Does anyone ever feel like casual speech, in whatever form, be it gossip, retelling of one's activities in the near past, expressing trivial opinions, etc., serves a definite purpose of concealing emotional pain or character faults?

Such casual speech seems to me to be a means of sustaining one's vanity, by avoiding disclosure of one's hardships and faults.

To be fair though, although I am, in person, very untalkative, that very silence is of this faulty nature. I don't talk because I'm afraid that people might discover what I'm actually feeling. With that being said, certain cases of non-speech could be viewed in a similar light.

very interesting topic.
to articulate so well such a subtle quality of this aspect of social interaction indicates an acute awareness of the nature of your character.
i can relate.

however, i feel that we must note what is defined as 'casual speech'.
for example, 'gossip', on the contrary can easily reveal emotional inconsistencies and perceived faults of character, rather than conceal them.
to those unaware of the image they impart, then yes, it may definitely serve the purpose of subconsciously concealing that aspect of themselves.

in contrast, it can speak volumes of one's character if the opposite is true, i.e. full disclosure of one's hardships and faults to everyone one meets.

we are alike concerning our reserved, uncommunicative nature.
except conversely, i like to speak for the purpose of engaging and exposing my true feelings concerning the subject, although i will usually only speak if spoken to..but i do as i am led.

thanks for being me.

I'm not sure if you mean for better or for worse in this case, but I assume you mean for worse.

If you mean for worse, then I actually disagree, but it requires explanation. If a person speaks at length of his faults to everyone when it is unnatural and unwarranted, then sure it could be a glaring mistake. But it would actually be a form of concealment because such out-of-tune behavior would require emotional dissonance. Basically, in such a case a person would likely be intellectualizing his character as a veal for tangible emotions buried within himself. (and I have been guilty of this, in an attempt to reveal bottled up feelings)

But if a person is always forthcoming about his faults without any attendant discord, then that would be an indication of good character, yet a form of full disclosure IMO.

i meant for "better", hence 'in contrast'. forgive me if it came across unclear.

interesting..would such behavior necessarily require emotional dissonance?
or is it possible some people just like to blab?

some may feel the need to blab about their emotions openly in order to later objectively intellectualize their character..

but even in displaying the expected discord, is it not possible to perceive an air of sarcasm in the speaker's tone which conveys congeniality in their self-victimization?

I got lost with you here.

I might have been trying to explain some of my own behavior with the 'emotional dissonace' situation. Actually, my manner of speaking can be quite complicated and admittedly disfunctional at times.

The reason I tend to fixate on this subject of casual speech of others is that I tend to avoid whatever kind of speech would be liberating for myself (largely out of fear), opting to fixate on that of others instead. It might be an unhealthy tendency, but I'm dumbfounded by what seems like people's endless attempts to evade beneficial manners of speaking, even though I accomplish similar shortcomings by saying nothing at all! Good for you if you are not like this.

As for the strategy of intellectualizing ones's faults as opposed to discovering one's potential, what I'm talking about can be compared to modern sit-coms where the character makes a supposedly humorous admittance of some fault with a sort of deadpan one-liner where the audience is cued (or bullied?) to sympathize. And what would perhaps be superior would be if the character actually embodied the vulnerability behind the fault and accepted whatever may be the result, be it hostility or sympathy from the listeners (in this case, other characters in the show). Of course it is in left field to literally expect sit-com characters to make such efforts... the plot could get severely derailed.

I only speak of nuances here cob.
ours is the same finger pointing at the moon, although the angles and trajectories may differ slightly, we still eventually get there..

care to share an example of what you perceive as liberating kinds of speech?

I like the sitcom analogy.
it's actually a perfect example of what I posed, although 'superiority' has no say in television.

This really does not have to do with God, Religion, or Theology so I am going to move it to OOT.

no

no

People who talk too much drive me nuts. If you don't have any useful information to convey or a legitimately funny/interesting story to tell then STFU.

It's a way to socialize in a light and fun way, when both deeper external interests (e.g., advanced sports stats, Kurosawa films, auto-erotic asphyxiation, vibrator collections) and serious personal and emotional interests (e.g., a recent breakup, your lack of confidence, your sadness over your vibrator collection being stolen) are either not shared by the other person or not good discussion topics at the moment because of either their inappropriateness, your being tired of discussing them, your lack of familiarity with the other person, or any of the gagillion other reasons you might not want to have a serious conversation. Or something.

It's going to be funny to look back at this thread and watch how much the quality of discussion will take a nosedive once this thread got moved here.

You two better get a room.

They had a room. They got kicked out and now they're sleeping on our couch.

Some people talk too much. OTOH OP needs to drink more.