Stephane Hamel and I were having a conversation earlier today about the online discussion Christopher Berry and I have been having about...well, I think it's about selling web analytics to the Canadian business community. It's gotten into some different areas and Stephane picked up on these in his comment on my Responding to Christopher Berry's Vexing Problem, Part 3 post entry. Christopher has since posted A Vexing Problem, Part 4 and I promise to get to it soon (heaven knows what that means with me, of course).
<RAMBLE>
It's amusing to me that I take a weekend off and several of the blogs I write get lots of traffic. Maybe I should stay away from the computer more often?
</RAMBLE>
Stephane was most curious about my "I'm also quite sure logic (at least as we're using it here) isn't the answer because the language of analytics (as exemplified by this blog, June Li's, (oh, just pick any one but not Stephane Hamel's or mine because Stephane and I use different language models, me all the time and Stephane much of the time) is to effect action, not promote logical processes. Effecting action rather than promoting logical processes is not specific to analytics although analytics really enforces that former aspect of language."
I asked Stephane if I could respond to some of his comments in a post and he, gracious man that he is, agreed. My purpose is to clarify what I meant by the above. I'll also add some when I respond to Christopher's latest.
First to clarify, all language effects action. That's it's purpose. It's why languages have "command" forms and not "repose" forms. Therefore, using language to cause people to repose, rest, think, etc., is usually more complex than language used to effect action. It's kind of like using a hammer to dig a hole. That's not what a hammer is designed for and you can do it if you're willing to put in the work.What I was commenting on in the above was that Stephane will sometimes encourage people to think in his language usage. I do it a lot (force of habit, I guess).
I consider this with the postings of other "web analysts". Note that I'm not evaluating their web analytics knowledge or any knowledge, opinion, inference, etc. What I'm considering is their language use, ie, are they using language to effect action on the part of the reader/listener/audience or are they effecting mentation?
Here I pick up my conversation with Stephane:
I need to explain what is meant by "language ...effect action, not logic..."
It's not indigenous to the language of analytics, per se, although the language of analytics intensifies the effect.
The function of all communication (human communication) is to cause people (the audience) to act in response to what is being communicated.
and I bet this difference would be reflected in most aspect of our lives, being more "directive" (you MUST do this) or more "convincing" (you SHOULD do this)
isn't it MUST vs SHOULD and the ending result is DO? The end goal is still to DO, the difference is in how you influence people to actually get there?
Big question you're asking, my friend. You're getting into Linguistics, Theory of Mind, Cognitive Theory, Linguistic Cognition Studies, Philosophy of Learning, Morality versus Ethics, ...
(why can't people have more discussions like this on their blogs? This is interesting stuff we're talking about here. To me, anyway)
"Must" == an obligation statement
"Should" == a choice statement
agreed!
Lots of my training went into learning to recognize the difference between inferring choice v obligation in language.
Then again, lots of my training went into figuring out my training.
LOL
and I guess my communication style might explain why my clients hire me to get advice, I bring recommendations, and then they fail to implement. Maybe because I'm giving them the choice (should) in the way I'm communicating and I should emphasize more the "must"
A book that plays into this discussion is "Did My Neurons Make Me Do It?" Not generally accessible for a lay audience but funnier than heck because of what's presented. Makes good reading, me thinks.
A simple read of Stephane's language above (well, a simple read to me, anyway) demonstrates that Stephane is working towards both understanding and concensus, both of which are elements of mentation, not action.
Way to go, Steph! You're the man....I mean, You're one of the men...I mean, when you think about it...
Please contact NextStage for information regarding presentations and trainings on this and other topics.
Sign up for the NextStage Irregular, our very irregular, definitely frequency-wise and probably topic-wise newsletter.
» Responding to Christopher Berry's "A Vexing Problem, Part 4" Post, Part 1 from BizMediaScience
Way more than you wanted to know about Americans, Canadians, Anecdotal v Logical Thinking, How We're Prisoners of Language, and lots of easter eggs [Read More]
Tracked on: July 1, 2008 12:29 PM | Permalink to Trackback