I don’t think it’s the general quality of your writing that’s causing problems; I think it’s a particular, specific flaw in this essay. Compare this comment thread to the one under ‘How To Deal With Depression’—there’s agreement and there’s disagreement, but unlike in this comment thread there’s no deep confusion about what your point is and how your essay supports it.
So what is that flaw? My theory is that ‘agentiness’ is psychological phlogiston, an imprecise non-explanation which should be purged from our collective vocabulary with great force. Taboo it, decompose it and retry.
If I’m right about the problem but wrong about the solution, my next best guess is that you’ve chosen too complicated an anecdote. I can see why you wouldn’t want to expand on the hospital story specifically, but something about that size might work better.
I don’t think it’s the general quality of your writing that’s causing problems; I think it’s a particular, specific flaw in this essay. Compare this comment thread to the one under ‘How To Deal With Depression’—there’s agreement and there’s disagreement, but unlike in this comment thread there’s no deep confusion about what your point is and how your essay supports it.
So what is that flaw? My theory is that ‘agentiness’ is psychological phlogiston, an imprecise non-explanation which should be purged from our collective vocabulary with great force. Taboo it, decompose it and retry.
If I’m right about the problem but wrong about the solution, my next best guess is that you’ve chosen too complicated an anecdote. I can see why you wouldn’t want to expand on the hospital story specifically, but something about that size might work better.
Hope this helps.
I agree that there isn’t a problem with Shannon’s prose. I thought agentiness was a clear concept, but I might be kidding myself.