6 ms·

Well then he should have said that and not tried to argue that people who can speak cannot think!

by o1iver 15y ago

pg 15y ago
Can you tell me the sentence where I claimed that?
- o1iver 15y ago
  You didn't say that per se, but I felt it in the undertone of the whole essay. See some of these sentences: "As I was doing it I tried to imagine what a transcript of the other guy's talk would be like, and it was only then I realized he hadn't said very much." "Being a really good speaker is not merely orthogonal to having good ideas, but in many ways pushes you in the opposite direction." "But here again there's a tradeoff between smoothness and ideas. All the time you spend practicing a talk, you could instead spend making it better." I know quite a few people who are great thinkers and great speakers and maybe that is why I found the article a bit offensive in that regard.
  - pg 15y ago
    I try to make the strongest claims I can that are true. If I believed something as extreme as what you claim I said, I'd say it. Which means if I didn't say it, I didn't say it. Though the difference in meaning between what you claim I said and what you're able to quote me as saying may seem small to you, there is a critical difference between them: what you claim I said is false, and the sentences you quote are true. I think we both agree on that. Or do you think any of the sentences I actually wrote are false?
    - yequalsx 15y ago
      I don't know you personally. I've read the majority of your essays. Your essays are well thought out and that what you write is purposeful. However, it isn't entirely unreasonable to think that you may[2] you have conveyed something in your writing that you didn't intend. Such a thing must occur occasionally. I agree with the person you responded to that your essay did come across as having as an undercurrent that good speakers tend not have as much depth in what they say. What you say about spending time on delivery coming at the cost (sometimes!) of content makes sense when I think of politicians and salesmen. I'm don't agree when it comes to more cerebral settings. [1] edit: Changed "It appears..." to "Your.." because your essays are well thought out and purposeful. It's not just an appearance. [2] edit: Added the word "may".
    - o1iver 15y ago
      I understand and agree with you, so I will take back that statement and simply say that that was my impression and not what was actually meant.
    - drumdance 15y ago
      Perhaps if you had been explaining this on stage instead of trying to write it down it would've been more clear. ;)
    - tissarah 15y ago
      Here is an important tradeoff between speaking and writing. Writing allows the user more room to color the information with their own experiences. For example the words "a very long time" conjures up some concept for a reader -- but when a listener hears "a very long time" from an old person versus a young person they may hear those as two different things. It's important and possibly absent information here that "if [you] didn't say it, [you] didn't say it." Inference is an incredibly powerful tool of persuasion and used often. Gesture, tone, emphasis, etc... can give an incredible amount of information that people may process quickly and easily. It may alleviate some confusion created by the readers personal interpretation of words. I think this thread well covers benefits and drawbacks of written versus spoken word. For me, I think of it like I think of various technologies available for a project. There are different tradeoffs and I must consider what I am trying to accomplish, what the pain points are going to be, who my users are, what is available, and make a careful choice.
- apl 15y ago
  You don't claim that, of course, but something of similar intent is implied in this paragraph: > A few years later I heard a talk by someone who > was not merely a better speaker than me, but > a famous speaker. Boy was he good. So I > decided I'd pay close attention to what he > said, to learn how he did it. After about ten > sentences I found myself thinking "I don't > want to be a good speaker." A charitable reading of this section is "I've observed a correlation between vacuousness and effective rhetoric." What I (and presumably others) gathered is "Clarity of thought and rhetoric ability, pick one." Both seem either misguided or wrong. I'll go ahead and assume that you're simply offering the passage as an anecdote. In that case, however, you're doing what you condemn -- rhetorics over conceptual purity and ideas. Can you elaborate a little?
  - pg 15y ago
    I don't see how you think that passage implies "people who speak [well] cannot think." All I'm saying is that speaking well depends little on having good ideas. That doesn't imply people who speak well can't have good ideas, just that they don't need to. Playing soccer well depends little on having good ideas. Is someone who says that saying "clarity of thought or soccer ability, pick one?"
    - apl 15y ago
      Now you're putting a spin on that passage that's simply not in the text. Quit the contrary: it's the opposite of what your essay seems to be suggesting. > "I don't want to be a good speaker." Why would you think that if rhetoric ability and good ideas are fully orthogonal? It'd amount to "The dude on stage is a brilliant speaker, which has nothing to do with inventiveness and clarity of thought, so I don't want to be a brilliant speaker." Nonsense. A much more reasonable interpretation is: a) The guy on stage doesn't have any ideas and is a brilliant speaker. b) Flashiness appears to preclude good ideas, or is at odds with it. c) Hence, I don't want to be a good speaker. If I'm still getting it wrong, please explain what the anecdote means -- especially given that, apparently, your essays contain only exactly what you intend them to contain. [EDIT: Slight rephrasing.]
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- bambax 15y ago
  > Being a really good speaker is not merely orthogonal to having good ideas, but in many ways pushes you in the opposite direction. You didn't say "trying to be a good speaker pushes you in the opposite direction of having good ideas"; you said "being", which implies some kind of essence / gift. You are effectively saying, in this sentence, that the gift of speak hinders one's ability to produce good ideas.

