The "Should" Fallacy

I do hereby reject the use of the unconditional "should," for it is meaningless. The word is inherently tied to a condition or goal. If someone tells me, "you should move to California," he/she might really be saying is, "if your priorities agree with mine - warm, not-to-humid weather, sandy beaches, and an altogether mellow life over a bastion of culture and services and a lot of people - then you should move to California." I haven't quite decided whether the condition is fulfilled in my case, but if it isn't, then I should not move to California unless other considerations prevail - considerations which only I can evaluate.

Likewise, when you hear that "you should really get started on that paper," the speaker is hiding from you certain assumptions about your philosophies, moralities, and/or priorities. Perhaps you don't give half a shit about the class; perhaps you have other, more pressing assignments or issues with which to deal; perhaps you work best under pressure; or perhaps you're hung over and can only fuck it up at this point. In any of these cases, it's entirely possible that you shouldn't get started on that paper just yet, and whoever is lecturing you is dead wrong.

There are those that would even say that making such unconditional statements about oneself undermines one's own philosophies and such - that doing so removes the element of decision from whatever it is one "should" do. I'm weakly inclined to agree, but this exits the realm of mere language and enters that of psychology, and I'm no expert there.

Of course, I must allow for exceptions: "putting out that fire would reduce the severity of the burns that you no doubt already have on your arm" is a tad long-winded for the situation in which one would expect to hear it. Plus, it's usually safe to assume that the listener considers uncharred arms among his/her priorities.

Hell, even the conditional "should" is a very weak word, for it is next to impossible to include every condition in one sentence. So please, just avoid using it altogether.


In the interest of consolidating posts... the Giants are now 2-0! New York overcame a hurricane-inspired but turnover-troubled New Orleans team, 27-10, and now share first place in the division with only the Washington Redskins (Philadelphia and Dallas share third at 1-1). Schwing!