Do you have AUTHORITY? Do you want more QUALITY?

When I stroll through the steemit block chain and read the articles of so many different themes and interests, I stumble again and again over a certain form of expression.

The "we" expression.

Where do "we" get it from? It seems it had become a common form of communication.

Which I more and more start to ... well ... dislike.

Actually this communication habit is so strong that I have to force myself only to use the "we" if it is inevidable.

My speculation on the causes:

Someone who says "we" doesn't dare to use the "I". The person hides his or her opinion or assumption behind a "we", because it sounds as if he or she is not alone with what one is trying to say.

It is an unconscious process and a deception. When I use the "we" in such a way that I use it automatically and without thinking about it, I show that I don't put a lot of effort into going to a personal reason for one thing. I conceal my lack of confrontation with a matter in which I pretend that my intention, view, theory and knowledge is already the intention of others. In many cases, this works wonderfully well. No one's bumping into it.

It's also a piece of normality.

But. Still it is nagging at me.

Where do I start rubbing myself against it?

Exactly those statements where I get the impression that they are just ... talk ... on the surface. It may even read itself very deep and yet... and yet a feeling still carries me when reading through an article, as if the author didn't really care what he says. Although, one would ask him, he would deny this vehemently.

Which leads me to walk around in the mental circle and to ask myself: What does it make any sense at all?

Am I actually the author of my thoughts?

Have I ever created something of my own that does not come from those I admire and learned from? (or those I have not learned from - complaining style?!)

... Then the surprised question: "... And, is that terrible?"
What is reprehensible about leaning on others? Is it not even wise to do so? Do I have to invent the steam engine or the computer chip myself to take me for granted?

What is "authority"?

I consider an author to be someone who wants to get to the bottom of his own findings. When I think of my own thoughts and bring them into the form of a readable thing, I can do it best if I try to translate what others have said before me or at the same time say. In a language that I can understand and accept. So I am basically just an interpreter of other people's expressions. But my attempt to find a translation with which I can agree is already a step in its own right, and the matter presented to me is not simply to parrot in the "we" form. But to subject them to a close examination.

It becomes immediately clear that such an approach is really complex! Yes, it seems impossible!

It's screaming to look for the rescue in the "we".

And it's not all wrong, is it?

An author also (that's what I've stolen from Alan Watts) has the authority over what he does, thinks and says. His work reflects this through his very own form of expression. What is authority? Is it a definition sovereignty or is it something like a calm conviction that my existence in the world accepts what others have recognized before me and at the same time recognises that I am also doing the work of pursuing what has been said?

For a long time I thought "authority" was very bad - downright diabolical, actually!

For us in Germany, it is predominantly negative connoted. An "authoritarian person" was therefore a strict (and unpopular!) teacher, a despotic parent.

Through the denigration of this term, an excellent expression has been lost to the "evil side", because I think that authority is a very fitting expression to grasp that a person deserves this attribution through his consideration, his reflection on things.

This is even clearer for me when it comes to bringing up children.

There, authority also has an incredibly bad image. Wouldn't need it, though. The adult is responsible for the actions and omissions of a child entrusted to him/her. If he did not give himself the authority over the education he exercises, who could fill this gap? Certainly not the child.
I remember, a teacher didn't have to be "sweet" or "funny" to be respected. He had to show me that he loved what he was trying to convey and I could buy from him that he liked to teach children.

Act, as if ...

Jesper Juul, a Danish family therapist, also expresses that some parents are not authority figures for their children, but merely play parenthood. I have made this observation, too. Behind playing parenting and pretending to be resolute, there is uncertainty. Authority is not in sight.

Quality is nothing which can be described well, it better is felt

When I write a novel and I want to keep my characters beyond stereotypical, they need authenticity. I need to have a certain idea and knowledge of how a character can become credible for the reader. No one who has not tried it before will know what a challenge this can be. In particular, if you think that you are immune to the fact that the habit of reading bad literature has not changed the way you express yourself. I have read so much rubbish and badly written things in my life that they almost automatically creep in when writing. It is extremely annoying to take out all the filler words and overblown phrases and then see if there is anything left of a sentence.

In this category I also place the gladly taken "we".

The same goes for me as it does for characters in novels. Therefore, I don't need to write that "we" "need better teachers" (complaint mode), but I give a memory of myself that both makes me believe and speaks a truth that is subjective and therefore doesn't seem either offended or insulting to the reader. In some cases, it is much easier and even better to give one's own experience than to refer to studies, statistics and other people's results. The reader actually would like to know at least a part of the authority one gives to him or herself within an article.

But if I do this ALL the time, it can seem dull and self-centered.

........

Anybody got an idea where this "we-thing" is coming from? Has it ever been said so before, say, two hundred years ago?

What about an experiment?

Why do I publish this topic? I want you to think about quality. The "avoiding we" can be ONE tool to write good articles. Just alter one of yours and re-write them and compare the two! Tell me, what you noticed!

Also: when you write your NEXT article, try to avoid "we"-expressions.
Whenever using them, read again and substitute them for an "I". Maybe then a sentence would not make so much sense anymore. Or you would have to re-write the whole chapter.

I think of this as an excellent instrument of self reflection.

This is not about TOTAL avoidance of the "we".
I am going to need and use it further on. It is not about binding myself to a strict rule which then has to be followed by a punishment or some sort of hurting consequence. ... Though a part of me is showing up and telling me: "Well, sometimes a consequence in the form of shocking me is quite useful".
Which leads me to think about occasions where that was the case.

... No! I stopp here and just want to ask you if you have tried already avoiding the "we" and what your findings and surprises were.

Thank you for visiting me.

P.S. A user I'd like to name as highly recommendable and inspirational - seems he lacks totally the "we"-virus:

@rok-sivante