There are situations whereby we need to stay calm and be silent. Not every issue deserves your opinion, sometimes silence speaks louder than words. Here are 7 situations where you should stay silent.
Disclaimer: All images are copyright to their respective owner.
Thank you for the A2A. I’m happy to critique your link. I hope this is why you asked me.
Be silent if your words could damage a friendship. Should I then speak if my silence damages it, or prolongs it in its dying agony? All relationships have, at their core, a basis of trust and honest communication. Whether the friendship is damaged or not, my words, ideally, shouldn’t change that.
The most my feeble words could hope to accomplish, would be to shed light on a wound that we both already feel. Sometimes we have to accept that its time to move on, not by swallowing our bitterness, but by speaking our hearts.
Be silent when you don’t have all the facts This one is subtle, because it intuitively sounds true. It is not. The reality is that nobody has “all the facts”. Whereas its a bad idea to jump to conclusions before hearing both sides of a story, and you shouldn’t accuse people without proof, sometimes you need to find out more, and asking questions, not silence, is the way to do that. Don’t be petty, though. Most of the time, on this one, silence probably is the best option here. These stories normally unfold themselves when its their time.
Be silent in the heat of anger. Yes. This one is correct, always.
Be silent if your words convey the wrong impression, I want to think I’m fairly decent at minding my tone, but the reality of it is I’m probably even better not minding it. I suppose I just enjoy saying what I have to say with feeling, even if that does make someone slightly uncomfortable.
Be silent if your feeling critical. What? Take a vow of silence? No, thank you.
Be silent if you can’t say it without screaming. Under most circumstances, I’d agree. I can think of an exception though, and that's if you’re in a Screamo band!
Be silent if your words would offend a person You can please some of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time. I do occasionally offend people, but I don’t mean to. I hope that nobody would intentionally do this, but please understand that not everyone will know your boundaries, until they get to know you.
Again, thanks for the A2A, I hope this is what you wanted!
When a child is getting told off by a parent . At funerals if you can maintain composure it helps others . In church . At meetings so the speaker can be heard . On public transport it's just polite . When it's none of your business . ( My favourite )
Some of the above are more appropriate than others .
I opt to remain quiet when talking to an illogical person. It is not that I am more logical or smarter, it is just that instead of wasting time trying to convince someone that they way they are thinking is incorrect I would rather remain quiet.
Lots of circumstances. At church, a funeral, a wedding, a meeting, during a class, in court, in a movie, during a play, at the theater, when you're hunting, when you're being accused of something in court…..
In a situation where someone your close to is very angry. In this situation I remain calm and don’t react. I get up and go into another room until they cool down. I don’t add fuel to the fire.
If theirs or somebody elses life is in danger. It's best not to say a word and comply. If you see a fight going on,keep away and then find somewhere safe and call the police.
This is a very broad question. In this case, context is everything. Generally speaking, unless the situation is physically dire or dangerous, or moral codes are being broken, I usually keep out of most situations, but I do watch them like a hawk to see if intervention is needed or wanted.
First, I will address the Wikipedia entry for an “Acceptable Loss”: An acceptable loss, also known as acceptable damage or acceptable casualties, is a military euphemism used to indicate casualties or destruction inflicted by the enemy that is considered minor or tolerable. ... Thus, the minefield must be “breached” even if this means some casualties … . A small scale practical example might be when the advancement of troops is halted by a minefield. In many military operations, the speed of advancement is more important than the safety of troops. Thus, the minefield must be "breached" even if this means some casualties.
Out in the real world, we’re not soldiers and this is not a war. There are a few reasons to actively choose to remain silent or not react, but they are few and situation-specific. Active silence or not reacting are understandable when—
Speaking up or reacting poses a threat to a more important objective or mission [See the wartime euphemism at the beginning of this answer]; Speaking up or reacting poses a greater threat to the health, safety, mental welfare, or lives of bystander(s) and witness(es) (including the person concerned about speaking up or reacting) than to the health, safety, mental welfare, or life of the people who are directly impacted by a given situation; Speaking up or reacting poses a threat to the work being done by bystanders and witnesses (including the person concerned about speaking up or reacting) to gather and develop pertinent facts and background related to the bad actor who has created a given situation, which remains ongoing in spite of warnings, and shows no sign of voluntary abatement, in order to present it to superiors or authorities for further action; or Speaking up or reacting poses a threat to a known current investigation by superiors or authorities to target and eliminate the threat posed by the bad actor who created the given situation, which has remained ongoing in spite of warnings, and shows no sign of voluntary abatement. The remaining reasons require no action and are either calculated to achieve a personal gain or avoid a perceived significant loss—apathy, indifference, disdain, hostility, amusement, or secret admiration for those who create negative situations; alternatively, a fear of reprisal or revenge, and being a secondary target of the bad actor who created the given situation, which has been active and ongoing in spite of warnings, and shows no sign of voluntary abatement.
