Thomas Dalton wrote:
2008/10/7 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonavaro@gmail.com:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
Odd, any chance somebody pasted the wrong category into the template code? I thought lack of completeness and lack of clarity were distinct issues.
Lack of clarity is usually caused by a lack of information, but the converse isn't necessarily true. I don't think that category is correct, either.
I call bullshit. Amphiboly and obfuscation are both based and predicated on a requirement and expectation of asymmetry of information.
Usually when people have a lack of information, their principles and motivations are often painfully clear.
I don't understand... what does that have to do with the difference between an article being unclear and an article being incomplete? It seems to just be a sequence of long words (one of which I'll admit to having had to look up).
Perhaps if you had been talking about difference rather than causation, your point would have been better made.
Unclear articles often omit details. But lack of details can not be a *cause* of unclarity, any more than a lack of decorations can be a cause for a lack of cake. The cake may have less decorations, but still have lots of cake.
An article may omit any amount of facts and still be quite clear on the heart of the matter, and often articles are clearer without embellishments, sideissues and blind alleys added into the mix, no matter how informative they may be in the absolute.
Omitting details can be an *instrument* for reducing clarity. When facts are missing through not being available to the one writing the copy, what is clear is that much remains unknown, but that is hardly lack of clarity. There is a good deal of clarity in circumscribing that which is not yet known.
Yours,
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen