Reason for hesitating

"Would it be better to speak out?"

I often have some personal and private entanglements in my heart, and I always feel stuffy in my heart and don't vomit, and I don't want to be more cheerful. Occasionally sharing my repressed feelings with others, many times the other person will always respond to me in this way. Sometimes I tell myself that too, but it doesn't end up being the case, and that's another story.

If we stand on the goal of making the two sides have the same cognition and information symmetry, this is indeed the case. I agree that it is very important to speak out the bottom of my heart and let others know my thoughts, because this is a very important condition for rational communication. . But if you're not sure if you can express yourself faithfully and accurately, is it still appropriate to express your thoughts?

This is an interesting thing, when I was taught to speak and write from a young age, I needed to be responsible for my own ideas - especially when writing. This statement maintains an idea that "words have time to allow for thinking and editing, while language is timely, and there is not much time and space that can be used as a buffer". Interestingly, just because the language is spoken, the listener may not have the intention to look back and think about the meaning, so in this view, it is relatively regarded as an expression that does not require so much responsibility. Text is different. In addition to writers have time to conceive and examine what they are trying to express, readers also have more time to chew on various messages between the lines. Therefore, when using words as a medium to express, they are burdened with more words. In the case of responsibility, they are required to be more precise and considerate; not only to express their ideas faithfully after thinking clearly, but also to be careful whether such ideas themselves or the mode of message delivery conform to the principles of public expectations.

But in the process of walking and jumping in the past few years, I heard another idea. I encouraged to express more without worrying about reputation. "After all, it is a student! There is nothing to lose!", "Now the Internet is very convenient. If there is any incorrect information, someone will be very willing to give advice, the point is that you don’t want to be glass-hearted.” Most of these statements hold the assumption that over time and experience accumulated to a certain level, people’s expressive ability will naturally “elevate”. . This is usually the rhetoric of popular science education promoters, who believe that college students have a certain level of knowledge and can use social media to "practice" their expressive skills.

Unfortunately, another argument in the academic circle is to sneer at imprecise or even unoriginal "scientific sketches"; they believe that since it is a published work, it should pay attention to the effect of the message after it is transmitted. Once you stand on the soapbox of "public intellectuals", you should try your best to avoid specious or sensational speech; in other words, if you are not ready, don't play easily. The cost of speaking the wrong thing is very high. Perhaps the responsibility can be entirely attributed to the author himself, but the consequences may no longer be handled by the author unilaterally after being informed of the problem, correcting, reviewing and apologizing. The high density and frequency of contemporary information transmission, coupled with the limitations of human cognition, make it difficult to measure the effects of false and false information, so it needs to be avoided.

The question is, how does one measure one's "readiness" if there is no opportunity to perform? Or to ask further, what does it mean to be "ready"? If it is assumed that college students have basic professional abilities to communicate with the public, but they still need to practice, does this mean that they also stand on the assumption that college students are "inadequate in their ability to communicate"? The difference between the two sides is not only on the responsibility of the writer, but also on the fundamental understanding of the writer's (college student's) ability, which in turn affects their thoughts on whether the writer can take the responsibility of the writer. It is worth mentioning that the party who advocates more expression often has more unilateral expectations of the writer than the actual performance (the expectation mentioned here may have a connotation closer to "you have professional ability, and you should also have basic responsibility for writing." They are self-conscious and can conduct preliminary censorship of their own speech”), so that they can often be seen complaining or criticizing the writer’s lack of literacy.

But in fact, if we look back, we will find that no matter how we look at scolding, no one will question the importance of expression, and no one will deny the value of "speaking out", but the "words" that are expressed are different. Just an imagination. How to "speak out" on the basis of precision, faithfulness, consideration, rationality, and possibly several aesthetic senses and several principles that should be paid attention to when writing is a difficult thing for me. Every time I think of putting my own thoughts It's tiring to spread out, because the process needs to adjust as much as possible on several control valves to the acceptable threshold, and I'm still not good at it. It happens that we have to discuss the matter of "expression", which can only be achieved through "expression". This is what you are reading. It has plagued me for several years, and I still can't figure it out. This post probably doesn't help me deal with the obsession itself, but I did sort out some of my thoughts while writing and got me off some horns.

As for the impact of this trouble on me, I will talk about it next time.

 In my first Matters article, "This is just another self-introduction," I mentioned that I'm not very active in writing, and this post is a starting point for thinking about why I am the way I am.