Another Take On Tone

[akirlu]

Consider the possibility that if some one tells you your choice of words makes it hard for some people to hear your message, this may not be a request to shut up, it might just be a request to find better words. If you can't bear to have people ask you to rephrase, perhaps the problem does not lie in them.

Comments

[oreouk]

But it depends what you are trying to achieve, surely. If you actually want a positive response and someone takes the time to say something that boils down to 'gosh, I might do that if you could only be polite about it' why should we not take that at face value? How you ask for something is an important part of the act of asking.

Also it may be that you are just the last person to step on that particular nerve and that has generated that response.

As a parent I spend a not insubstantial part of my time telling my children variants on the 'you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar' line. So sometimes I might call people on how they are expressing something ebcause if my kids said it like that I'd certainly be calling them on it.

What does it hurt to take a look at how you have expressed something and see if there is a way to restate it that is less inflamatory? Sometimes the tone argument is 'I actually do want to engage with you on this but I'm not willing to invest the time if you're not willing to be polite (aka also invest the time)'.

Which is not to say that people don't abuse the tone argument, just that I think it goes both ways.

[daveon]

Yes, you are correct. But as I said, I have found that most people I see using 'tone' as an argument aren't really suggesting a rephrasing of the argument but using it as a passive aggressive way to try and shut down an argument they're losing or when presented with a position they've not thought about before and suddenly feel uncomfortable.

I also have the issue that as a Brit my 'accent' tends to come through both in spoken and written word and perfectly normal turns of phrase for me might sound weird or insulting to other people. The concept of the 'tone' argument, baring no holds barred insults, seems to turn on people making assumptions about the mind of the author that aren't necessarily true.

That's not to say that there haven't been times when I have used 'withering contempt' to convey my disapproval of a particular position and done so intentionally, but when I do, it's rarely because I actually wish to engage in a discussion. Topics falling into this bucket include anti-vaccination, creationists, libertarians and a few others...)

[oreouk]

:-) I think we're on the same page. I think I've seen fewer tone arguments (other than ones which arose in the Jonathan Ross thing and even then I mostly skimmed over those as being stupid and missing the point).

[daveon]

I saw a lot of people complain about 'tone' in the Ross stuff but actually saw nothing that suggested anything other than both sides missing the point entirely. But that was a weird one where it was possible to be simultaneously right and wrong at the same time for completely contradictory reasons...

I must admit the number of people I saw arguing on the same sides of that issue whom I know can't actually agree on the colour of the sky nor the time of day did bring a slight smile to my face :)