But the bullet-points above are the only scenarios that come to my mind as legitimate situation-specific reasons for actively choosing to remain silent or non-reactive. I will, however, note that anyone who finds himself or herself in the situations that are bullet-pointed above, would then actually be dealing with someone who poses an imminent threat to them as well.
Bad actors sometimes forget the most imperative one can learn as an adult: Once the trust is gone, everyone is dispensable. Not a sermon, just a thought.
When you knew your best friend was being cheated on and she finds out….
It may look like you're not a real friend but imagine if you told her and she told her boyfriend which obviously he'll deny and now you look like the bad guy and she ends your friendship because she said you're toxic and jealous etc
When breaking silence or having the wrong reaction will set someone off. When supporting people living with disabilities, there are many times when silence is necessary, and showing the wrong reaction will either trigger a difficult situation, or make a difficult situation worst.
I can think of a situation where remaining silent would harm each of these scenarios, so I don’t know if these are great rules to live by.
If I was dating someone and they slept around and cheated on me, and a friend knew but stayed silent while I poured my heart (and wallet) into the girl, because they didn’t want to hurt me or our relationship. That would be bad for me and the friend, or think of the case where I was being a bad partner, my friend knew, yet I was unaware. If my partner then leaves me listing all the things that I was doing wrong, and my friends didn’t say anything, are they really friends?
When your parents give you instructions to behave or suffer the consequences.
ReplyDeleteThank you for the A2A. I’m happy to critique your link. I hope this is why you asked me.
ReplyDeleteBe silent if your words could damage a friendship.
Should I then speak if my silence damages it, or prolongs it in its dying agony? All relationships have, at their core, a basis of trust and honest communication. Whether the friendship is damaged or not, my words, ideally, shouldn’t change that.
The most my feeble words could hope to accomplish, would be to shed light on a wound that we both already feel. Sometimes we have to accept that its time to move on, not by swallowing our bitterness, but by speaking our hearts.
Be silent when you don’t have all the facts
This one is subtle, because it intuitively sounds true. It is not. The reality is that nobody has “all the facts”. Whereas its a bad idea to jump to conclusions before hearing both sides of a story, and you shouldn’t accuse people without proof, sometimes you need to find out more, and asking questions, not silence, is the way to do that. Don’t be petty, though. Most of the time, on this one, silence probably is the best option here. These stories normally unfold themselves when its their time.
Be silent in the heat of anger.
Yes. This one is correct, always.
Be silent if your words convey the wrong impression,
I want to think I’m fairly decent at minding my tone, but the reality of it is I’m probably even better not minding it. I suppose I just enjoy saying what I have to say with feeling, even if that does make someone slightly uncomfortable.
Be silent if your feeling critical.
What? Take a vow of silence? No, thank you.
Be silent if you can’t say it without screaming.
Under most circumstances, I’d agree. I can think of an exception though, and that's if you’re in a Screamo band!
Be silent if your words would offend a person
You can please some of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time. I do occasionally offend people, but I don’t mean to. I hope that nobody would intentionally do this, but please understand that not everyone will know your boundaries, until they get to know you.
Again, thanks for the A2A, I hope this is what you wanted!
When in court and in front of a judge.
ReplyDeleteWhen a child is getting told off by a parent . At funerals if you can maintain composure it helps others . In church . At meetings so the speaker can be heard . On public transport it's just polite . When it's none of your business . ( My favourite )
ReplyDeleteSome of the above are more appropriate than others .
I opt to remain quiet when talking to an illogical person. It is not that I am more logical or smarter, it is just that instead of wasting time trying to convince someone that they way they are thinking is incorrect I would rather remain quiet.
