“[Using Big Words?] Is this what you’re saying?”– As someone who is daily accus

–“[Using Big Words?] Is this what you’re saying?”–
As someone who is daily accused of using “big words”, “word salad”, and “incomprehensibility”, that would hardly be the case.
What I’m saying is that in the spectrum of precision of means of communication, argument, and persuasion, adults who are intellectually honest favor those paradigms that limit loading, framing, obscuring and fictionalism as means of suggestion deceit or fraud. In other words The theological (Abrahamic), the literary (Plato) vs the Empirical (Aristotle).
Because the capacity for deception increases with the decrease in precision and the increase of the capacity to appeal to intuition instead of reason.

Repeating from a post a few minutes ago:

|Scale of Precision|: Embodiment <> (Narrative: Anthropomorphism <> Mythology <> Literature )<>( Systematizing: Theology <> Philosophy <> History )<> (Measuring: Empiricism <> Science <> Operationalism (causality)).

In that sequence “< Easier to vs Harder to >” lie, deceive, suggest, conflate, load, frame, obscure, and fictionalize.

It is conversely easier to communicate to those with less knowledge and ability as we move downward on the scale.

Cheers
CD

Reply addressees: @ccllaazz