I realize my description of interpersonal curiosity in the face of what I saw as attacks yesterday was a bit superficial, and since I’m at the laundromat again I have some time to go into more depth.
What would Inquiry, for example, have looked like in that situation? Something like this:
Data selection: Could you tell me what has happened as you see it? What have you seen or heard?
Meanings added: How do you feel about those points? What do they say to you?
Conclusions drawn: What do you feel is the right way to deal with such a situation?
Actions: What steps precisely do you feel the organizers should have taken?
And since the machine is still going around, here is one example of how Inquiry could look if I were speaking to the supporting organization or organizations that uninvited the speaker:
Data selection: I had never heard of Amina B. before this incident. What can you tell me about her?
Meanings added: What about her makes you feel she is an inappropriate speaker for this event? What do think would happen if she did speak?
Conclusions drawn: What qualifications or characteristics do you feel a speaker for this event should have?
Actions: How, in your opinion, should the organizers go about lining up such speakers? What do they need to do?
– It isn’t Inquiry if I don’t listen to the answers without trying to understand the other person’s point of view.
– Some day I really have to do more of this in real life. In my defense, in this particular case the interaction took place online and with multiple participants. That did make it harder. I would have had to be willing to invest considerable time and effort, and in this case I wasn’t.