ReplyDeleteLots of circumstances. At church, a funeral, a wedding, a meeting, during a class, in court, in a movie, during a play, at the theater, when you're hunting, when you're being accused of something in court…..
ReplyDeleteIn a situation where someone your close to is very angry. In this situation I remain calm and don’t react. I get up and go into another room until they cool down. I don’t add fuel to the fire.
ReplyDeleteCourt is the first thing that comes to mind.
ReplyDeleteIf theirs or somebody elses life is in danger. It's best not to say a word and comply. If you see a fight going on,keep away and then find somewhere safe and call the police.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very broad question. In this case, context is everything. Generally speaking, unless the situation is physically dire or dangerous, or moral codes are being broken, I usually keep out of most situations, but I do watch them like a hawk to see if intervention is needed or wanted.
ReplyDeleteI hope this helps.
When one has taken an oath. Do not react personally to a situation. Keep calm and remain cool.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I will address the Wikipedia entry for an “Acceptable Loss”: An acceptable loss, also known as acceptable damage or acceptable casualties, is a military euphemism used to indicate casualties or destruction inflicted by the enemy that is considered minor or tolerable. ... Thus, the minefield must be “breached” even if this means some casualties … . A small scale practical example might be when the advancement of troops is halted by a minefield. In many military operations, the speed of advancement is more important than the safety of troops. Thus, the minefield must be "breached" even if this means some casualties.
ReplyDeleteOut in the real world, we’re not soldiers and this is not a war. There are a few reasons to actively choose to remain silent or not react, but they are few and situation-specific. Active silence or not reacting are understandable when—
Speaking up or reacting poses a threat to a more important objective or mission [See the wartime euphemism at the beginning of this answer];
Speaking up or reacting poses a greater threat to the health, safety, mental welfare, or lives of bystander(s) and witness(es) (including the person concerned about speaking up or reacting) than to the health, safety, mental welfare, or life of the people who are directly impacted by a given situation;
Speaking up or reacting poses a threat to the work being done by bystanders and witnesses (including the person concerned about speaking up or reacting) to gather and develop pertinent facts and background related to the bad actor who has created a given situation, which remains ongoing in spite of warnings, and shows no sign of voluntary abatement, in order to present it to superiors or authorities for further action; or
Speaking up or reacting poses a threat to a known current investigation by superiors or authorities to target and eliminate the threat posed by the bad actor who created the given situation, which has remained ongoing in spite of warnings, and shows no sign of voluntary abatement.
The remaining reasons require no action and are either calculated to achieve a personal gain or avoid a perceived significant loss—apathy, indifference, disdain, hostility, amusement, or secret admiration for those who create negative situations; alternatively, a fear of reprisal or revenge, and being a secondary target of the bad actor who created the given situation, which has been active and ongoing in spite of warnings, and shows no sign of voluntary abatement.
But the bullet-points above are the only scenarios that come to my mind as legitimate situation-specific reasons for actively choosing to remain silent or non-reactive. I will, however, note that anyone who finds himself or herself in the situations that are bullet-pointed above, would then actually be dealing with someone who poses an imminent threat to them as well.
Bad actors sometimes forget the most imperative one can learn as an adult: Once the trust is gone, everyone is dispensable. Not a sermon, just a thought.
When you knew your best friend was being cheated on and she finds out….
ReplyDeleteIt may look like you're not a real friend but imagine if you told her and she told her boyfriend which obviously he'll deny and now you look like the bad guy and she ends your friendship because she said you're toxic and jealous etc
When speaking will make things worse.
ReplyDeleteWhen breaking silence or having the wrong reaction will set someone off. When supporting people living with disabilities, there are many times when silence is necessary, and showing the wrong reaction will either trigger a difficult situation, or make a difficult situation worst.
ReplyDeleteI can think of a situation where remaining silent would harm each of these scenarios, so I don’t know if these are great rules to live by.
ReplyDeleteIf I was dating someone and they slept around and cheated on me, and a friend knew but stayed silent while I poured my heart (and wallet) into the girl, because they didn’t want to hurt me or our relationship. That would be bad for me and the friend, or think of the case where I was being a bad partner, my friend knew, yet I was unaware. If my partner then leaves me listing all the things that I was doing wrong, and my friends didn’t say anything, are they really friends?