Posted by Bryte on August 12, 2014, at 23:47:22
In reply to Re: The Hsiung-Twinleaf discussion, posted by Dr. Bob on August 12, 2014, at 0:38:49
This I-statement business is far, far removed from any standard form in popular narrative. Stance is assumed in most popular narrative. Even elementary readers in most Western cultures are widely presumed to be capable of recognizing implicit stance. When one speaks or writes, we adjudge from context whether they are speaking from their personal perspective or the perspective of subject-area authority. Adherence to a hackneyed I-statement form implies statements not wrapped among first-person verb clauses are simply untrue. They are not.
If someone says something seems a certain way, it seems that way. If someone says it seems the opposite, it also seems the opposite. It seems different to different people and we don't need to remind each other every time we open our mouths or peck at the keyboard that we are speaking only about our own perspective. Maybe we are. Maybe others share our perspective. We don't need to remind readers with each statement we utter that we have not polled a statistically significant sample of a representative population.
This I-statement business is not necesarily good for groups. It can diminish groups by isolating individuals. It diminishes narrative.
The demand that every statement be couched as "it's just little ole me, but I feeeeeel as if..." can diminish groups by emaciating the individual of confidence they otherwise can share with a group.
It resembles a pop-psychology fad that assumes a grand new discovery that could cure all miscommunication if only everyone would comply. It couches the leader with the grand fix-all idea as a hero ready to rescue poor victims from their own self-inflicted injuries. It provides a convenient dodge to allow authoritarian allusions to process that embody a false promise to the group - the false promise that everything could have been so much better if only group had done what leader said.
It is more an exaggeration of perceived benefits associated with an atypical communication form rarely used in popular discourse than moderation of mutually supportive discourse. It may best serve someone as an idealized belief that a group can be made compliant to a preconceived notion of civilization. It may be seen as a thinly veiled therapeutic effort rather than a well-considered, realistic attempt to enhance communication among diverse individuals.
At best, I-statements may be useful as an occasional device and then perhaps in discourse with younger, immature or particularly narcissistic correspondents unskilled at empathetic correspondence. But we do not know that exposing feelings encourages empathy among those unable or unwilling to empathize. I-statements can just as well serve as a device to demand that others cater to one's feelings.
We have been shown no empirical evidence that narrative limited to strictly crafted I-statements enhances group correspondence. We do not know the demand for I-statements is not an attempt to repair damage caused by misguided or ill-informed interventions by a self-described outsider in otherwise self-directed large-group processes.
We do not know those interventions have not caused more harm than good. We might not care to assume the "let me know if this hurts" system for reporting adverse events has gathered reliable evidence of the frequency or cause of adverse events in the group.
We have no way of knowing whether the real motivation for demanding I-statements is an attempt to gain acceptance among professional peers - including perhaps performances directed at an inner concept of what one believes would impress professional peers.
We have nothing other than personal assertions as proof that the persistent demands for I-statements are an intelligently considered attempt to provide a quasi-therapeutic milieu hosted by a charitable individual who otherwise is either uninterested in welcoming fellow benefactors or is unable to find peer-level partners who would join him in facilitating a charitable endeavor by someone we might otherwise believe to be a well-qualified benefactor.
I made this, but you already know that.
poster:Bryte
thread:1069388
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20140304/msgs/1069671.html