We all agree that communication is crucial. Especially in relationships. Silence between partners at most times is regarded as negative: something is wrong, when nobody reaches out to the other. Communication fails come early of dramatic fails of partnership.
Why is silence on one side regarded as negative and as a high rhetoric skill to steer conversation on another?
How much communication is necessary, and when does it become tiresome to the other? Redundancy or repetitiveness is tiring, and many a relation even breaks on those repetitions of dumb nonsense.
Silence is verbal silence, semantic silence, and we should know that there is more than semantics. Even more crucial than a politically correct conversation is the truth behind the words. Words are used to lie. It’s harder and more unlikely to lie without words.
Obviously silence can be a denial of communication, but maybe a denial of carrying on repetitive bullshit or lies. Denial of semantics IS also communication without words, but honest. It’s a truth that is hard to accept, though nevertheless a truth.
Communication without words, in silence, requests special skills to be conducted. Receive and decode and understand and respond to a wordless message demands active emphatic thinking, thinking without words.
The advantage is to have more options to understand deeper layers of our being, without being nailed down to words, maybe improperly or hastily chosen.
To communicate in silence is a result of a long partnership and requests not only life experience but a special way of “listening” into the other person and the whole situation. It’s a holistic way of communicating, in other words.