I realize that E-Prime is completely impractical, but there is one thing that I'm wondering about regarding E-Prime that relates to what Janet said about qualifiers in a comment. My question: if every single thing we say has some sort of a qualifier in it (as E-Prime would require), doesn't that completely eliminate the possibility of getting someone to adopt your viewpoint? I mean, if everything you say admits that you could be wrong, doesn't that undermine the essence of argument (that you are completely convinced of what you are supporting)?
Any thoughts on these two questions would be greatly appreciated. I am very interested to hear what others have to say about this.
(Emily T.)
7 comments:
I don't think that it does undermine the essence of the argument. Take the Toulmin Sentence for example. There is a qualifier in present in our claim? It still doesn't change the fact that we have a view on a particular subject.
For example, say that I use E-Prime and state: The dog seems friendly to me. This sentence is E-Prime approved, and yet, it still holds my point of view. I can still use different types of grounds to back up my claim.
I think that the whole point of E-Prime is to ensure the inclusion of a qualifier. A mere fact of life is this: Nothing is absolute, everything is dynamic and everchanging. We shan't forget Bessie the Cow. If you all recall previous posts concerning the sciences (predominantly Biology and Chemistry), even extensively researched statements are in need of qualifiers.
Our world is too complex for any one individual or group to claim that he/she/it has complete information about everything. If this were so, the existence of human life would be somewhat purposeless. We strive to discover the unknown. (This last statement is phrased as an absolute. Yet, what about the exceptions to the rule? What about the people who DO NOT strive to unfold the mysteries of the world? Thus, qualifiers are a necessity, and E-Prime seems to cater to that point of view.)
Even if a topic lacks definitiveness, one's opinion is set. The key/goal is to convince the opposing party to convert to your own beliefs even after recognition of the presented qualifier and possible "iffiness" of the subject at hand.
(Samantha Maliha)
While I believe that the world or "reality" is not static, perhaps some things can maintain a net equilibrium instead of a more polarizing dynamic state.
So, yes, it does kind of undermine the essence of your argument, depending on how you use the qualifier. If you maintain a balanced equilibrium of absolutes and qualified statements, you're golden. Otherwise you just seem like A) a Kerry-life wishy-washy flip-flopper or B) an incompetent babbler.
The basis of E-Prime lies in the use of qualifiers, as Sam mentioned, but also in the inclusion of relevant contextual information. This information also acts as a qualifier of sorts because it limits the assertion to a certain set of circumstances. Just as Wilson states, the two Standard English phrases: "The electron is a wave" and "The electron is a particle" make little sense since they contradict each other. Substituting in the word "appears" helps somewhat, but it is the inclusion of the information regarding instruments 1 and 2 that gives the phrases a sense of clarity.
So yes, the inclusion of qualifiers limits your argument, but it does so to provide you with a chance to better defend your claim. We humans seem to have developed an attachment to the verb "to be" and its accompanying forms, which is why E-Prime is such an impractical concept. It seems, however, that you are not undermining the essence of your argument but rather you are asserting the fact that your claim is distinct and clear-cut. The limits that are put in place by qualifiers are for practicality's sake and not for the purpose of evading the burden of proof.
Tiffany's citations of Wilson's quotes triggered a thought that crossed my mind earlier today. It included a few males and females and an act for which Moorestown High School students have become infamous: the comparison of grades..(shudder).
Student A: Oh darnit! (As if the youth of our generation would use such harmless slang..) I got an 87!
Student B: That's a great grade!
Student C: That's a bad grade!
..Well, which was it? Student A found himself/herself torn between the statements of Students B and C. They were contradictory and left no room for error. Now, observe the following model.
Student A: Oh fiddle sticks! (Again; are we really so controlling over our utilized language?) I got an 87!
Student B: That seems like a good grade to me!
Students C: That seems like a bad grade to me!
In this second example, Students B and C demonstrated their thoughts in a clearly opinion-based fashion. Thus, Student A was therefore able to draw tidbits from each observation and form his/her own conclusion. Statements that seemed to be facts were not imposed; a qualifier was present.
(Sam Maliha)
Having read Sam's example of students comparing grades, a quick question struck me.
Sam pointed out that the difference between her two examples is that the second utilizes qualifiers to state an OPINION about a grade rather than imposing a FACT as in the first example, in which "Student A" hears two opposing statements about his/her grade.
My question is the following: would Student A in the first example actually be torn between the opposing statements of Students B and C? If someone says, "that IS a bad grade," don't we automatically interpret this statement as an OPINION? In other words, can't ANYTHING we say be understood as IMPLYING the qualifier "seem(s) like," regardless of whether we actually state it, since our opinions are essentially interpretations based on our personal experiences?
(Janet Lee)
I think that you could say the qualifier is implied, but it's less obvious than when you use E-Prime. It really depends on the situation. If I say "John McCain should be president", thats obviously an opinion because it is predicting the future and nobody would read it as a fact.
But when somebody says that your grade is bad, I don't think you determine it an opinion unless you have a different opinion yourself. If I also feel that the grade is bad, then I don't think I would look at the statement as an opinion, but more as a fact. However, when Student B comes up to me and says that he thinks my grade is good, I would look at that as an opinion, because I don't see it that way.
Arvind Kalidindi
Post a Comment