I have some issues with the sentiments in this thread, which seems to be saying that stories are good in real life discourse too. To some extent I agree, but I

I have some issues with the sentiments in this thread, which seems to be saying that stories are good in real life discourse too. To some extent I agree, but I think it is overexaggerated. TL;DR: This is all well and good in current society, but I feel that says a lot about the flaws of current society. "Reality is stranger than fiction because fiction needs to make sense, but reality doesn't". Stories are written for a purpose, whether that's to entertain, to instruct, etc.. That's why it makes sense to have plot twists and unrealistic tension. Stories are meant to be contrived to some degree; that's what makes them valuable. But I think real life should have a plot that isn't like a tidy, comfortable story. If there is to be a plot, it should be complex and strange. > I used to be the person who would always tell it as it is - it doesn't work in general, because often times people don't want to hear it. Indeed, but I'm not sure then that couching your language towards them is better. It won't ease most people into your narrative. It will just allow them to sink further into a narrative. I think moderation is generally correct, but moderation that isn't the golden mean can also be quite harmful. (See "Letter from Birmingham Jail" for MLK Jr.'s thoughts on white moderates during the Civil Rights movement.) > small talk and euphemisms evolved for a good reason Evolution by natural selection does not work like this. "I observe feature A" does not remotely mean "feature A is beneficial". It just means "feature A is not a dealbreaker". We as humans have certainly evolved for gossiping and storytelling, and it is often beneficial to appease the group, but attributing a bigger moral reason on that line is doubtful. It is not necessarily good that we engage in so much "small talk and euphemisms" (I would even say it's quite bad), it's just that we've made it comfortable to live like that. > I find that using "softer" language, since it requires more work, also often sharpens my message to really say what I think is important. I disagree on both points. "Softer language" is easier to grasp for since we are accustomed to it, and even for the speaker it may be a hassle to distinguish using it carelessly versus deliberately. Since it works as a shield and intentionally employs ambiguity, I doubt it communicates the actual message well. I am myself a big fan of stories, and I do see value in using them in real life to enhance communication. But I think this requires a lot more care and scrutiny than we normally use. Our whole culture around communication is flawed.