Judging behind the Screen: Can Words Have Chemistry?
Everyday a communication takes place with a faceless voiceless name that hardly tells you anything remotely true about the real person behind the text. Yet we manage to remain judgmental behind the screen and to cast biased votes in favor of some senders over others.
What exactly incites us to respond more enthusiastically to certain communications that we like to privilege to the exclusion of others?
Could it be a discourse tone filling us with alarm that makes our superstitiously-judged correspondents score lowest on our measure of empathy?
Is it the firmness and conciseness of speech of capable writers that leave us with good feelings and impact words that call up pictures in our minds and, consequently, trigger a favorable reaction eligible for a higher score?
Or, simply, exchanged words, like anything else happening live, also succumb to the command of chemistry causing us to assume, conclude, and judge all within a limited context backed up with a good deal of intuition.
Like Bob Marley sang it, ”In every little action, there’s a reaction” and reactions to this blog are more than welcome to help explain what influences the way we act, interact, and react upon one another. React.:)