undefined | Better HN

0 pointsgruseom16y ago0 comments

Sure. But I think the point was that the father realized that he had overemphasized a linguistic device at the expense of a general principle. He'd got his 8-year-old into a state of clueless, if not malicious, compliance, which didn't serve the real goal. (In fact, it often backfires, because people will instinctively resist anything that inhibits their freedom.)

By the way, using active instead of passive language really does change one's thinking and foster responsibility. I've found it to yield pretty rich rewards, and the whole subject is fascinating. Similarly, beginning a status meeting with a one-sentence summary, then proceeding to details, can be quite effective. But when people focus on the trick rather than the substance, it doesn't work anymore. And the OP is an example of that. A car accident is not a status meeting.

0 comments

scott_s16y ago

The phone call reporting it is. I imagine his son put in the "bull is dead" bit to be funny - which it was. But when I've had to make similar phone calls, I always start with "I'm okay, but..." It tells the person on the other end the most important thing first: I'm okay.

pbhj16y ago

I never start a conversation with my mother like "I've been in an accident ...", if you're cut off then she'd go psycho and be needing tranqs. As the parent said "We're all OK but ...".

BrentRitterbeck16y ago

I know it changes one's thinking. It's one of the biggest issues I had working on the traditional side of banking. Whenever someone did something wrong, we would end up getting an email written entirely in passive language because no one wanted to point fingers. Passive language is a tool used either to not accept responsibility or to avoid pointing fingers at the true culprit. Both are terrible things, especially in the office where everyone knows who is to blame anyways.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse