Of course I’m not listening!
The problem with Kate Murphy’s You’re Not Listening is the approach it adopts – entering a conversation like a psychoanalyst. Is the goal of listening to understand another human or to extract interesting information? Murphy’s framework blurs this line.
In You’re Not Listening, Murphy often suggests listeners should adopt the mindset of a psychoanalyst / anthropologist studying a foreign culture or a journalist digging for a story. This frames the listener as a detached observer or investigator rather than a genuine, equal participant in a human connection. It can feel clinical, extractive, and even voyeuristic.
This approach can create a power imbalance where the listener is “studying” the speaker, potentially turning the speaker into an object of analysis rather than a partner in dialogue. It risks prioritising curiosity about a “story” over empathy for a person. True connection often requires vulnerability from both parties, not just one.
Overemphasis on the Listener’s “Gain”
A significant theme in the book is that being a good listener makes you more interesting, successful, and knowledgeable. You “gain” insight and information from others.
This can be seen as instrumentalising listening, making it a selfish tool for self-improvement rather than a selfless act of generosity or a fundamental part of human relationship-building. The ultimate goal of a conversation (at least a casual one) shouldn’t be to mine others for interesting data but to connect and understand for mutual benefit.
Anecdotal Over Scientific Evidence
While Murphy is a journalist and includes interviews with experts (like psychologists, priests, and CIA interrogators), the book relies heavily on personal anecdotes and stories.
The heavy use of anecdotes can make the advice feel situational and less like universally applicable techniques grounded in proven theory. It can come across as “this worked for this person in this specific case” rather than “this is a proven principle”.
Lack of Structural or Systemic Analysis
The book largely frames poor listening as an individual failing, a skill we’ve all neglected due to technology and busyness. It pays insufficient attention to the larger systemic and cultural forces that discourage listening.
This includes factors like:
Workplace structures: Open-plan offices that destroy focus, corporate cultures that value quick answers over deep deliberation, and metrics that prioritise output over thoughtful input.
Political and media incentives: Systems that reward loud, confident, and simplistic rhetoric over nuanced, careful listening and compromise.
Social media algorithms: Designed to promote broadcasting and reaction, not dialogue and understanding.
Under-addressing the Challenges of Bad Faith Speakers
The book’s framework generally assumes that both parties are engaging in good faith. It doesn’t thoroughly address how to handle situations where the other person is a poor communicator themselves: someone who monopolises the conversation, is aggressively argumentative, or is speaking in bad faith.
In the real world, not every conversation is with a reasonable person waiting to be heard. You might finish the book feeling equipped for ideal scenarios but still lost on how to apply these principles in difficult, toxic, or asymmetric interactions.
