In previous posts, I have highlighted vague word usages such as most, almost all, danger, safety and some. Before I launch into a few more, I share an exchange I had with Naomi Wolfe a few months ago. She leads the team analyzing the released Pfizer documents and often appears to report on Steve Bannon’s War Room.
Tucker Carlson, before he was dismissed by Fox News, had just played videos on his show from the J6 incident. Naomi’s response was:
I don’t agree with Mr. Carlson’s interpretation of the videos as depicting “mostly peaceful chaos.”
I commented to her Substack as follows:
Naomi, you might agree with his interpretation if Tucker had clarified his meaning. By default, you used, and Tucker literally used, mostly. This is an extremely dangerous word to use in a sentence and especially precarious for anyone in engineering or statistics. It defeats communication.
Most or mostly literally means any fraction greater than 1/2. Expressed another way, it is any percentage of a whole greater than 50%. Therefore, 50.00000001% qualifies.
I guess that many interpret mostly as about 75%, while many others interpret it as slightly less than 100%... perhaps around 99.999%. These interpretations are vastly disparate.
I heard Tucker make his statement several days before I read your response to it and it caused me great concern. I really have no exact idea of what he meant by it. Nor do you. And none of your readers have an exact idea of what either of you are exactly saying or disagreeing about although they ASSUME to align with one of you or the other.
Only recently, I have endeavored to explain my usage of most, mostly, almost all, etc, in the preface of my books. Not only do I now fear that I have done an inadequate job of making these distinctions, but I fear that many who read my books ignore the preface.
This all makes for undisciplined communication.
After I was attacked by one of her fans, she graciously responded and stated that she understood my point.
[Upon further reflection, I might have bolstered my comment to Naomi with: Some people invoke mostly to represent a plurality that fails to acheive 50% of a whole.]
More Dangerous Expressions
1… The statement is only partially correct.
Partially implies that the statement is largely false when when it may, indeed, be largely true. [Note that I fall prey to largely. Our language is replete with these traps. Majorly and minorly and smally are more.]
2… The real value is only a fraction of the reported value.
The implication—again—is that fraction represents a small fraction when, indeed, it may be a large fraction.
3… This five-fold increase represents a 500% gain.
No it does not. It is a 400% gain. Note that a doubling is a 100% gain. I often witness examples of this mathematical misstatement. Of course, this misstatement is merely a mathematical error, not really a duplicitous specimen like 1 and 2.
4… Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps, perhaps not… possibility.
When maybe is stated, the speaker is sometimes compelled to add, “maybe not.” This is unnecessary as maybe is already definitionally inclusive of both a positive and a negative possibility.
5… Apparently… It is apparent that…
From what I’ve studied, apparently is not equivalent to obviously, although I’ve mistakenly used these words somewhat interchangeably in the past. Apparently casts doubt on the statement associated with it while obviously imbues the associated statement with notion that it widely accepted to be true.
Please comment on any of my assertions if you feel that I have misfired.
I’d like to say that this mathematical expression is partially but not completely false: “If A is B squared, then B is the square root of A.” It’s true enough for introducing the concept of square roots even if mathematicians will quibble that it doesn’t take the case of squaring negative numbers into account.