Well then he should have said that and not tried to argue that people who can speak cannot think!

by o1iver 15y ago

Well then he should have said that and not tried to argue that people who can speak cannot think!

pg 15y ago

Can you tell me the sentence where I claimed that?

o1iver 15y ago
You didn't say that per se, but I felt it in the undertone of the whole essay. See some of these sentences: "As I was doing it I tried to imagine what a transcript of the other guy's talk would be like, and it was only then I realized he hadn't said very much." "Being a really good speaker is not merely orthogonal to having good ideas, but in many ways pushes you in the opposite direction." "But here again there's a tradeoff between smoothness and ideas. All the time you spend practicing a talk, you could instead spend making it better." I know quite a few people who are great thinkers and great speakers and maybe that is why I found the article a bit offensive in that regard.
- pg 15y ago
  I try to make the strongest claims I can that are true. If I believed something as extreme as what you claim I said, I'd say it. Which means if I didn't say it, I didn't say it. Though the difference in meaning between what you claim I said and what you're able to quote me as saying may seem small to you, there is a critical difference between them: what you claim I said is false, and the sentences you quote are true. I think we both agree on that. Or do you think any of the sentences I actually wrote are false?
  - yequalsx 15y ago
    I don't know you personally. I've read the majority of your essays. Your essays are well thought out and that what you write is purposeful. However, it isn't entirely unreasonable to think that you may[2] you have conveyed something in your writing that you didn't intend. Such a thing must occur occasionally. I agree with the person you responded to that your essay did come across as having as an undercurrent that good speakers tend not have as much depth in what they say. What you say about spending time on delivery coming at the cost (sometimes!) of content makes sense when I think of politicians and salesmen. I'm don't agree when it comes to more cerebral settings. [1] edit: Changed "It appears..." to "Your.." because your essays are well thought out and purposeful. It's not just an appearance. [2] edit: Added the word "may".
  - o1iver 15y ago
    I understand and agree with you, so I will take back that statement and simply say that that was my impression and not what was actually meant.
  - drumdance 15y ago
    Perhaps if you had been explaining this on stage instead of trying to write it down it would've been more clear. ;)
  - tissarah 15y ago
    Here is an important tradeoff between speaking and writing. Writing allows the user more room to color the information with their own experiences. For example the words "a very long time" conjures up some concept for a reader -- but when a listener hears "a very long time" from an old person versus a young person they may hear those as two different things. It's important and possibly absent information here that "if [you] didn't say it, [you] didn't say it." Inference is an incredibly powerful tool of persuasion and used often. Gesture, tone, emphasis, etc... can give an incredible amount of information that people may process quickly and easily. It may alleviate some confusion created by the readers personal interpretation of words. I think this thread well covers benefits and drawbacks of written versus spoken word. For me, I think of it like I think of various technologies available for a project. There are different tradeoffs and I must consider what I am trying to accomplish, what the pain points are going to be, who my users are, what is available, and make a careful choice.
apl 15y ago
You don't claim that, of course, but something of similar intent is implied in this paragraph: > A few years later I heard a talk by someone who > was not merely a better speaker than me, but > a famous speaker. Boy was he good. So I > decided I'd pay close attention to what he > said, to learn how he did it. After about ten > sentences I found myself thinking "I don't > want to be a good speaker." A charitable reading of this section is "I've observed a correlation between vacuousness and effective rhetoric." What I (and presumably others) gathered is "Clarity of thought and rhetoric ability, pick one." Both seem either misguided or wrong. I'll go ahead and assume that you're simply offering the passage as an anecdote. In that case, however, you're doing what you condemn -- rhetorics over conceptual purity and ideas. Can you elaborate a little?
- pg 15y ago
  I don't see how you think that passage implies "people who speak [well] cannot think." All I'm saying is that speaking well depends little on having good ideas. That doesn't imply people who speak well can't have good ideas, just that they don't need to. Playing soccer well depends little on having good ideas. Is someone who says that saying "clarity of thought or soccer ability, pick one?"
  - apl 15y ago
    Now you're putting a spin on that passage that's simply not in the text. Quit the contrary: it's the opposite of what your essay seems to be suggesting. > "I don't want to be a good speaker." Why would you think that if rhetoric ability and good ideas are fully orthogonal? It'd amount to "The dude on stage is a brilliant speaker, which has nothing to do with inventiveness and clarity of thought, so I don't want to be a brilliant speaker." Nonsense. A much more reasonable interpretation is: a) The guy on stage doesn't have any ideas and is a brilliant speaker. b) Flashiness appears to preclude good ideas, or is at odds with it. c) Hence, I don't want to be a good speaker. If I'm still getting it wrong, please explain what the anecdote means -- especially given that, apparently, your essays contain only exactly what you intend them to contain. [EDIT: Slight rephrasing.]
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
bambax 15y ago
> Being a really good speaker is not merely orthogonal to having good ideas, but in many ways pushes you in the opposite direction. You didn't say "trying to be a good speaker pushes you in the opposite direction of having good ideas"; you said "being", which implies some kind of essence / gift. You are effectively saying, in this sentence, that the gift of speak hinders one's ability to produce good ideas.