Consciousness, Conversation and Conversational Leadership How our experiences shape conversation, relationships and thinking together

Every conversation is more than an exchange of words and ideas. We each experience it differently, yet we often overlook how those experiences shape our thinking, relationships and willingness to contribute. Greater conversational awareness can help us understand one another, think together more effectively and take responsibility for the conversations we create.

Conversation is usually described as an exchange of information, ideas or opinions. But every conversation is also an experience, and those experiences shape how we think, feel and respond to one another. Understanding this dimension of conversation offers an important perspective on the practice of Conversational Leadership.

Conversation is an experience

In the earlier posts in this chapter, consciousness was explored as the capacity to have subjective experiences. Seeing a colour, hearing music, feeling pain or enjoying a conversation are not simply things the brain detects and processes. They are things that we experience.

A conversation is therefore not simply an exchange of words or information. It is also an experience for everyone involved. We may feel interested, bored, encouraged, uncomfortable, respected, ignored, anxious or excited. We may leave a conversation feeling more connected to others or more isolated.

These experiences are not incidental to what happens in a conversation. They influence what we are willing to say, how carefully we listen, whether we question our assumptions and how open we remain to different perspectives.

When we feel dismissed, we may withdraw from a discussion. When we feel respected, we may be more willing to express an uncertain or unpopular opinion. A thoughtful question can stimulate curiosity, while a careless remark can create embarrassment or defensiveness.

Conversation and our experiences interact continuously. What we feel influences how we participate, and how we participate influences what others experience.

Conversation is not merely something we do. It is something we experience.

This connects the philosophical question of consciousness to the everyday practice of conversation. It also suggests we cannot judge a conversation’s quality solely by the information exchanged or the decisions reached. How we experience the interaction matters too.

Separate inner worlds

One defining feature of subjective experience is its personal nature. We each experience the world from our own perspective, and none of us can directly experience what it feels like to be someone else.

We can describe our feelings, thoughts and experiences, but words never fully capture another person’s inner world. Even when we use the same words, we may be describing rather different experiences.

Consider two of us leaving the same meeting. One describes it as open and constructive, while the other feels that their contributions were ignored. We attended the same meeting, heard the same words and observed the same events, but our experiences differed.

Our memories, expectations, emotions, beliefs and previous experiences may all have influenced how we interpreted what happened.

Conversation provides a way of exploring those differences. Through listening, asking questions, and sharing experiences, we can begin to understand how others see and experience the world.

But this understanding is always incomplete. It depends on what we can and are willing to communicate, and how accurately others interpret what we say.

This connects to the Johari Window, which explores the relationship between what we know about ourselves and what others know about us. It reminds us that some aspects of ourselves are hidden from others, while others may be apparent to them but not to us.

Conversation, feedback and openness can help reduce these gaps in understanding, although they can never eliminate them entirely.

This is why assumptions can damage conversation. It is easy to assume others see a situation as we do, or that their words mean what they would mean if we had said them.

When disagreement arises, we may immediately defend a position or explain why the other person is mistaken. Yet a more useful question may be: What are you seeing or experiencing that others are not?

Such a question does not require agreement. It invites exploration and creates an opportunity to understand a perspective that might otherwise remain hidden.

How conversation changes experience

Conversation does more than reveal what we are experiencing. It can change our experiences.

A difficult conversation may begin with anxiety and end with relief. A disagreement may grow into greater mutual understanding, or leave us feeling angry and alienated. A question may encourage us to reconsider a long-held assumption, while a personal story may change how we feel about an issue.

These changes are not simply the result of information being transferred from one person to another. They emerge through the interaction itself.

How we listen can influence how comfortable others feel speaking. The tone of a question can make the difference between curiosity and interrogation. A moment of silence may give us space to think, while an interruption may discourage us from continuing.

Experience and conversation have a reciprocal relationship. Our experiences influence our participation, while the conversation continually shapes what we experience.

This is particularly important when we face uncertainty, disagreement or complexity. In such situations, we may need to question assumptions, acknowledge doubts or explore ideas that aren’t yet fully formed. Whether we are willing to do so depends partly on how we experience the conversation.

This connects closely to the principle of connection before content. The quality of our connection can shape the quality of the thinking that becomes possible.

Connection does not mean that we must all agree or feel comfortable all the time. Difficult questions and disagreement are often essential. But we can explore differences more effectively when we feel respected and believe our contributions will be taken seriously.

The challenge is not to eliminate discomfort, but to create conditions in which we can engage with it constructively.

Consciousness and thinking together

Conversation also plays an important role in developing our thinking.

We do not always arrive at a conversation with fully formed ideas. Sometimes we discover what we think by attempting to explain it to someone else. A question may reveal an assumption, an objection may expose a weakness, and another person’s experience may suggest a possibility that we had not previously considered.

This connects to the idea of interthinking, associated with the work of Neil Mercer and Rupert Wegerif, among others.

Interthinking involves using conversation to think together. Rather than simply exchanging existing ideas, we develop our understanding through interaction. The resulting insights may differ from anything any of us brought to the conversation.

Consciousness and thinking are not the same thing, as explored earlier in this chapter. Nor does thinking together imply that a group possesses a collective consciousness.

Nevertheless, we bring our subjective experiences into the conversation. Our memories, feelings, concerns, and personal interpretations shape what we notice, what we contribute, and how we respond.

