acknowledged as a living practice that communication creates whole new worlds of experience then one should be concerned with just how those worlds are being created and the nature of how they may feel exclusive or separating to others or engender such feelings within the people involved. Here is where the peril is and one of the foundations of the “Us vs. Them” mentality in political and social discourse.

I don’t want to leave on a negative though. Communication or communal-creation is a beautiful and powerful facet of human existence. There is no greater feeling than that engendered by the creation of our worlds when bonding with another, whether the practice be that of simply talking, doing an activity together or engaging in other forms of interaction from nestling on a couch reading to sex. What poly does is attempt to bring this communication principle and place it into constant conscious practice, but whether you identify as poly or not is beside the point. Recognizing the inevitable creation involved in communication will help in any connection of whatever form.