Need A Better Story -- Perhaps Yours?
This is a point from my Communicating chapter of my next book, "Good Manners For Nice People Who Sometimes Say F*ck," for St. Martin's Press. I need a story to illustrate it. Got one? Heard of one in the news? Please post it below.
It's also okay to say you don't know and never will, although it tends to irritate the hell out of people.
Whenever I discuss certain historical questions--e.g. Was Lincoln gay or How many lovers did Catherine the Great have--I often say that we don't know and never will. We can make informed guesses, but that's all we can do: guess.
Hubbard at December 1, 2012 4:15 PM
Can not really think of any story related to it. The thought that comes out why it irritates people is because "the I don't know" can be easily confused with "I don't care". Nothing peeves off people more then some one not caring about what they care about.
John Paulson at December 1, 2012 4:33 PM
One of the few problems I have with the "I don't know answer" is I once ran across someone who used it as a to fuel what I thought was a friendly debate and turn it into an argument.
I was in my late forties at the time and this girl, that I worked with briefly was maybe 22.
I am an extremely opinionated person, but also a pretty well read one.
She had been fed the standard liberal pc garbage in college, and did not seem to realize, that a pretty well educated 40 something woman was going to have many more opinions about politics, economics and history than she did. She implied that my having opinions about things she knew nothing about was somehow rude and ill mannered.
It seemed to be particularly grating when I brought up evidence to support my opinion.
In other words, I guess since she was a bubble head who believed the liberal mantra that all opinions were equal, and therefore only judged on their social acceptability,
I asked her some questions to try and get to the basis of her beliefs, but since there was no basis, she used her "I don't know" response as a defense to keep from being exposed as having no factual basis for what few opinions she had.
I was being impolite in implying that "knowing something" was a matter of applying logic to facts, and not just having some baseless emotional preference for the color purple, for example.
Isab at December 1, 2012 6:41 PM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/12/need-a-better-s.html#comment-3497541">comment from IsabThanks, everybody, for these responses. Thoughtful and interesting -- as expected.
Isab, your example is one I hadn't considered.
Keep these coming - please!
Amy Alkon at December 1, 2012 6:47 PM
I get that reaction regularly at work from certain managers who don't want to face reality. I'm an engineer, when a transient fault occurs in a system then goes away we try and find out why it happened, and sometimes we can find a reason, but sometimes the answer is "I don't know and I never will be able to tell you what happened". I can't analyse information that wasn't recorded! A associated bit of cognitive dysfunction that occurs when we then put in place extra monitoring to try and capture it next time, or a mysterious fault has occurred that is ongoing but we have no idea what's causing it yet, is "how long will it take?" "I don't know" "we have to put a timeframe for resolution down" "ok, you pick a date then, I'm not giving you one."
Because I'm generally polite and dislike confrontation, when I was younger I would give them a guess to make them happy. Then when it wasn't fixed, I was 'late'. With more experience, I've a)learned to stand up for myself, and b)developed the track record and reputation to make "I don't know" stick.
Ltw at December 1, 2012 7:24 PM
I'm with Hubbard on this one. Sometimes you can speculate to Hell and back, but you'll never really know the truth.
Speculating is still fun, though.
Daghain at December 1, 2012 7:48 PM
I do politics for a living, but there are some issues that I'm still "agnostic" on.
The issues are complicated, have potential far-reaching implications beyond the simplified talking points, and transcend ideology. Thus, both sides can have valid points.
It's very awkward to say "I don't know" in a political discussion these days, though, especially if you're knowledgable and opinionated (and confident of your opinions) on 98 percent of the other issues.
You're not allowed to be "agnostic" in politics anymore - on either side of the aisle.
AB at December 2, 2012 6:11 AM
I've always been fond of the response, "I don't know, but I'll try and find out for you."
On subjects like whether God exists, I usually respond with "I have no clue and probably never will."
Anne Cacioppo at December 2, 2012 7:06 AM
Having worked in customer service and tech support jobs over the years, I have more than once told a customer "I don't know.." only be interrupted and told that was an unacceptable answer and then lectured to tell a customer "I will find out for you..." and never to tell a customer "I don't know."
If these people had let me finish my sentence, I would have said "I don't know but will find out for you." I also resented like hell someone telling me how to do my job. I thought and still think honesty is usually the best response. Oh and all jobs I've had have given absolutely no "customer service" training so I was winging it but in a good way.
Janet C at December 2, 2012 10:06 AM
The recent flap over Marco Rubio's response when asked the age of the earth illustrates to me there are questions about which one is not allowed to say "I don't know". Usually the questioner has an answer in mind, and wants the respondent to prove his or her membership in the elect by giving the right answer (Or demonstrate the person's apostasy when he or she gives the wrong one).
As an aside, I'd have liked to see someone respond to the "age of the earth" question by asking the reporter what he thinks the answer is, and why. What evidence has convinced the reporter one way or the other, and is the reporter really competent to evaluate it, or is it taken on faith?
Karl Lembke at December 2, 2012 10:56 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/12/need-a-better-s.html#comment-3498505">comment from Karl LembkeRegarding Rubio, come on.
Here's a excerpt from of his remarks:
http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/Politics/marco-rubio-muses-gq-earths-age-hip-hop/story?id=17761631#.ULumgqVxUso
He's saying that we really can't know whether the earth was created in seven days -- idiocy, because we have methods of measurement for that. And no, they are not divining rods and men in beards who just spoke to baby Jesus.
Parents are free to indoctrinate their children with idiocy instead of science but fairy tales out of a religious book should not be used for science education in school, and I'm disgusted that a person in power advocates such idiocy.
Oh, and I also think it's moronic to believe in astrology, one of the "spiritual" idiocies favored by many on the left.
Amy Alkon at December 2, 2012 11:11 AM
Aside from what Marco Rubio actually believes about the age of the earth, this was a baited trap with no good answer.
Karl, correctly points out, that giving an "I don't know"answer to a political or a religious question, will do nothing for your reputation with your suporters, and will automatically get you labeled as an idiot by your detractors.
Off course, if you are a democrat, you can say a lot of incredibly stupid shit, and it will never be widely enough reported by the national media, to make a difference.
http://trueslant.com/michaelpeck/2010/04/01/congressman-fears-marines-will-capsize-guam/
Isab at December 2, 2012 2:04 PM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/12/need-a-better-s.html#comment-3498809">comment from IsabOff course, if you are a democrat, you can say a lot of incredibly stupid shit, and it will never be widely enough reported by the national media, to make a difference. http://trueslant.com/michaelpeck/2010/04/01/congressman-fears-marines-will-capsize-guam/
Can't get away with it with me:
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/04/07/genius_in_gover.html
Amy Alkon at December 2, 2012 3:39 PM
One of the few problems I have with the "I don't know answer" is I once ran across someone who used it as a to fuel what I thought was a friendly debate and turn it into an argument.
I was in my late forties at the time and this girl, that I worked with briefly was maybe 22.
I am an extremely opinionated person, but also a pretty well read one.
She had been fed the standard liberal pc garbage in college, and did not seem to realize, that a pretty well educated 40 something woman was going to have many more opinions about politics, economics and history than she did. She implied that my having opinions about things she knew nothing about was somehow rude and ill mannered.
_________________________
She was probably raised by those oh-so-common parents who thought it was wrong to make kids accept the fact that yes, age and experience DO make one superior to those who have neither. You know, those parents who never make kids use honorifics, even when the kids are addressing elderly adults who want nothing less?
_________________________
I was being impolite in implying that "knowing something" was a matter of applying logic to facts, and not just having some baseless emotional preference for the color purple, for example.
Posted by: Isab at December 1, 2012 6:41 PM
__________________________
As many have said: "You're only entitled to your INFORMED opinion." What's wrong with that?
Regarding that, here's a great fable by Aesop:
"At a great meeting of the beasts, the monkey stood up to dance, and his performance delighted all those present so much that they honored him with great applause. Such praise infuriated the camel, who stood up and tried to show up the monkey with his own dancing. He made such a fool of himself, however, that the beasts became outraged and drove him out of the meeting with clubs.
"Stretch your arm no farther than your sleeve will reach."
BTW, there's nothing wrong with being well-read and opinionated, of course. However, I think it IS a very good etiquette rule never to discuss certain subjects (religion, politics, etc.) without mutual consent.
lenona at December 3, 2012 7:42 AM
"I think it IS a very good etiquette rule never to discuss certain subjects (religion, politics, etc.) without mutual consent."
That's true, but what really irritates the hell out of me is someone who will, out of the blue, venture a (usually leftist) opinion on a subject, and then expect that no one will voice opposition. And if anyone dares to do so, that person is accused of being "argumentative".
(Leftists also love to bring up their pet issues in venues where counter-argument is impossislbe, e.g., idiot Bob Coatas last night.)
Cousin Dave at December 3, 2012 9:35 AM
Oh, and I also think it's moronic to believe in astrology,
I love you.
one of the "spiritual" idiocies favored by many on the left.
But why mention just the left? I'd bet the percentage of people on the right, and center, who believe in astrology is roughly the same as the percentage of lefties.
JD at December 3, 2012 6:52 PM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/12/need-a-better-s.html#comment-3501026">comment from JDI mentioned them because many sneer at people for believing in god while believing that the moon giving a foot rub to Capricorn will have some meaningful effect on their day.
Amy Alkon at December 3, 2012 6:59 PM
And if anyone dares to do so, that person is accused of being "argumentative".
I dated a woman like that a few years ago. I couldn't differ with one of her opinions -- and they were numerous -- without that accusation being hurled at me. She also loved to accuse me of "not respecting women" when I'd differ with her. Needless to say, it wasn't a long relationship and I only stayed with her as long as I did (four months) because she was so hot in bed.
JD at December 3, 2012 7:02 PM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/12/need-a-better-s.html#comment-3501040">comment from JDShe also loved to accuse me of "not respecting women" when I'd differ with her.
Well, if a woman can't manage a difference of opinion, she doesn't seem worthy of respect.
Amy Alkon at December 3, 2012 7:12 PM
Well, if a woman can't manage a difference of opinion, she doesn't seem worthy of respect.
You're absolutely right, and she wasn't worthy of it. She did have other good qualities (the hotness in bed wasn't the only one, although it was a very powerful draw) but that inability of hers to accept a differing opinion (along with a few other negative things) overshadowed all the good stuff. Her main problem was that she had issues with men -- an older brother had molested her; her father used to put her down -- and had never dealt with them. Interestingly, I would have thought this would have made her not-very-positive toward men when it came to sex, but she was one of the best lovers I ever had...very game and very giving.
JD at December 3, 2012 7:26 PM
I mentioned them because many sneer at people for believing in god while believing that the moon giving a foot rub to Capricorn will have some meaningful effect on their day.
I don't think lefties are the main believers in astrology but I certainly agree with you that it's ludicrous to put down people for religious beliefs while believing in astrology.
In my experience, I haven't seen a left/right divide, but what I have seen is a female/male divide. I don't know of any man who takes astrology seriously, but I've met many women who do. I've gone on dates with women who said they wouldn't go out with a man if he was such-and-such sign. Again, that's just my experience. It may not hold true in general.
JD at December 3, 2012 7:35 PM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/12/need-a-better-s.html#comment-3501073">comment from JDOh, men believe in astrology. For me, that's about as sexy as seeing a man in women's panties.
Amy Alkon at December 3, 2012 7:43 PM
I don't know has been unacceptable answer to manager (or customer) as to how long something will take.
Not quite the same thing. My mother often times ends her stories with "I don't know" and sometimes followed by "Probably whatever either." The real problem is unless you really drill her, you don't know what she means in that particular usage. It has meant - what she had said before was unconfirmed - rumourish - but she believed it was pretty much true, Some point or points were unconfirmed, she doesn't know what should be concluded from it, she doesn't know what to think about it, there is existing relevant information that she knows exists but does not it. So you either have to really push her for details (which quickly annoys her) or just forget about it.
The Former Banker at December 4, 2012 12:32 AM
Oh, men believe in astrology.
I know they do. I just said I don't know any personally. Even though men believe in it, I'm not sure they do to the degree that women do.
For me, that's about as sexy as seeing a man in women's panties.
I hear you. Whenever I've met a woman on a date who has brought it up, it's been a huge turn-off.
JD at December 4, 2012 5:23 PM
She had been fed the standard liberal pc garbage in college, and did not seem to realize, that a pretty well educated 40 something woman was going to have many more opinions about politics, economics and history than she did. She implied that my having opinions about things she knew nothing about was somehow rude and ill mannered.
___________________________
I forgot to ask - regarding what I said earlier about the old etiquette rule of not discussing sensitive subjects, did you raise subjects such as politics first, or did she? (I had the impression you did.)
_____________________________
It seemed to be particularly grating when I brought up evidence to support my opinion.
In other words, I guess since she was a bubble head who believed the liberal mantra that all opinions were equal, and therefore only judged on their social acceptability,
(snip)
I was being impolite in implying that "knowing something" was a matter of applying logic to facts, and not just having some baseless emotional preference for the color purple, for example.
__________________________
You DO know, don't you, that logic and science are frowned upon by conservatives as well, no? Take, for example, "universities" such as Bob Jones, which claim the earth was created in six days? Or Liberty University, where (from Wikipedia, mind you) "students are taught both creationism and evolution and that creationism offers a better explanation of biological diversity than evolution"?
Not to mention any community where elementary students are FORCED to hear about creationism in schools?
Posted by: Isab at December 1, 2012 6:41 PM
lenona at December 5, 2012 9:04 AM
Leave a comment