All but one of us work from the "collaboration" model of conversation; I think the other is working from a "competition of ideas" model.
The interaction that made this difference clear to me was when one idea was met with quick and firm disagreement, and he said "OK, that didn't work, let me try another" (paraphrased).
Perhaps this observation is so obvious as to go without saying, but it was new to me.
It may provide an underlying explanation for the "going on at length to convince the group of something the group already agrees with" phenomenon, at least in his case. (I don't mean to imply that he's the only one who does such a thing, but for the rest of us, it feels more like "ooh, a shiny new argument for my point of view, let's play with it and see if it's useful." And I suppose it could be the same for him, but he does it so forcefully and doggedly that it does feel different.)
Will this help you figure out how to make him, or any of the rest of us, shut up once a point is made? I don't know. But it seemed worth saying, in case it wasn't obvious.
an observation
The interaction that made this difference clear to me was when one idea was met with quick and firm disagreement, and he said "OK, that didn't work, let me try another" (paraphrased).
Perhaps this observation is so obvious as to go without saying, but it was new to me.
It may provide an underlying explanation for the "going on at length to convince the group of something the group already agrees with" phenomenon, at least in his case. (I don't mean to imply that he's the only one who does such a thing, but for the rest of us, it feels more like "ooh, a shiny new argument for my point of view, let's play with it and see if it's useful." And I suppose it could be the same for him, but he does it so forcefully and doggedly that it does feel different.)
Will this help you figure out how to make him, or any of the rest of us, shut up once a point is made? I don't know. But it seemed worth saying, in case it wasn't obvious.