"Writing is tricky in 2021. No matter how well structured your argument, if a single sentence can be interpreted in a negative light, even if it requires spectacular mental gymnastics to do so, some people will dismiss the entire article or even an entire body of work."
This actually falls a bit outside of the overall theme of this articl…
"Writing is tricky in 2021. No matter how well structured your argument, if a single sentence can be interpreted in a negative light, even if it requires spectacular mental gymnastics to do so, some people will dismiss the entire article or even an entire body of work."
This actually falls a bit outside of the overall theme of this article but it jumped out at me as something from my experience. At one time I was a technical instructor for my employer's avionics products with airline and support center maintenance personnel students. We issued a completion certificate which was required by aeronautical authorities, but we did not test.
Perhaps it isn't so far off the point of this commentary article after all.
One of the instructors suggested that we should test and another instructor who's degree was in industrial education said that we were not qualified to write tests (a skill of its own). Disagreement followed and he said, I want all of you to write a test (multiple choice) for one of the products you teach that I have not taken the class. He passed them all with flying colors and went on to explain that he had used a different method for choosing the correct answer on each test which had nothing to do with him giving technical thought to them.
Here's the point (finally). For one of the tests he chose the shortest answer for each question. He explained that the longer the answer, the more likely there would be something falsifying. A lesson I learned in the early 1990s and sometimes forgotten in internet "discussion." And when I forget, I sometimes get burned when someone latches onto the one thing, ignoring the larger body. Here, you can relate.
Perhaps related to the idea that a solution should be as simple as possible, but no simpler. Sorry about the length but I think the background provides justification, rather than just opinion.
"Here's the point (finally). For one of the tests he chose the shortest answer for each question. He explained that the longer the answer, the more likely there would be something falsifying."
Yeah absolutely. Economy of words is something that I strive for. But I think the problem is slightly different. It's more that people are looking for a way to misinterpret (or interpret in the most negative conceivable light) any argument that doesn't immediately and comfortably fit their world view.
The instant there's the slightest challenge to the opinions they already hold, the reaction isn't curiosity or self-examination, it's outrage. And a whole bunch of other motives and beliefs are immediately applied to the person who dares think differently to them.
I see this all the time. Even, occasionally, in people who know me well and trust me. There are a few topics where if I offer a view that's too contrarian, I have to spend the next twenty minutes reminding me that they know me and I'm not an evil bigot before we can even get to *why* I hold that view.
"Writing is tricky in 2021. No matter how well structured your argument, if a single sentence can be interpreted in a negative light, even if it requires spectacular mental gymnastics to do so, some people will dismiss the entire article or even an entire body of work."
This actually falls a bit outside of the overall theme of this article but it jumped out at me as something from my experience. At one time I was a technical instructor for my employer's avionics products with airline and support center maintenance personnel students. We issued a completion certificate which was required by aeronautical authorities, but we did not test.
Perhaps it isn't so far off the point of this commentary article after all.
One of the instructors suggested that we should test and another instructor who's degree was in industrial education said that we were not qualified to write tests (a skill of its own). Disagreement followed and he said, I want all of you to write a test (multiple choice) for one of the products you teach that I have not taken the class. He passed them all with flying colors and went on to explain that he had used a different method for choosing the correct answer on each test which had nothing to do with him giving technical thought to them.
Here's the point (finally). For one of the tests he chose the shortest answer for each question. He explained that the longer the answer, the more likely there would be something falsifying. A lesson I learned in the early 1990s and sometimes forgotten in internet "discussion." And when I forget, I sometimes get burned when someone latches onto the one thing, ignoring the larger body. Here, you can relate.
Perhaps related to the idea that a solution should be as simple as possible, but no simpler. Sorry about the length but I think the background provides justification, rather than just opinion.
"Here's the point (finally). For one of the tests he chose the shortest answer for each question. He explained that the longer the answer, the more likely there would be something falsifying."
Yeah absolutely. Economy of words is something that I strive for. But I think the problem is slightly different. It's more that people are looking for a way to misinterpret (or interpret in the most negative conceivable light) any argument that doesn't immediately and comfortably fit their world view.
The instant there's the slightest challenge to the opinions they already hold, the reaction isn't curiosity or self-examination, it's outrage. And a whole bunch of other motives and beliefs are immediately applied to the person who dares think differently to them.
I see this all the time. Even, occasionally, in people who know me well and trust me. There are a few topics where if I offer a view that's too contrarian, I have to spend the next twenty minutes reminding me that they know me and I'm not an evil bigot before we can even get to *why* I hold that view.