Here, have a dinosaur comic that is very me. I'm the T-Rex, if for some reason you could not guess. Fie on all who cannot handle the steely embrace of logic! Fie
( Read more... )
Yes, I read that kind of caveat as a way of deflating my (or the listener's) skoffing reaction. It's similar to, "No offense, but..." in that it says, "I know what I'm about to say is offensive (or woo-woo), but I'm going to say it, anyway, and by flagging it for you, I make it reasonable for me to talk about."
Do you think "No offense, but..." is a fair conversational device? Do you think it's just requesting that a conversation be had about something, despite the emotions involved? Or is it actually requesting of the listener that they not be offended, and cut off those emotions? I guess I agree with you about the intent, but I'm not sure that it actually succeeds in making it reasonable to talk about, because I think it sounds like it's a request to actually quit having those emotions (which is unreasonable).
"No offense, but...." almost never causes me to take offense, no matter what follows. If what you have to say to me is offensive, it's offensive, and acknowledging it in a way that makes it sound like you think I shouldn't take offense because you already know it's offensive, which is additionally offensive.
I try really hard never to use it, and I think I succeed. I also try hard not to take someone's head off when they use it with me, and I mostly succeed with that, too, but less so.
So that's different from the "woo-woo" disclaimer, which is, I think, more speaker-directed than listener-directly, or more evenly so, anyway.
I would take it to mean "I know *you* are going to find this totally woo-woo, so give me a chance, at least I'm not so unhinged that I don't *realize* that."
Right, I guess that makes sense. Particularly when the speaker is talking to me specifically about certain topics. But in a few cases it's been to a largely pagan/accepting crowd, which has interested me.
I think the construction is "this sounds implausible at first stroke, but hear me out." Much of the time it's used to talk about things which are outside things considered normal by that social group, so for example heliocentricity in ancient religious societies, and faith healing in modern secular societies.
Of course, only one of those things is really "woo-woo".
Right. Well, and in some cases, when someone goes on to give some new evidence, or a new reason to at least believe that something is possible, then I think it's a fine caveat to begin with.
What others said. Someone who says "This is going to sound woo-woo" is trying to ensure that [i]you[/i] don't call it woo-woo. A lot of people, I understand, would rather just say their piece and move on, without getting into a debate over it.
See, I don't say "This will sound woo-woo," because I think all of my ideas sound perfectly rational (right up until I discard them).
I think its intent is something like "I know that this will sound woo-woo to you, and I know you look down on woo-woo stuff, but I'm a person you like or care about, and it really did happen to me, and I'm excited about it and want to tell you, but I don't want you to think less of me, so I'm letting you know in advance that I understand you don't believe in the fairies I saw in my garden yesterday."
Yeah. Sigh... I wish I knew how to respond better in such cases. See my above comment to iphy. There are times when I don't feel like arguing about things, but it generally makes me uncomfortable when people expect me to accept things that I don't believe could be true.
someotherguy and I have this conversation a lot. Somehow, we've figured out, it's perfectly polite to sit in a room full (typo: fool) of Bay-Area people and say "Well, of course it's pretty obvious that the Indigo Children are extraterrestrials sent down here to teach us lessons," or "I saw an eagle today, and it was a personal message to me from the Universe," but saying anything the slightest bit skeptical is impolite.
If we didn't have each other to snark to, we might go mad. As it is, I tend to just do the fake self-deprecating thing, with my best goodwill smile: "Well, you know me -- I'm a big old atheist freak, so angels don't talk to *me*" or something like that.
Ah, faux self-deprecation sounds like a good plan. And having friends to snark with (and in my case, a novel in which to fictionalize and caricature all the ridiculous statements in) is awfully helpful in getting through it all. :)
Comments 29
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
I try really hard never to use it, and I think I succeed. I also try hard not to take someone's head off when they use it with me, and I mostly succeed with that, too, but less so.
So that's different from the "woo-woo" disclaimer, which is, I think, more speaker-directed than listener-directly, or more evenly so, anyway.
Reply
-J
Reply
Reply
Of course, only one of those things is really "woo-woo".
Reply
Reply
See, I don't say "This will sound woo-woo," because I think all of my ideas sound perfectly rational (right up until I discard them).
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
If we didn't have each other to snark to, we might go mad. As it is, I tend to just do the fake self-deprecating thing, with my best goodwill smile: "Well, you know me -- I'm a big old atheist freak, so angels don't talk to *me*" or something like that.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment