Conceptual Method: L'3

Choice of Name: This name immediately presented itself. Of the alternatives, jargonistic, seems pejorative; philosophical, specialized and field-based seem too general and not sufficiently evocative.

Features

This is the language of group-defined fields. The key words denote something specific within that delimited area of interest—rather than vaguely connoting as in the associative method. The goal is for thought processes to comprehensively cover the specified field and be as structured and rational as possible prior to communications, both spoken and written.

Communication can then be:

  • coherent—especially within a single contribution
  • consistent—especially across contributors and through time
  • careful—through re-drafting and review or revision by others
  • cumulative—deepening understanding and promoting further clarification
  • debatable—because clarity facilitates disagreement around the unknown

Those using this method seek to convince themselves as well as others in regard to what is clearly known or not known. Disputation is normal and errors are assumed to occur. Often there is a desire for conclusions to be accepted so as to enhance personal status. So conventions exist to minimize or prohibit emotion-based or irrational manoeuvres.

The organization of thinking, desire for intelligent discussion, and promotion of valid valuable viewpoints foster the production of specialized magazines, websites and books. This approach also leads to meetings, conventions and conferences where exchanges of view can occur via lectures, presentations, seminars, poster sessions, and other media.

Examples

ClosedEstablished Scientific Field: Bioanalytical Chemistry.

ClosedOverhead in a Board Meeting

ClosedField of Specialized Social Activity: Sport Terminology

Criticisms: Fair and Unfair

Because any field is always partial, the conceptual method can be disparaged as reductionist or compartmentalizing. The need for terminology may be ridiculed unfairly as jargon and exclusionary. Sometimes what is said is indeed gobbledygook and, where money is involved, there may be a desire to blind and dominate listeners. However, in most fields, there is a low tolerance for knowingly dishonest or fraudulent claims.

The dependence on definitions makes communications abstract: so abstract, that reading or listening may become stressful, even for experts. While the message of a scientific communication may be captured in a few sentences, even experts need to study an academic paper carefully and even read it more than once to properly understand and evaluate it.


Originally posted: 5-Jan-2013. Last amended: 10-Feb-2023.