E-Prime is English without the verb "to be." I read a quote somewhere by someone that it is an effective way of teaching the scientific way of thinking, removing the ability to make god-like declarations about the nature of reality. Albert Ellis suggested that it is useful for therapy.
You know, it actually helps for self-reflection. Many times in thinking we are confused about where the emphasis ought to be. Is the fault with me? Ought I not to blame myself? How should I feel? E-Prime has a way of obviating the problem by acting as a compass where you only need to follow the needle and see where you end up.
For example, instead of thinking "I am sorry," in E-Prime I ended up thinking "I want the problem to stop." This is a revealing conclusion, because wanting the problem to stop does not mean that I am doing anything to stop it.
Today I was reflecting on another mistake, and E-Prime led me to "I acknowledge that I failed to meet expectations in an egregious manner, and now that I put it that way, I realize that I have a lot of work to do before I intuitively understand the gravity of my error." This is considerably more useful than the "sorry" that came naturally, and importantly, it helps me clearly understand my state of mind- I didn't say "I feel terrible about it," instead I said "maybe I should feel terrible about it, but I need to put in some effort before that can happen."
This complexity is easily masked in "I am sorry," which can include anything from "I regret the choice" to "I recognize that I must offer an apology for social harmony" to "I feel horrible about this." It seems more about belonging to a category than anything specific.
Fun: reading Wikipedia, the creator, D. David Bourland Jr, studied under Korzybski. The same Alfred Korzybski who coined 'the map is not the territory'.
Wiki's short list of people who Korzybski influenced in the sidebar is somewhat surreal. Robert Heinlein, Alan Watts, Robert Anton Wilson...seems like one of those people worth revisiting, to get a fresh take on a source of modern knowledge.
Just stumbled on it on Wikipedia and tried it myself after reading some Ellis (though I didn't read his opinions on E-Prime). It's a feeling that isn't too hard to grasp with experimenting with it, because banning "I am" turns into "I feel...no, that word isn't right..."
If you want to try it, the list of banned words are: be, is, am, are, was ,were, been, being (as a verb), and contractions 'm (eg. I'm), 's (eg. it's), 're (eg. you're), and I guess things like "isn't," not sure if this is comprehensive. Can be a pain but it helps when I'm stumped.
(Bourland suggested banning some other words after "to be," but I think it ruins the simplicity of the method. I can't remember them, they're in papers he wrote.)
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
E-Prime is English without the verb "to be." I read a quote somewhere by someone that it is an effective way of teaching the scientific way of thinking, removing the ability to make god-like declarations about the nature of reality. Albert Ellis suggested that it is useful for therapy.
You know, it actually helps for self-reflection. Many times in thinking we are confused about where the emphasis ought to be. Is the fault with me? Ought I not to blame myself? How should I feel? E-Prime has a way of obviating the problem by acting as a compass where you only need to follow the needle and see where you end up.
For example, instead of thinking "I am sorry," in E-Prime I ended up thinking "I want the problem to stop." This is a revealing conclusion, because wanting the problem to stop does not mean that I am doing anything to stop it.
Today I was reflecting on another mistake, and E-Prime led me to "I acknowledge that I failed to meet expectations in an egregious manner, and now that I put it that way, I realize that I have a lot of work to do before I intuitively understand the gravity of my error." This is considerably more useful than the "sorry" that came naturally, and importantly, it helps me clearly understand my state of mind- I didn't say "I feel terrible about it," instead I said "maybe I should feel terrible about it, but I need to put in some effort before that can happen."
This complexity is easily masked in "I am sorry," which can include anything from "I regret the choice" to "I recognize that I must offer an apology for social harmony" to "I feel horrible about this." It seems more about belonging to a category than anything specific.
Fun: reading Wikipedia, the creator, D. David Bourland Jr, studied under Korzybski. The same Alfred Korzybski who coined 'the map is not the territory'.
Wiki's short list of people who Korzybski influenced in the sidebar is somewhat surreal. Robert Heinlein, Alan Watts, Robert Anton Wilson...seems like one of those people worth revisiting, to get a fresh take on a source of modern knowledge.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Is this self taught or did you take a course?
Just stumbled on it on Wikipedia and tried it myself after reading some Ellis (though I didn't read his opinions on E-Prime). It's a feeling that isn't too hard to grasp with experimenting with it, because banning "I am" turns into "I feel...no, that word isn't right..."
If you want to try it, the list of banned words are: be, is, am, are, was ,were, been, being (as a verb), and contractions 'm (eg. I'm), 's (eg. it's), 're (eg. you're), and I guess things like "isn't," not sure if this is comprehensive. Can be a pain but it helps when I'm stumped.
(Bourland suggested banning some other words after "to be," but I think it ruins the simplicity of the method. I can't remember them, they're in papers he wrote.)
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link