hide

Read Next

Convincing Arguments Aren't Necessarily Correct - They're Merely Convincing

Things have been going well lately, and I now have a surplus of cash for the first time in a while. Err, rather, I have both a surplus of cash and some high consistency predictable future income. That's nice! I envy all you salaried people when I think about predictable future income. Having a decent chunk of cash, but no predictable future income means you don't really have a surplus of cash.

Anyways, I was thinking of what to invest a small bit of money in, and reading some papers and analyses and such. I'm reading a mix of finance, investment, politics, diplomacy, and history lately, which makes for a nice mix. It also has me interested in the topic.

Today, I read a really fantastically convincing argument, enough so that I was immediately ready to go buy a small amount of what the author was advocating.

Then I stopped myself! Wait, the author isn't necessarily correct - he's merely convincing.

I went back through the piece I was reading, which was quite a long piece. I started counting the number of premises the author had, and it went something like this:

The Truth About Writing

There's two elements of writing. One is fun when it's going well, and miserable when it's not. The other is never fun.

Those are:

(1) Thinking, planning, brainstorming, daydreaming, and otherwise figuring out ideas.

(2) Communicating those ideas using words, language, and structure.

The first part of writing is thinking - figuring out what you want to say.

No bio set
Guest
Vote
Advanced options  
at
Close