To listen means you have to "acknowlege" or "agree" with what is being said, no?

kmarinas86

Do you think in the vast majority of cases that those who listen agree with what is being said, acknowledge it and move on? Or, do you think that those who do not listen well disagree a lot with what is being said?

Howers

You ackowledge it, you don't neccessarily agree with it.

kmarinas86

Si.

In particular, I had in mind a child who disagrees with their parents a lot and tends to not follow what they say and cannot unlearn habits based on other people's suggestions. Could that be because the person disagrees that what they ask for is reasonable or simply disagrees with them in general? Maybe the child is afraid to agree with them, perhaps due to having a negative experience by following what is said? Perhaps he finds agreeing with others to be boring?

How common is that among the people you have met in life and on these forums?

If it is uncommon, is there a name for this personality characteristic?

Astronuc

If a child disagrees or disobeys a parents or if someone acts against authority, then that is 'oppositional behavior'.

Danger

It isn't possible to listen to someone without acknowledging (at least to yourself) what is being said. You certainly don't have to agree with it.

Darkiekurdo

What is meant with 'acknowledging'?

Moonbear

It depends entirely on what you mean by "listening." It can simply mean hearing, or more commonly, paying attention. Active listening involves some acknowledgement that one heard what was said, which is usually a good thing for clear communication. That acknowledgement certainly doesn't need to be agreement. It can be agreement, "Okay, got it," or disagreement, "No thank you," or neutral, "If I understood you correctly, you said..."

In the context described above, with a small child, parents often mean more than just listen when they tell a child to listen to them. They really mean, "listen and obey." In other words, get instructions and follow them. But, children don't always interpret it that way when asked, "Are you listening to me?" To them, "Yes," means they heard you, not that they plan to obey. Especially with teens, it's the age-old power struggle between parents and kids. Instead of asking, "Are you listening to me?" it is better to ask, "Are you going to do as I just asked?" or "Are you going to do as told?" (Every kid with half a brain knows the answer to those questions better be "yes," but if it isn't, you have to employ your own parenting skills and context of your child's answer to determine if there is a reason to discuss a refusal or issue a more forceful ultimatum where the only question that follows is, "Which privileges would you like taken away if this isn't done?")

russ_watters

I took the OP's question to mean "paying attention".

Mk

I took the question as literal. There is no need to acknowledge or to agree to be able to hear what someone is saying, although it is often polite, customary, necessary, and helpful. In one-way communication it is important to provide understandable feedback, verbal or nonverbal.

Danger

Perhaps this is a matter of semantics. 'Hearing' is one thing; 'listening' is another, in that the latter requires attention to be paid to what is said rather than just the knowledge that sound waves at a vocal frequency are impinging upon your eardrums. In order to 'listen', your brain has to acknowledge that there is speech entering. This does not necessarily imply understanding. I can listen to someone speaking French all day, and have no idea what s/he is talking about. (And no... not all Canuks are bilingual.) That doesn't mean that I'm not trying to understand, which to me makes the difference between hearing and listening.

BryanP

If you mean active listening, then yes IMO it means whatever is being said is being acknowledged. It doesn't mean that you're just "hearing" what he/she is saying without knowing a single clue of what's going on.

Of course you don't have to agree with whatever is told to you. Whether or not you want to is your choice based on whatever judgement you have towards the subject at hand.

Moonbear

I think that's the part I'm not clear about. One can listen and not acknowledge a thing yet has heard and understood it all, they just have done nothing to verify this to the one doing the talking (sometimes because they simply don't realize it's needed, and sometimes because they choose NOT to acknowledge it because it's easier to pretend they didn't hear than to disagree). Of course, if you want to save yourself the trouble of hearing the same thing repeated, it is best to acknowledge you've heard it, but that isn't required to have been listening.

BryanP

You're right on that one. I didn't take in consideration of the case that one can actually listen but just pretend they didn't hear a thing.

Gokul43201

Unless you're in the middle ages or before, listening is a whole different thing than hearing. Hearing can be completely passive, while listening involves directed attention.

Moonbear

I guess the married men haven't really chimed in too much yet.

Danger

Semantics again. That's why I specified in my first response that one has to acknowledge it internally, but not necessarily externally. If there's no internal recognition that something is said, then it's just 'hearing' rather than 'listening'.

D H

Yes, dear. I'm listening.