Why Does Communication Matter? And is it an attempt to control others?

Responding to THIS (clickable link) 

Someone has replied with this:


As scientists peer out into the Universe using increasingly sophisticated equipment Astronomers and Theoretical Astrophysicists are mapping the presently perceivable area. What we seem to know is that something they call dark matter and dark energy are thought to be the glue that binds the visible components together. The size of our known Universe is beyond anything most of us can imagine. As we clump everything together to give us a picture we find it looks more like an intricate fibrous structure occupying an unknown but vast amount of space. There's a constant motion/interaction of energy that could be described as representative of a living organism. We don't witness a lot of what goes on because of the scale and relative timing of the interactions. Discussing the many descriptions of what the word "God" represents to individuals accomplishes little. Living life in real time; working on trying to keep our species from destroying itself makes much more sense. I could invent/theorize scenarios that might be plausible but what would that accomplish? As many have said there are things we can control and those we cannot. We aren't likely to control cultural/religious indoctrinations so why not just accept them for what they are and move on dealing with the realities of the day. I don't know if we're capable of coming to consensus relative to the pressing issues of the day but I think we should try. Things that immediately come to mind in no special order are: climate, immigration, food supply, pollution of land sea and air, national borders, weapons of mass destruction, and viruses/diseases (natural and man made). Your "God" doesn't have to be my god. We can respect others religions but in turn shouldn't expect others to disrespect ours or the lack of ours. If you believe our species is worth saving, lets just work together for its survival. If there is a "God" he/she/it would likely expect nothing less. If not...no harm done. Just sayin!

----
[My reply]

 I agree with most of what you said there.

Although, a few things stand out for me as ... warranting further dialogue.

First, and I'm going to keep reminding you about this:

BUT THE OP WASN'T ABOUT ALL THAT. 

We can DISCUSS all the other stuff.
But you're raising issues that weren't eluded to in anything I have said or shared. 

-----

But ok.
We can discuss all the other stuff. 

" Discussing the many descriptions of what the word "God" represents to individuals accomplishes little."

True. But the OP (and Sagan) weren't trying to examine or challenge the many ways people define the term "God".

It was merely pointing that there ARE many different ways,

and so: 

IF we care about the entire POINT of communication

(and surely we do; if we're trying to communicate),

then it's:

 irresponsible and self-defeating 

to use a word like "God" in any setting where the meaning is not provided by the setting.

 If WHAT we want to say matters,

then HOW we say it matters; automatically.

---------

Consider how this is relevant to the very next thing you said there:

"Living life in real time; working on trying to keep our species from destroying itself makes much more sense"

That's like responding to someone who talked about choosing the best tomatoes, 
to say "but it's more important to keep our species from destroying itself".

Yep.
It sure is.
But that wasn't the topic.

However, of course.

Yes.

Those things matter more.

But if you really want to build a bridge of relevance to what Sagan was talking about, ... then ok.
Here.
I'll help with that:

Isn't that WHEN and WHY people invoke the term "God"?

Aren't THOSE the conversations where that happens?

If someone has some solution to the world's most serious problems they want to propose

or 

a change-in-the-world they want to encourage, ...

then Sagan was offering a teaching moment to remind people:

 if you want to effect change, (not "force"; not "control"; but plant seeds and cultivate growth) ...

communication is often necessary to that goal. 

And communication is an attempt to be understood.

Thus, it starts with being thoughtfully responsible with how we use words. 

And that requires that we  wisely choose words that will accurately be understood.

 Your response to Sagan's words (as heard in Sagan's video clip) only holds

IF 

every (really every) utterance where the term "God" is ever invoked ... is only ever a utterance of no potential for any meaningful effect. 

 If I say "put God first", 

but I MEAN "put love first",

and if by THAT I mean "put compassion for all humans first",

and if by THAT I mean "so always respect their right to exist and enjoy health", ...

then it would be a shame that I didn't say what I actually meant. 

If all I say is "Put God first", ... 

A Muslim Jihadist might hear that.

If they do,

they are going to think I meant "Put Allah first";
ahead of themselves, and ahead of the rights of others. 

 So had better hope I have NOT impressed them. Otherwise, I just helped them decide to do it.

A range of less extreme but still *important* examples are easy to imagine.

 Whatever they think "God" means 

AND 

whatever they think that "God" wants, ...

is what they are going to think I meant.

And just in case you didn't realize this,

Billions of God-ists 
think "God" wants this world destroyed.

And in the meantime,
"He" wants public schools infiltrated, so that "the faithful" can get access to indoctrinate everyone else's kids.

And he wants them to win a Culture War, so they can dominate every facet of society;
at all costs. 

And he wants them to prevent LGBT and other hated demographics from having the same rights as them. 

----

Consider how that applies to the very next thing you said 

"I could invent/theorize scenarios that might be plausible but what would that accomplish? "

It would accomplish a LOT; 
if you limit those "WHAT IFs" to things that are relevant to the real world
and realistically possible. 

It would accomplish you realizing how all the ways you could *realistically* be misunderstood;

and how that could ripple effect into very real harm to innocent people;
and, at the very least,
 cause the speaker to waste their energies and cancel out whatever they were trying to say. 

When we speak, we DO cause effects in our physical world. 

Words have power; no matter if we want them to or not.
 

------

Consider the next thing you said there:

"As many have said there are things we can control and those we cannot."

 

Yes. Exactly.

We can control our own choices.

We can choose to behave responsibly.

Speech is a form of behavior.

And it causes real effect in our physical world. 

Although, again,
what Sagan said (in that video clip) wasn't focused on WHY it matters. 
He wasn't getting into any of that. 
He was only encouraging responsible use of language.
And yes, of course that matters. 

-----

"We aren't likely to control cultural/religious indoctrinations "

But I'm not saying we should try to "control" any of that.

Nothing in the OP even hints at such a notion. 

---------

"so why not just accept them for what they are and move on dealing with the realities of the day."

Because if everyone did that, starting thousands of years ago,

no progress would have been made.

The same holds true today.