Why do you keep the hedge phrase “I think” in your improved version?
After all, “I think” is just as meaningless as the hedge phrases you remove: I already assumed that you think it, otherwise you wouldn’t have said it. So, if hedge phrases are bad, “Chrome is the most visually appealing...” would be even better.
Unless you agree that hedge phrases have some value, in which case this is much more of a “haggling over the price” sort of disagreement than it seemed at first.
I do agree that hedge phrases have some value. They have more or less use depending on the social circles you’re dealing with. Here, you could probably leave out the “I think” as implicit, but in many circles dropping it would be taken as abrasive and overprivileging of one’s opinion. Remember that there is no shortage of people to whom “other people don’t have to share your opinion” seems like a genuine insight.
I’m not taking issue with lionhearted’s general point that social signals that would seem fluffy in this community can be legitimately useful in many situations, but like many others in this thread, I question his grasp of what sort of signaling actually tends to be most effective.
An introductory phrase need not be a ‘hedge phrase’ in the sense of demoting the following statement—it can just serve to position it properly.
I find a good medium to be ‘I find’, or ‘It strikes me’, or ‘It occurs to me’, depending on context. These are clearly indications of subjectivity without denigrating subjectivity.
“I find Chrome to be the most visually appealing…” is not confrontational at all, and in terms of added length it’s 3 short words (‘I find’, and using ‘to be’ instead of ‘is’), barely a cost at all.
It doesn’t bring up the fact/opinion divide, it just uses it.
It seems we understand ‘hedge phrase’ somewhat differently, but I certainly agree that adding phrases that convert what would otherwise be a statement about the world (e.g. “Chrome is the most etc.”) into a statement about my own thoughts, feelings or experiences (e.g., “I think Chrome is...” or “I find Chrome to be...” or “In my experience Chrome is...” or whatever) makes the statement seem less confrontational, and that the difference in statement length is negligible.
In my more pedantic youth, I entertained myself endlessly by playing this game when people tried to ask me for the time.
“Do you have the time?” “Yes.” ”Will you tell me the time?” “It depends.” ”On what?” “Whether you ask me.” (sigh) “All right, then, will you tell me the time?!?” ”As I say: it depends!”
It astonished me how difficult it was for people to forego polite indirection.
Why do you keep the hedge phrase “I think” in your improved version?
After all, “I think” is just as meaningless as the hedge phrases you remove: I already assumed that you think it, otherwise you wouldn’t have said it. So, if hedge phrases are bad, “Chrome is the most visually appealing...” would be even better.
Unless you agree that hedge phrases have some value, in which case this is much more of a “haggling over the price” sort of disagreement than it seemed at first.
I do agree that hedge phrases have some value. They have more or less use depending on the social circles you’re dealing with. Here, you could probably leave out the “I think” as implicit, but in many circles dropping it would be taken as abrasive and overprivileging of one’s opinion. Remember that there is no shortage of people to whom “other people don’t have to share your opinion” seems like a genuine insight.
I’m not taking issue with lionhearted’s general point that social signals that would seem fluffy in this community can be legitimately useful in many situations, but like many others in this thread, I question his grasp of what sort of signaling actually tends to be most effective.
An introductory phrase need not be a ‘hedge phrase’ in the sense of demoting the following statement—it can just serve to position it properly.
I find a good medium to be ‘I find’, or ‘It strikes me’, or ‘It occurs to me’, depending on context. These are clearly indications of subjectivity without denigrating subjectivity.
“I find Chrome to be the most visually appealing…” is not confrontational at all, and in terms of added length it’s 3 short words (‘I find’, and using ‘to be’ instead of ‘is’), barely a cost at all.
It doesn’t bring up the fact/opinion divide, it just uses it.
It seems we understand ‘hedge phrase’ somewhat differently, but I certainly agree that adding phrases that convert what would otherwise be a statement about the world (e.g. “Chrome is the most etc.”) into a statement about my own thoughts, feelings or experiences (e.g., “I think Chrome is...” or “I find Chrome to be...” or “In my experience Chrome is...” or whatever) makes the statement seem less confrontational, and that the difference in statement length is negligible.
“It would be great if you could pass the salt.”
“There is no objective criteria by which it could be ‘great’ if - ”
“I would appreciate it if you would pass the salt.”
“If you think so, then it’s probably true, although there are limits to introspection - ”
“Trust me.”
″ - but even granting that, that’s really a lame counterfactual scenario to raise - ”
“Salt motherfucker. Can you pass it?!”
“I can.”
(A short interval of time elapses. Salt is not passed.)
“Pass the salt!”
In my more pedantic youth, I entertained myself endlessly by playing this game when people tried to ask me for the time.
“Do you have the time?”
“Yes.”
”Will you tell me the time?”
“It depends.”
”On what?”
“Whether you ask me.”
(sigh) “All right, then, will you tell me the time?!?”
”As I say: it depends!”
It astonished me how difficult it was for people to forego polite indirection.
“What time is it?!”
“It’s five o’clock somewhere.”