The Lost Art of Listening: What David Bohm Taught Us About Dialogue

Most ‘conversations’ aren’t really conversations. They’re turn-based battles where people wait to speak rather than actually listening. Words become weapons, pauses are just reload time, and the goal is to be right, not to understand.

David Bohm saw this happening everywhere, from scientific debates to boardrooms to dinner tables and he knew something was missing. Real dialogue. Not a polite exchange of ideas, not structured debate, but a way of thinking together that doesn’t assume we already know everything worth knowing.

This wasn’t just an intellectual exercise for him. He believed dialogue could transform how we solve problems, how we collaborate, and, ultimately, how we live together. And in a world where communication is more abundant but less meaningful than ever, his ideas might be exactly what we need.

David Bohm: The Physicist Who Wanted to Fix How We Think

Bohm wasn’t a psychologist or a communications expert. He was a theoretical physicist, known for his work in quantum mechanics. But he didn’t stop at studying particles, he turned his attention to something just as unpredictable: human thought.

What he saw was unsettling. People weren’t actually thinking together. They were stuck in patterns, defending positions rather than exploring possibilities. Even the smartest minds, when put in a room together, often ended up reinforcing their own assumptions instead of discovering something new.

He realised the issue wasn’t just what people were saying, it was how they were thinking. Or, more accurately, how they were failing to see their own thinking in action.

Beyond Talking: Bohm’s Radical Definition of Dialogue

For Bohm, dialogue wasn’t just about exchanging words. It was about creating something new in real time. He described it as:

“A stream of meaning flowing among and through us and between us. This will make possible a flow of meaning in the whole group, out of which may emerge some new understanding.”

This is not conversation as we know it. It’s not debate, where the loudest or most confident voice wins. It’s not discussion, which literally means “to break things apart.” And it’s definitely not an argument disguised as an exchange of ideas.

Dialogue is not about winning, it’s about seeing. Seeing your own thoughts, seeing how they collide or connect with others, seeing what emerges when you stop assuming you already know.

Why Most Conversations Fail

We assume we’re good at talking to each other. We’re not.

Most of the time, we’re engaged in what Bohm called fragmented thought, a kind of mental autopilot where we only hear what fits our existing worldview. We pick out the bits that confirm what we already believe and discard the rest. We’re not bad people for doing this, it’s just how the mind works.

But if we never slow down, if we never examine our own thinking, we become trapped in it. And when two people, or a whole organisation, or an entire society are stuck in separate realities, nothing truly new can emerge.

That’s why Bohm insisted on three key shifts in how we approach dialogue.

Suspending Assumptions (Instead of Clutching Them Like a Life Raft)

Imagine someone challenges a core belief you hold, maybe about leadership, success, or how the world works. What’s your first reaction? Probably defensiveness.

Bohm’s approach asks something radically different: suspend judgment. Not suppress it, not pretend you don’t have strong opinions, but just… hold them loosely. Instead of reacting, watch your own thinking in action.

This is not about agreeing with everything you hear. It’s about creating space for real exploration. When you’re no longer in a rush to defend, you can actually listen.

Seeing Your Own Thoughts (Instead of Being Owned by Them)

Bohm borrowed a concept from neuroscience called proprioception, the ability to sense where your body is in space. You don’t have to look at your arm to know where it is; you just feel it.

He suggested we need something similar for thought. A way to notice our own mental movements without being completely controlled by them.

Most of the time, we don’t do this. We assume our thoughts are reality. We don’t stop to ask: Where did this belief come from? Why do I feel threatened by this idea? Am I actually engaging with this person, or am I reacting to my own internal story about them?

When we develop this awareness, dialogue stops being a battlefield and becomes an exploration.

Creating a Container for Dialogue (Instead of Just Talking Louder)

Bohm knew that none of this happens automatically. The right conditions need to exist.

A true dialogue space isn’t just any meeting or conversation, it’s a carefully held environment where people feel safe to question, challenge, and explore ideas without fear of looking stupid or being attacked.

This isn’t just about “psychological safety” as a buzzword. It’s about recognising that fear shuts down thinking. If people feel they’ll be ridiculed or ignored, they won’t engage. If they sense that disagreement isn’t welcome, they’ll perform agreement rather than participate honestly.

So real dialogue requires a commitment, not just from individuals, but from groups and organisations, to hold space where meaning can emerge.

Why This Matters More Than Ever

Bohm wasn’t interested in dialogue as a nice-to-have communication tool. He saw it as the key to solving the biggest problems of our time.

Because let’s be honest, most of our challenges aren’t technical, they’re relational. We have the knowledge to tackle poverty, climate change, and systemic injustice. What we lack is the ability to think together in a way that leads to real solutions.

If organisations embraced dialogue instead of hierarchy-driven decision-making, how much more innovation would emerge?

If communities practiced dialogue instead of debating entrenched positions, how much more progress could be made?

If we personally engaged in dialogue instead of reacting defensively, how much more could we learn?

This isn’t an abstract philosophy, it’s a practice. A skill. A different way of being with each other.

And maybe, just maybe, it’s exactly what we need.

At Being Humanly, we believe in creating the kind of conversations where people actually hear each other. The kind that move things forward, not just around in circles. If that’s the kind of space you’re trying to build in your organisation, come and have a yarn with us. No pressure, no perfect answers, just a chance to think together.