GEN1040 Seven things are [typical] in a clod, and seven in a wise man; [The Wise Man] does not break in on the speech of his fellow-man. Pirkei Avot V:9   … it is only common courtesy to let someone complete his thought before we respond.   An eagerness to interrupt, straining at the leash, usually comes from an overpowering conviction that we know exactly what the other intends to say before he has said it, and already we perceive his fallacy.   Such a conviction often turns out wrong.   But right or wrong, anyone speaking should be given the right to express himself freely as he sees fit, without interruption, until he is done.  Avoth d’R. Natan (37) gives two illustrative examples from Scripture… (Leviticus 10:16-20) … The other example concerns Abraham the Patriarch.   When the Almighty was about to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, He told Abraham, and this man of piety and loving-kindness began to plead. First he asked that the cities be spared if fifty righteous men could be found there; when that prayer was granted, he asked the same grace should only forty-five tzaddikim be found. That granted, he lowered the number to forty, then thirty, then twenty, and finally ten. Each plea was accepted favorably in turn. [this verse and subsequent]. The Lord knew that were there even five or four virtuous people in Sodom, it would be saved from destruction. Seek them there, however, and you could not find them. Nevertheless, the Holy, Blessed One waited for Abraham to finish, and only then did he send him off, as it is stated [at the end]: the Lord went His way when He had finished speaking to Abraham; and Abraham returned to his place.” As it were, He as much as told him, “Now I am free [to act].” The lesson, continues Avoth d’R. Nathan (B40), is clear: The world and all that fills it is the holy, Blessed One’s; yet he did not wish to break into our father Abraham’s words. How much more certainly should a man – dust, [food for] worm and maggot – not break into the words of his fellow-man. It would be well to remember, though, that the courtesy should not be entirely one-sided. If a person speaking is to be permitted to conclude, let him forbear to abuse his privilege. He should not ramble but learn to express himself succinctly and concisely.   The story is told of an “august personage” who rose to address a rabbinic meeting.   After an hour and a half he was still talking, refusing to relinquish his precious opportunity. Then he remarked, “I once heard a great scholar say …” Suddenly a listener called out, “That cannot be!” There was a stunned silence. Sputtering with rage, the speaker shouted to his heckler, “How do you challenge me when I did not even tell what this great man said?” Replied the other, “You could never have heard any scholar say anything. You never give anyone else a chance to speak at all!”   SINAI3 103-4