Why do we use unnecessary jargon?

[Keldan]

I’ve noticed that practitioners tend to overcomplicate things and use a lot of hard to understand words to express something. I’m curious. Is this a way to show off one’s prowess?

I’m not trying to call anyone out, but sometimes it feels like the wording creates more difficulty than clarity. Would you prefer a forum culture that leans more toward “here’s what I did + what happened” rather than theory heavy descriptions? I’d love to hear different perspectives.

 

[Aldebaran]

Aye—obscurity is an ancient perfume, oft applied where the body itself is wanting. When the work hath little fire, men grow eloquent about smoke, ash, and the sacred geometry of the hearth.
Yet I will not wholly damn it. Some experiences twist the tongue, and a man fresh from the altar rarely speaks like a clerk. There are truths that come out sideways, muttering and drunk, because they were learned with the nerves and not the dictionary.
Still—mark this well—results are the final argument. “I did this; this followed” is worth a shelf of theories that have never been dared. Practice gives words their blood. Without it, they are corpses dressed in fine robes.
But flee the other pit as well: the worship of raw anecdote and vibes, where thought is shunned as heresy. Action without reflection is blind; theory without action is dead. The Work is born of their constant and fruitful quarrel.
So speak plainly when thou canst, strangely when thou must—but if thou insist on sounding profound, see to it that thou hast first done something worth obscuring.

 

[Durward]

I’ve noticed that practitioners tend to overcomplicate things and use a lot of hard to understand words to express something. I’m curious. Is this a way to show off one’s prowess?

I’m not trying to call anyone out, but sometimes it feels like the wording creates more difficulty than clarity. Would you prefer a forum culture that leans more toward “here’s what I did + what happened” rather than theory heavy descriptions? I’d love to hear different perspectives.

I get this sort of over-complicated expression from neurodivergent people like myself at times, and my simple opinion is that it is still expression, in whatever format. Some of us tend to rant on and on as well, getting off-subject easily, because we see so much as interconnected.
Some authors also write in fumble-dore Harry Pothead format, like Ophiel, and it becomes a struggle for me to find any gems in that mayhem. Others find it amazing, fascinating, informative. So to each their own is my comment.
I'm not a fan of censoring or steering anyone, unless censoring is to block hateful or oppressive rants, lies, scams, etc. What is obvious, is that many people are not destined to be teachers or public speakers, but should still feel comfortable contributing and participating.

 

[deci belle]

Un-necessary to whom?

 

[Lurker]

I’ve noticed that practitioners tend to overcomplicate things and use a lot of hard to understand words to express something.

I haven't noticed that. Can you give some examples? You don't need to link to other posts if you don't want to, just give some examples of the jargon that you find confusing. Hopefully we can de-confuse you.

Aye—obscurity is an ancient perfume, oft applied where the body itself is wanting. When the work hath little fire, men grow eloquent about smoke, ash, and the sacred geometry of the hearth.
Yet I will not wholly damn it. Some experiences twist the tongue, and a man fresh from the altar rarely speaks like a clerk. There are truths that come out sideways, muttering and drunk, because they were learned with the nerves and not the dictionary.
Still—mark this well—results are the final argument. “I did this; this followed” is worth a shelf of theories that have never been dared. Practice gives words their blood. Without it, they are corpses dressed in fine robes.
But flee the other pit as well: the worship of raw anecdote and vibes, where thought is shunned as heresy. Action without reflection is blind; theory without action is dead. The Work is born of their constant and fruitful quarrel.
So speak plainly when thou canst, strangely when thou must—but if thou insist on sounding profound, see to it that thou hast first done something worth obscuring.

Yeah! Get thou thy Shakespeare on!

Post automatically merged: Today at 6:14 PM

Yeah! Get thou thy Shakespeare on!

Obviously I was taking a little license.

 

[Durward]

I haven't noticed that. Can you give some examples? You don't need to link to other posts if you don't want to, just give some examples of the jargon that you find confusing. Hopefully we can de-confuse you.

Anything from

deci belle​

It comes across like what you would expect from an oracle that speaks in riddles and considers anyone who doesn't get it to be an ignorant peasant.

 

[Morell]

I’ve noticed that practitioners tend to overcomplicate things and use a lot of hard to understand words to express something. I’m curious. Is this a way to show off one’s prowess?

I’m not trying to call anyone out, but sometimes it feels like the wording creates more difficulty than clarity. Would you prefer a forum culture that leans more toward “here’s what I did + what happened” rather than theory heavy descriptions? I’d love to hear different perspectives.

You know, diversification of language is natural effect in any and every "specialized" group. Be it hobbies, like football or tennis, modeling, designing, or jobs, like army, train industry, factories, technology, etc. etc.

So simply said the fact that we have jargon is consequence of natural effect of developing ourselves in this "department" and seeking for naming things specific to us. I think it is also possible to be called subculture. Specific jargon is one of the signs of subculture.

 

[AbammonTheGreat]

Anything from

deci belle​

It comes across like what you would expect from an oracle that speaks in riddles and considers anyone who doesn't get it to be an ignorant peasant.

Thats just magusitis. Its more of an attitude than vernacular though artificially inflated verbiosity is a part of a defense mechanism used by insecure people who feel their self worth is tied into being smart/being perceived as an intellectual.

You can tell the difference because confident intelligent people are more interested in communicating their ideas and so will tone down concepts to try to reach more people. When you run into somebody that is insecure/doesnt have much else going for them they have an heir of superiority and are condescending because "being an intellectual" is where their self worth is tied up in. They havent really discovered who they really ARE yet so their identity is tied to some type of superficial trait like "well im the smart guy in the room".

 

[Lurker]

Anything from

deci belle​

It comes across like what you would expect from an oracle that speaks in riddles and considers anyone who doesn't get it to be an ignorant peasant.

Lol okay, I see that's more of a personal issue between you two. They have a very formal and high-level writing style, but I was looking for jargon.

As @Morell pointed out, we need to use specialized language for talking about magic, so it's bound to include jargon.

Would you prefer a forum culture that leans more toward “here’s what I did + what happened” rather than theory heavy descriptions?

No, I like a variety of perspectives and like to read a variety of writing styles. Monochrome is not my jam.

Post automatically merged: 35 minutes ago

Just a couple more thoughts.

I like a variety of perspectives and like to read a variety of writing styles.

People's writing styles are an expression of their personalities. It's not just what they say, it's how they say it that helps give a feeling for their humanity.

A long, long time ago, I started reading Rudolph Steiner's book How to Know Higher Worlds. At the beginning of the book he said that he used a difficult writing style because he wanted readers to think long and hard about what he was saying, and thereby internalize the book on a deeper level. I thought that was an interesting approach. There's something to be said for puzzling over a piece of difficult writing, although that applies more to a noted author than an internet forum of anonymous members. (I never finished the book because I had no idea where it was going and it moved at a snail's pace, not because of the writing style.)

 

[Robert Ramsay]

I haven't really noticed this - well, apart from that patronising guy who got banned recently.

There have been other posts where I have no idea what the person was talking about - but it wasn't because of the jargon.