Perhaps, but this is not that now... is it?

This is a thread which involves what it is safe for a reader to assume about a writer based solely upon the content of the writing alone.

I think it has everything to do with this question.

For example you had just written:



Since you had written this and even included a reference to yourself as *I* it seems resonable to conludue that it is indeed your personal position and belief that you would tell my English professor that he needs a course on logic?

Would it be fair for me to say that this is indeed your personal belief and your position since this is precisely what you wrote and how you wrote it?

You also wrote:



This sentence I totally disagree with. In this sentence you are telling me, as the reader, what my purpose is.

I disagree with your assessment on this. I would also then ask what makes you think that you know what the reader's purpose is?

Can it not be that I write for the needs of my readers?

When I write for my students, or fellow scientists, I have their needs in mind, not mine. In fact, when I write for most people my goal is to offer them as much clarity of understanding as possible.

So not only do I disagree with your assertion here, but I feel confident to say that is an incorrect assumption about me (as a reader). And you certainly appeared to be referencing the reader directly in that statement. Or was that just poor writing?

You think what has everything to do with what question?



In this context, yes... It would be my position to think that your professor needed a logic course, if he would have said what you suggested... for the reason I gave.




See, now your wrong! I am not telling you the reader what your purpose is. I was following the lead given by you which included his hypothetical use of the term your. I used it to follow suit only. It was directed to you, James(aka Abrabcadabra) personally, however, it was not about you personally. So, this presupposition(false belief) has led you to the following false conclusion.



I would have to ask you what makes you think that I do. I do not have to know each person's individual purpose in order to logically conclude that that purpose - whatever it may consist of - is one of personal reason gained or drawn from personal experience and completely due to a personal need.

Call it tautological... or an axiom.



I suppose one could call it poor writing... or poor reading comprehension too. I would call it a misunderstanding of which I am correcting. Blame matters not.

To address what you express are your personal reasons for your writing, in all of the different scenarios provided in your explanation, how many of those answer this question...

Would it not be safe to conclude that you feel a need to acknowledge and help another with what you think their needs are?

How is that not your need, according to your words here?

I mean, to me, your professor made it quite clear that the writer(you in this case) needs to keep in mind the audience and purpose.

The writer's need.

Am I missing something here?

That is not meant to dismiss, nor can it, the importance of recognizing that a writer can have both, his/her and the audience needs in mind. Especially if the content of his/her need revolves around what s/he thinks the audience's is.

But it is the writer's need none-the-less, that drives the writer, regardless of whether or not that particular writer has(honorably, I must say) what s/he feels is the audience's needs in mind.

Evidently so.

Good luck with your thread.

I think in images/sounds/smells.

I write in words.

How can there be a correlation when one is rich in ways that the other can never convey.

If that is the extent of the support behind your claim that I am, in fact, missing something here, then the claim is not worth much to me. I absolutely love it when another can show me the fallacious nature of *any* belief which I hold, however, it must be shown as more than just an unsupported biased opinion.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To get back to the topic at hand...

The earlier link which was given has a few interesting aspects of human judgment regarding the actions of another human. For those who are willing and are interested, it is intriguing indeed, how we humans grow into these judgment abilities and/or deficiencies. It focuses upon the actual portion of the brain that is responsible for entertaining these judgmental thoughts.

I found it a little curious that only a few responses entertained the notion that it may not be possible to know with any amount of certainty something personally about a writer by merely the writing alone.

Of course this would not be the case if the writing consisted of autobiographical content. In that case, one must assume that the content is a direct reflection of the person themself.

Sky mentioned the notion of having a history of writing by which to draw conclusions about the author from. I feel that a history would indeed be helpful if the writing was of a certain personal nature, or if the reader's ability to infer personality traits from writing alone was accurate.

That leads me to the aforementioned idea of 'reading between the lines', and exactly how that attribute, if it belongs to the reader, could be unconsciously or consciously falsely ascribed to a writer by such a reader.

For as Sky also mentioned in another thread regarding these things, it is *sometimes* possible to recognize certain traits in a person according to what and how they write. But as he mentioned in this thread...

To what degree can we safely assume, and just as importantly, by what measure?

Ab writes...



Indeed, there is often inherent difficulty in putting sense into word.



How are ya AB?

Alive and well.

and still stickin my oar in once in a while.

You make a good point though AB.

If the writer has trouble putting thoughts into words, then it would be equally difficult for any reader to ascribe traits to such a writer by their words alone.

As I see it, the "measure" cannot be anything but the readers experience and evaluations. That is all he has to compare it with. He cannot use the writers experience and evaluations (although he can use his evaluations of and experience with the writer - if any). He cannot use another readers experiences and evaluations (although he can use his experience with and evaluations of another reader - if any). He only has his own evaluations and experience to work with. So he cannot "measure" it any other way.

Likewise, “safety” is totally subjective. What may be considered “safe” by one person, may be considered “dangerous” by another.

Which simply illustrates that the question, and it’s answer, have no bearing on anything outside the readers own mind.

In order for the subjective state of the readers mind to have any bearing on anything, outside of itself, there would have to be some action in the physical universe.

So as far as I’m concerned, the assumptions are all but irrelevant. It is the actions based on those assumptions that are important.

Which leads me to believe that the OP was intended to elicit responses regarding the moral aspects of a readers actions in response to what he read. Either that, or to prompt people to examine their own subjective viewpoints regarding the written word.

And personally, I think both of those are good ideas if they result in people being more polite or mannerly in their responses.

I appreciate the confirmation on my attempts to be more polite in other people's eyes, especially during those frustrating times where words are given a false meaning.



Assuming I am imparting a correct 'reading between the lines'.

i think its better to never assume anything about the writer. just love their work and you will never suspect the writer of being evil.

http://www.ted.com/talks/michael_merzenich_on_the_elastic_brain.html

A little more scientific information regarding how we think...

Shameless bump...

Baring pure fiction, I think that how you write, particularly in a forum speaks volumes about who you are, and what your attitude is.

The words you chose, the subjects you chose, the method you use all reflect your feelings, attitudes, opinions and agenda.

So yes, it is save to conclude that how one writes is a reflection of how one thinks.

Ditto.

in no uncertain terms is it safe to conclude such. and it is highly unfair to do so. i just dealt with a poster who wrote, "you are saying that.............." and then proceded to use HIS words to describe MY thoughts when i said no such thing. i take great care in chosing my words to express what i think. if i don't succeed in accurately portraying my thoughts it's my fault if i'm missunderstod. but to conclude what my thoughts are by using anything other than the exact words that i write is not only unfair it's dishonest. especially when the words you may assert to be mine becomes the basis for making your own argument.

not so. my feeling, attitude, opinions and agenda varies with each topic. for instance, i've been called a right wing facist neocon by liberals for my opinions on ecconomic issues. on another thread where the 2nd amendment is the topic i've been called a left wing bleeding hear liberal somewhere left of micheal moore. neither taken alone are accurate much less fair assesments of me as a person. if you only read one thread you'd miss that i consider issues on their own merits.