Taking the judge role with one word
Hello guys,
As I talked about in this post, language structure is one of the pillars of power dynamics.
What is the judge role if not qualifying something as either good or bad, depending on the context. Words are important. For instance, Matthew thought I was tasking him, because the words could mean this, despite the context and my intentions (reminder: "see page 43" is not tasking, it means: "if you want to know more, go to page 43").
So here is a simple technique to take the judge role:
Without the judge role: Thank you for your website, Lucio!
With the judge role: Thank you for your great website, Lucio!
In the second instance, I'm positioning myself as somebody able to judge the website and I do it. It does not mean that I'm putting myself above Lucio or that I'm putting him down, a frequent confusion about the judge role. However, it does frame me as an authority able to judge the website, and by extension the author's work.
For instance, I've seen this after a presentation:
Thank you for this excellent presentation.
When you do this, you frame yourself as a judge. And sometimes it's not appropriate! If you're a student and a professor is presenting a topic, then it's better not to use it. If you're a professor and you invited another professor, then it might be called for as you elevate both yourself and him, but still put you a bit above him.
Very good point! (this is not a judgement but an opinion)
From my guess, there is a slight difference between judgement and opinion. An opinion is a comment that the speaker do not mean to have others to accept his frame. A judgement is a firm declaration and the judger wants to force others into his frame. For example, if someone emphasize his authority, then he is most likely a judger. If he does not believe that he is 100% correct, then he might not be a judger.
In most other scenarios, because we are usually unsure if the speaker is forcing us to accept his frame, the boundary between an opinion and a judgement is blur.
By adding the word "excellent" or "great", it could be taking the judger role. Others can also reframe it to an opinion or preference, as other forum members commented in a related thread. Reframe a value-taking judgement as a value-giving opinion could be a good way to start a win-win interaction.
Of course I could be wrong.
Good point. There is definitely a spectrum from opinion to judgment. You refer to the situtation when the speaker recognizes that his judgment might be subjective and not objective. This gives the judgment a relative flavor rather than absolute flavor.
Yes, however I think an opinion is still a judgment. By that, I mean we judge as in "evaluation". We rate the behavior or the person, still.
However, by framing our judgment as an opinion we give room for other opinions (=interpretations). This goes into a win-win frame of reality enriching perceptions. This is what is cool about sharing our perspectives. We know more when we share our common perceptions, such as the mastermind of this forum.
The frame being: "I think that, what do you think?"
Quote from John Freeman on March 26, 2021, 7:03 amWhat is the judge role if not qualifying something as either good or bad, depending on the context. Words are important. For instance, Matthew thought I was tasking him, because the words could mean this, despite the context and my intentions (reminder: "see page 43" is not tasking, it means: "if you want to know more, go to page 43").
Hey John,
I'm not sure of the context.
Would it be convenient to elaborate?
I don't remember this incident.
Maybe it's quite some time ago?
Power Dynamics of Compliments
I'm very interested in the power dynamics of compliments as well.
I think the concept of self-framing here is very useful:
Thank you for your great website, Lucio!
This could be viewed as a student evaluating Lucio's course to have provided a lot of value to him.
In this case, I think Lucio's value gets built up more than the student.
But as you said, you can be seen as judgemental.
So it's good to elaborate a little more.
Thank you for your great website, Lucio!
I enjoyed and learnt a lot from your content.
It can come across as judgemental as you said.
Adding a statement to highlight the effect would be
Thank you for your great website, Lucio!
I expect more great content to follow.
This has more of the reward/punishment vibe of the judge role.
It also sounds judgemental with a bit of tasking.
I think a majority of the people including myself would mean the former when saying only the first statement.
Using this in the presentation example, I have heard many moderators say this after a speaker finishes his/her talk:
Thank you for this excellent presentation.
Today, we have learnt a lot from what you shared on this topic based on your experience.
...
What do you think about this?
Mmmh... I’m not sure I was understood here. Could you let me know what is not clear?
About the tasking: it’s an old event. I wrote in the thread (“see above”) and you interpreted it as I was tasking you. It’s an example where the words can be interpreted either way.
Quote from John Freeman on March 26, 2021, 11:06 amAbout the tasking: it’s an old event. I wrote in the thread (“see above”) and you interpreted it as I was tasking you. It’s an example where the words can be interpreted either way.
I didn't find any comments of mine on the thread that you linked in the first sentence after your greeting:
As I talked about in this post, language structure is one of the pillars of power dynamics.
That's why I was perplexed as to how I was involved in the situation.
It’s an example, not related to the post linked.
Quote from John Freeman on March 26, 2021, 12:32 pmFor instance, Matthew thought I was tasking him, because the words could mean this, despite the context and my intentions (reminder: "see page 43" is not tasking, it means: "if you want to know more, go to page 43").
I'm guessing you quoted this without linking to the associated post.
I would prefer if you leave me out of this as this may be misconstrued without the full context.
And this was a past incident. Could we leave this behind us?
Unless we did not resolve our discussion.
Yes, this is what I wrote above.
I misinterpreted your statement.
I changed my post as you typed the reply.