Writing isn’t just about making words sound pretty or mindlessly describing completely abstract and “useless” ideas. Instead, it’s a vehicle for expression that dictates how we think.
A Systematic Practicality
“We’re writing a lab report, not an English essay, so cut out all the fluff and get straight to the point”
This sentiment has been constantly echoed throughout STEM and, to an extent, the point of writing has been utterly rewritten for those that immerse themselves in this field. Written information is valued for little else other than communicating complex ideas fully and succinctly.
Even though science has its fair share of jargon such as molecule names, lengthy acronyms, and other formalities, practicality is king. All necessary information from any scientific, mathematical, or theoretical papers is described in detail and further implications are kept succinct.
Is it wrong to use writing this way? Of course not.
Communication is probably some of the biggest reasons for writing’s genesis. In fact, it had been initially used to keep census records, note internal wages and external trade, and even allow for primordial forms of taxation in many ancient cultures such as the Sumerians and the Aztecs.
However, as pictorial shapes developed into somewhat abstract symbols and markings, the more interesting aspects of writing can be truly seen. In the case of cuneiform(check out this awesome presentation if you want to know more), complex grammar, ambiguous structure, and a multitude of other factors develop writing to not just be a method of communication, but something much more insightful and useful.
The Impossibility of Impartiality
These syntactic and semantic ambiguities that are embedded in every single language mean that pure communication will always be tainted with some sort of perspective.
For example, the adjectives “affordable” and “cheap” have basically the same meaning but have extremely different connotations associated with them. When you say that something is affordable, you highlight how easily you can buy an item. On the other hand, when something is cheap, you are mainly highlighting the poor quality associated with an item.
These differences may be subtle, but they completely change the tone and perceptions of any situation. Moreover, it means that a purely analytical and unbiased means of communication is practically impossible. Although there exists a subset of somewhat neutral words, they themselves are still wrapped with their own differing connotations.
Even disregarding the conscious bias that many people may have, the ambiguities of English inherently infuse a sense of judgment, perspective, and tone in every message. As a result, detailed descriptions of a flower’s interesting properties, or the outcomes of a clinical trial can all have their own extrinsic connotations, even if their intrinsic meaning and purpose may be nothing more than trying to distinctly communicate observed information.
However, this underlying subtlety is usually unnoticed since people are usually there for the “concrete” information. After all, the truth is just the truth, right? Well, not exactly. We can all draw different conclusions from the same information, and thus how we draw upon our perspective of said information will always be reflected in one’s qualitative writing.
Although a lab report may not be like an English essay in its purpose, it still functions under the same rules; Syntactic and semantic meanings are still extremely necessary to writing a qualitative report. Ironically, without truly understanding the quirks of one’s language and the nuances of words, one becomes less inclined to communicate effectively.
Numbers and observations will always have to be interpreted by someone. The conclusion can be a somewhat logical derivation of these data, or it could be some conspiratory levels of misconstruction and extreme extrapolation. But in the end, human perception is what guides the action to be taken.
When 29 teams of analysts all analyzed the same data and sought to determine whether skin color determined the number of red cards a player got during soccer, the end conclusions of these analysts differed wildly(full paper). The “facts” can’t really speak for themselves. It is up to us to decide probable action.
Prelude to Thought
Technically speaking, essays about the human condition, personal narratives, among a multitude of other pieces of writing still follow the primary goal of communication. Yet, they exist in much more abstract spheres of thought. To many, this abstraction is just useless and impractical. I won’t spend too long elaborating on why this is wrong, but it all boils down to pushing the boundaries of understanding.
Someone looking at a bacteria all day wouldn’t seem too useful back in the 17th century, but fast forward to today, the study of the microbial realm has allowed for the creation of vaccines, improved sterilization techniques, and even the ability to edit our own genomes. You can’t know what you don’t know.
The exploration of emotionality, meaning, and experience all are extremely nebulous because it isn’t subjected to the collective subjectivity of the sciences. But this nuance is so rich with the diverse understandings of ourselves, that it would be an absolute detriment to not explore these realms as well.
You could even argue that these aforementioned subjects all manifest themselves in the physical world as well(even though we know little about them), but I think it's safe to say that these areas are indeed important to understand. At its root, writing encourages communication, but it necessitates the understanding and transformation of knowledge.
Every single word you write down has to in some way, shape, or form, arise from active thought and epistemological manipulation. But you can’t just write down every idea you have. It has to be deliberate, organized, and well-constructed to serve a purpose.
In order to write, you have to think. To get better at thinking, you have to write.
Writing encourages the modes of thought necessary for all walks of life and the qualities to survive in our digital age. In a time where you have all kinds of insightful, horrifying, pleasant, and ambiguous bits of information that are only a google search away, it's become easier to just absorb information without thinking.
Shortening attention spans also mean that many literary works, diagrams, and videos have been condensed so that they take minimal effort to digest. So much so, that creating pieces that are too long and descriptive is actually detrimental to readership and viewership. Through this distillation, information is inevitably lost, and it is up to you, the reader, to explore deeper.
Don’t just settle with reading an article. Actively engage with it. Although you don’t have to just write, it is one of the simplest ways that you can activate this discussion of your own ideas and others. Through writing, you can collect a wealth of knowledge and actively broaden your perspective of the world and of yourself. Don’t write just for the sake of it or just for the grade. Write to think.
Now that you’ve approached the end of the article, I want to give you a final action item; Write about something.
It doesn’t have to be published anywhere, nor does it have to be “good.” Just write about something you care about. Because writing isn’t just about talking gibberish nonsense or purely recording observations; It's about being human.
