be a source of information and reflection for someone involves starting a process of mental or intrinsic change in the person for questioning. attitude can be positive - or negative - to the stimulus generated by the (s) question (s) or simply the change of mental context of the respondent and his vision to the interrogator (s).
These attitudes that are classified as distress or eutress, in psychological terms, not the only phenomenon observed in this process cognitive apprehension.
Something that really catches my attention to interview some professionals in various fields, is the role and the poses they adopt them to enter the abstract field of reflection and verbal expression of such thoughts, which often are structured the time - conversation -.
is easy to narrate some events experienced, but things get complicated when trying to interpret that experience, especially to stimuli generated by the question and the pressure of a camera that records every word and expose the essence of past actions .
funny thing is that many questioned adopt a negative attitude, angry, or suspicious with your answers to deliver. Suddenly you wonder what is the cause of the trouble?
This anger caused by the apprehension of the question in the questioning itself is simply an inability to express a synoptic response on an issue that can be very complex, but through observation and reflection upon, it is simple at a time.
what extent the questions have the privilege of ignorance or simply the difference of rationality?, Is it an error or an interrogator must realize their ignorance about them? Or is it the inability to respond, which questioned the causes of these "bumps" communication?
Because of this problem is currently classified the types of interview, obviously depending on the questions to ask, but the fact that a person asks another on an issue does NOT mean that it ever disposes of subjugating or, indeed, it is often purposely such disposition.
However, given this issue reflects the intolerance within society and, especially, in the intellectual society of Peru.
other hand, what does make an implicit question answered? - As those who like both politicians and intellectuals - means that there is no question, just a kind of dialogue, although there is an interrogator.
But
Who can serve the information whether previously rationalized as the questioner? Why ask something that already reasoned?
If there is something to defend, as well as the right to life, the right to ask and think freely without discomfort or discrimination involved, because it is an attack on media and mental development of a country .
0 comments:
Post a Comment