Tuesday, May 16, 2006
Fearful Phraseology
Why yes, I did write that other post. Why do you ask?
There have been some tricks of language used in the current administration that really scrape their nails on my chalkboard. Not that previous administrations haven’t contributed, of course. “At that point in time” was notorious for Tricky Dick’s boys, “what is is” was more so for Clinton, and I could go on. But these are what have been grating on me lately, so here goes.
First, the phrase I used in closing the last post: “But we can all agree that (rocks are better than scissors, or whatever.)” Well, maybe not. It shows an ignorant use of assumptions that even really smart people use to save them having to think. I guess when you’re really smart you get really tired from all that thinking so naturally I find more of this sort of insinuating nonsense from smart people than I do from the population in general. What you’re saying when you say that is that since you have reasoned that position out, it is perforce reasonable, and that anyone who can’t agree with that point at least is not worth arguing with. It looks reasonable and thoughtful, but in fact it’s exclusionary and stupid. (And I’m sure we can all agree on that.) ;-) It’s a way to avoid letting people argue against you, in fact, and an act of fear in a many cases.
Another more common tactic is to ask questions and then answer them yourself. Secretary Rumsfeld uses this one a lot, but then so do a lot of people. Do I think that this is a fair technique to use in a press conference? No, I don’t. Do I think that it’s mostly used by those trying to avoid exposing something embarrassing or unpleasant? Yes I do. Is this paragraph being written to illustrate what I’m writing about? Yes, it is. Rummy is famous for ducking and weaving at press conferences, but he’s not the only one I’ve heard using the technique. In fact, I’ve heard politicians from both parties use it, which for me just makes the noise of those nails on slate harder to take. If I could point at one side or the other it would mean that I’d find some relief somewhere, but unfortunately I apparently can’t.
The thing that’s the most wrong with those techniques is that they’re both acts of fear. We all fear being wrong, even though we must be most of the time. It’s just the nature of reality. Everybody knows a few things, but nobody knows enough never to make mistakes. The world is just too damn big for that, with entirely too many aspects for anyone to be right about anything but the few things they actually do know. Which is why at first his opponents, and now most of us, have come to distrust Rumsfeld. Hey, maybe he just has a bad habit in how he talks to reporters, but we’ll never know now because he’s screwed himself to the floor.
Too bad more of us didn’t see all this coming five years ago, isn’t it?
There have been some tricks of language used in the current administration that really scrape their nails on my chalkboard. Not that previous administrations haven’t contributed, of course. “At that point in time” was notorious for Tricky Dick’s boys, “what is is” was more so for Clinton, and I could go on. But these are what have been grating on me lately, so here goes.
First, the phrase I used in closing the last post: “But we can all agree that (rocks are better than scissors, or whatever.)” Well, maybe not. It shows an ignorant use of assumptions that even really smart people use to save them having to think. I guess when you’re really smart you get really tired from all that thinking so naturally I find more of this sort of insinuating nonsense from smart people than I do from the population in general. What you’re saying when you say that is that since you have reasoned that position out, it is perforce reasonable, and that anyone who can’t agree with that point at least is not worth arguing with. It looks reasonable and thoughtful, but in fact it’s exclusionary and stupid. (And I’m sure we can all agree on that.) ;-) It’s a way to avoid letting people argue against you, in fact, and an act of fear in a many cases.
Another more common tactic is to ask questions and then answer them yourself. Secretary Rumsfeld uses this one a lot, but then so do a lot of people. Do I think that this is a fair technique to use in a press conference? No, I don’t. Do I think that it’s mostly used by those trying to avoid exposing something embarrassing or unpleasant? Yes I do. Is this paragraph being written to illustrate what I’m writing about? Yes, it is. Rummy is famous for ducking and weaving at press conferences, but he’s not the only one I’ve heard using the technique. In fact, I’ve heard politicians from both parties use it, which for me just makes the noise of those nails on slate harder to take. If I could point at one side or the other it would mean that I’d find some relief somewhere, but unfortunately I apparently can’t.
The thing that’s the most wrong with those techniques is that they’re both acts of fear. We all fear being wrong, even though we must be most of the time. It’s just the nature of reality. Everybody knows a few things, but nobody knows enough never to make mistakes. The world is just too damn big for that, with entirely too many aspects for anyone to be right about anything but the few things they actually do know. Which is why at first his opponents, and now most of us, have come to distrust Rumsfeld. Hey, maybe he just has a bad habit in how he talks to reporters, but we’ll never know now because he’s screwed himself to the floor.
Too bad more of us didn’t see all this coming five years ago, isn’t it?
