You are taking this to the extreme. The goal is to make text succinct, to get rid of fillers. It doesn’t mean that you can’t make likelihood statements when warranted, just don’t start every sentence with agnostic “maybe”, or “I think”.
I think you might be taking this to the extreme. I guess that the goal might be to make text succinct, or maybe to get rid of fillers. I would probably say that it doesn’t mean that you can’t make likelihood statements when warranted, but it might be better to not to start every sentence with agnostic “maybe”, or “I think”.
Fwiw I think if I were rewriting the first paragraph to self-aware style I’d go for something like:
It feels like you’re taking this to the extreme. The goal as I see it is to make text succinct, to get rid of fillers. Which doesn’t mean [… no other changes].
And yeah, I do think that’s an improvement in terms of things I’d personally like to read. It doesn’t just acknowledge uncertainty, but subjectivity. E.g. I think the “I feel like” makes it easier for me to react like “interesting, I don’t feel like that, I wonder why you do” versus “what, no I’m not”.
(Or maybe my rewrite doesn’t actually reflect what you think? Like, maybe you’re confident that you’re speaking for Pinker as well as just yourself, in which case you could start with “Pinker would say”, or “I think Pinker would say” if you’re less confident.)
But you are right about value subjectivity. “I feel” are an amazing technique to deescalate conflicts and built rapport. You cannot disagree with my feelings! That’s quite powerful.
I agree with you these are useful in dialogues whether in person or in comments section.
I don’t believe they (usually) have a place in books or blogposts. Those are not situations requiring conflict deescalation. The “I think” is filler because it is implied. Of course the author writes what he thinks.
The “I think” is filler because it is implied. Of course the author writes what he thinks.
I disagree with this. As a writer, I don’t mean the same thing by “I think it cost over $100” versus “it cost over $100″. The latter is more confident; I don’t intend to literally never be wrong when I say things like it, but I do intend to very rarely be wrong. The former suggests that I don’t remember very well and I didn’t look it up. And as a reader, I think I roughly by-default expect writers to be doing the same, and if they regularly say things unhedged that turn out to be false (or that I think they couldn’t possibly know) I lose respect for them.
I don’t know how common it is for other readers to read like me, or other writers to write like me. But I’d be surprised if either demographic was fewer than 10% on LW.
I weakly predict that if you compare the typical writer who doesn’t use “I think” to the typical writer who does, the one who doesn’t is less capable of distinguishing what-is from what-seems-to-be; and is less well-calibrated if you press them to put probabilities on their statements.
The line between good and bad is thin. This technique can be and often is misused for manipulation. The white-hat use of this technique is to make the other person stop and think.
Avoiding hedging is only one aspect of classic style. I would also recommend against hedging, but I would replace hedging with more precise notions of uncertainty.
You are taking this to the extreme. The goal is to make text succinct, to get rid of fillers. It doesn’t mean that you can’t make likelihood statements when warranted, just don’t start every sentence with agnostic “maybe”, or “I think”.
I think you might be taking this to the extreme. I guess that the goal might be to make text succinct, or maybe to get rid of fillers. I would probably say that it doesn’t mean that you can’t make likelihood statements when warranted, but it might be better to not to start every sentence with agnostic “maybe”, or “I think”.
Fwiw I think if I were rewriting the first paragraph to self-aware style I’d go for something like:
And yeah, I do think that’s an improvement in terms of things I’d personally like to read. It doesn’t just acknowledge uncertainty, but subjectivity. E.g. I think the “I feel like” makes it easier for me to react like “interesting, I don’t feel like that, I wonder why you do” versus “what, no I’m not”.
(Or maybe my rewrite doesn’t actually reflect what you think? Like, maybe you’re confident that you’re speaking for Pinker as well as just yourself, in which case you could start with “Pinker would say”, or “I think Pinker would say” if you’re less confident.)
Of course, my rewrite was a hyperbole;)
But you are right about value subjectivity. “I feel” are an amazing technique to deescalate conflicts and built rapport. You cannot disagree with my feelings! That’s quite powerful.
I agree with you these are useful in dialogues whether in person or in comments section.
I don’t believe they (usually) have a place in books or blogposts. Those are not situations requiring conflict deescalation. The “I think” is filler because it is implied. Of course the author writes what he thinks.
I disagree with this. As a writer, I don’t mean the same thing by “I think it cost over $100” versus “it cost over $100″. The latter is more confident; I don’t intend to literally never be wrong when I say things like it, but I do intend to very rarely be wrong. The former suggests that I don’t remember very well and I didn’t look it up. And as a reader, I think I roughly by-default expect writers to be doing the same, and if they regularly say things unhedged that turn out to be false (or that I think they couldn’t possibly know) I lose respect for them.
I don’t know how common it is for other readers to read like me, or other writers to write like me. But I’d be surprised if either demographic was fewer than 10% on LW.
I weakly predict that if you compare the typical writer who doesn’t use “I think” to the typical writer who does, the one who doesn’t is less capable of distinguishing what-is from what-seems-to-be; and is less well-calibrated if you press them to put probabilities on their statements.
Too powerful. You can say anything, claim anything, under the guise of “feeling”, and shut down anyone who disagrees, because “muh FEELINGS!”
Every sentence beginning “I feel that” is false, because what follows those words is always a claim about how the world is, never a feeling.
The line between good and bad is thin. This technique can be and often is misused for manipulation. The white-hat use of this technique is to make the other person stop and think.
Avoiding hedging is only one aspect of classic style. I would also recommend against hedging, but I would replace hedging with more precise notions of uncertainty.