LEND ME YOUR EAR: HOW DO I KNOW WHAT I THINK TILL I SEE WHAT I SAY?

On an auto trip through Kentucky and Tennessee some time ago, my friend Esther and I found the scenery so breathtaking we were at a loss for words to describe it. Mark Twain said the difference between the right word and the almost-right word was like the difference between lightning and the lightning bug. We became concerned with the difference between luscious and luxuriant. Of course it's food that's luscious. Vegetation and foliage are luxuriant. We also considered luxurious, which refers to a standard of living, and lush, which serves to bridge the gap between luscious and luxuriant and is a synonym for both, as well as a word used to identify a drunk!

Our discussion turned to the art of conversation as a way of stretching the mind. And indeed, the more we talked, the more ideas were engendered and the more enlightened we both became. "That's a new approach," Esther declared at one point. "I never thought of it in quite that light."

"Neither did I till now," I replied. "I had to put it in words first. How do I know what I think till I see what I say?"

This thought-provoking gem is not original with me, but I have used it for years as an argument in favor of dinner and after-dinner conversation as against cards and TV. I have nothing against either, but I always feel somewhat misled when invited out to dinner and not warned in advance that cards or TV will take the place of conversation for the evening.

I can watch TV at home. And if I have to think hard enough to play a good game of bridge, I want something left over for the effort, and I don't mean a mere prize. It is selfish of me, but I feel I am missing a good chance to enlarge my horizons if not allowed to exchange experiences and attitudes with my hosts and their guests.

Conversation is one way of increasing one's scope of knowledge and range of thought. Writing is another. Expressing one thought on paper invariably gives rise to a succession of them. Often, it leads to a new way of viewing an old issue, or even of creating a new one. Many a writer has sat down to write one thing and wound up with something quite different. I have even wound up presenting the opposite view from the one with which I started. If we want to be fair, we have to remember there are at least two sides to almost any issue, usually many more.

Of course, fairness of thought can be death to politicians and debaters. No one should ever attempt to discuss publicly or debate upon a subject about which he is too well informed. The more he knows, the more difficult it is to follow a straight line of thinking and the more difficult to defend his own side. Distracting angles keep confusing his arguments, rendering conclusions all but impossible.

But unless one is trying to win a debate or an election, controversy is all to the good. To consider all the angles of any issue or circumstance is to render us more understanding, hence more tolerant and sympathetic even toward causes we thought we were against. Who knows, in time I might even be persuaded that there is more to be said for an evening of TV or cards than I am now willing to grant!