Those of you who read this blog regularly know that on occasion I rant a little bit. Well, this is one of those days, spurred on by a discussion with a LinkedIn pal (thanks, Norman!) Spare me the technobabble or the intellectualized gobbledygook - just say it already!
Norman was talking about the value of experts and their studies (we were questioning it, actually) when he wrote:
See the excerpt from the original article here."Must say, I'm impressed by anyone who begins the summary of their conclusions with . . .
'Naturally, our correlational findings are causally ambiguous.' "
"Causally ambiguous?" This goes to two points:
- The expert is discounting the study's content, after the entire study was described in detail, and
- Tell us in plain language! If the expert had made his point clearly he would have said - "we don't know, or this study didn't really tell us anything."
As for point number two - why not just come out and say it? Is it necessary to wrap an idea in a flowery package in order for it to be perceived as smart enough? I say no, and if you dispute that point you're apparently not smart enough to get my point. ( hehe.) I'm not advocating that you "dumb things down," but why engage in verbal obfuscation? (Obfuscation - that word just rolls off the tongue!)
Hey, I read - a lot. I have a pretty big vocabulary. (No brag - I'm going somewhere with this...) I understand the words. But why is it necessary for some people to stand on a pedestal and rain fifty-pound words on other people's heads?
I'm thinking that it's not about communication - which is a two-way process. It's about doing a performance, a monologue. Gotta tell you that I won't be clapping - except maybe because I'm glad it's over.