Week 9: Post 2

When I reflected on the pragmatic perspective of Chapter 2, I found a personal connection to the statement “[the pragmatic perspective] urges us to look carefully at patterns that emerge as people play the communication game” (Trenholm, 2008, p. 32). From the moment I began to argue (age 3 ;)) with my father, I learned more and more about our patterns of communication in argument and how to “win.” As a child, communication with my father was unequal because he was “the parent” and he often told me “what I say goes because I pay the bills!” As I aged, I learned how I could benefit from our interactions, arguing for compromise or “payoff” for both of us. Still, our relationship remained tense and strained. I honestly don’t think my father realized I’d be able to pick up on his patterns so well or would I learn how to “push his buttons” so well (for my gain). Our fighting became more about competition and I know, as I now have hindsight of those experiences, I barely remember what we were fighting about and the reasons we struggled to find peace in our relationship. As the pragmatic perspective suggests, my father and I reached a point where we recognized no one was benefiting from our arguments. As I matured through college, we found the means to “work out patterns of interaction [to] satisfy both of [us]” (Trenholm, 2008, p. 34). This allowed us to develop a mutual respect for the other and to practice civility when in disagreement.