Through conversation, some of those experiences become available to others. A personal story may reveal an aspect of a problem that abstract analysis has overlooked. An expression of concern may prompt us to reconsider a decision. A different interpretation of events may challenge assumptions we took for granted.

The conversation can also change how we experience the issue being discussed. What initially seemed threatening may become easier to understand. What appeared straightforward may become more complex. A previously unnoticed possibility may become worth exploring.

In this sense, thinking together is not simply about combining information from different people. It also means bringing our different experiences and perspectives into contact and letting them influence one another.

Conversation can change not only what we think, but also how we experience and understand the world.

Conversational awareness and leadership

Consciousness as subjective experience should not be confused with being conscious of something. Having experiences differs from deliberately noticing our thoughts, feelings, behaviour, or what is happening around us. Nevertheless, these forms of awareness are important to the practice of Conversational Leadership.

The post Conversational Awareness explores this skill in greater detail. It involves paying attention to ourselves, other participants and the wider conversational situation. It means noticing not only what is said, but also how it is said, what remains unspoken, and how the conversation develops.

But there is an important limitation. Observing someone’s behaviour does not mean knowing what they are experiencing. Silence might indicate discomfort, disagreement, careful thought or simply a preference for listening. Conversational awareness therefore requires curiosity and inquiry, not just observation and interpretation.

This also connects to empathy, the ability to understand and respond to something of another person’s experience. Empathy does not mean feeling exactly what another person feels, nor does it guarantee that we have understood their experience correctly. It involves trying to appreciate their perspective while recognising the limits of our understanding.

Conversational Leadership involves taking responsibility for creating the conditions in which we can think, learn and act together. Part of that responsibility is recognising that we each experience the conversation differently, and that those experiences may influence our willingness and ability to contribute.

The aim is not to control how others feel, but to stay attentive to what is happening, question assumptions and help create conditions where different perspectives can be explored.

What changes when AI joins the conversation?

The emergence of conversational AI raises some particularly interesting questions.

AI systems can now participate in extended conversations, respond to questions, challenge ideas and help us explore difficult problems. Such interactions can be useful, stimulating and sometimes surprisingly engaging.

But as discussed in the earlier post Is AI Conscious?, it remains uncertain whether AI systems have subjective experiences.

This uncertainty introduces an important distinction.

An AI may help us feel understood without experiencing understanding itself.

An AI can respond sensitively to a personal concern, ask thoughtful questions or help us make sense of a difficult experience. We may genuinely feel reassured, challenged or understood, regardless of whether the AI experiences anything.

Our experience of the conversation is real. But that does not establish that the AI has a corresponding experience.

Does this difference matter? The answer may depend on the purpose and nature of the conversation.

If our aim is to explore ideas, clarify thinking or examine alternative perspectives, an AI may be a valuable conversational participant without needing to possess subjective experience.

But when a conversation involves mutual vulnerability, emotional connection or a relationship between people with their own experiences and concerns, the question of consciousness becomes more significant.

There is a difference between receiving a response that expresses understanding and knowing that another experiencing being is trying to understand us.

This does not make one form of conversation necessarily useful and the other useless. It suggests that they may offer different kinds of value.

The distinction becomes particularly important when AI participates in group conversations. An AI may introduce useful questions, challenge assumptions or help us explore possibilities. But its presence may also change how we interact with one another.

We might defer to the AI’s apparent authority, become less willing to challenge its responses, or focus on the system rather than on one another. Alternatively, an AI might help us articulate ideas, introduce neglected perspectives or stimulate a more thoughtful discussion.

These effects depend on how we introduce and use AI, and how we respond to it.

For Conversational Leadership, the important question is therefore not simply whether AI can hold a conversation or whether it is conscious. It is also about how AI’s presence changes the experience and quality of the conversation for those of us involved.

We can explore this through practice, observation, and reflection, without waiting for the philosophical question of AI consciousness to be resolved.

A responsibility for the conversations we create

Earlier posts in this chapter explored what consciousness is, why subjective experience remains difficult to explain, how consciousness differs from intelligence, and whether AI might possess it.

These questions remain important, even though many of them are unresolved. But consciousness also matters in everyday conversation.

We are not simply sources of information, holders of opinions or participants in decision-making processes. We are experiencing beings. What happens in a conversation can affect how we feel, what we understand, how we relate to others and what we become willing or able to do.

Conversation can help us understand experiences beyond our own. It can change our thinking, challenge assumptions, strengthen relationships and open up new possibilities. It can also leave us feeling excluded, misunderstood or unwilling to participate.

This does not mean that every conversation must be comfortable or harmonious. Disagreement, uncertainty and difficult questions are often necessary for learning and change. What matters is how we engage with those difficulties and the conditions we create for one another.

Conversational Leadership involves recognising these dimensions of conversation and taking responsibility for how we participate in them. It calls for curiosity about others’ experiences, awareness of our own behaviour and attention to the relationships and dynamics that shape collective thinking.

The central insight is simple: conversation is not merely something we do together. We experience it together, though each of us experiences it differently.

And the experience of a conversation helps determine what becomes possible within it.

That raises a practical question worth carrying into every conversation:

What kind of experience are we creating for one another, and how might it affect our ability to think and act together?

As we take part in conversations, we can pay closer attention to how we and others experience them. We can question our assumptions, listen more carefully and notice how our words and actions affect others. By doing so, we create better conditions for understanding, learning and thinking together.