Isn't that just not "articulation"?

Since it became possible to post long-form articles on X, it seems that every day, articles that "articulate" human hearts and behaviors go viral, accompanied by quotes like "This is so essential" or "Their ability to articulate is insane," which then get spread further.

I think this is a truly troublesome trend. I feel like I've said this about 100 times already, but there are so, so many people who don't seem to properly recognize that facts and interpretations are different. Facts and guesses are different, facts and imagination are different, and facts and impressions are different.

For example, let's say the words and actions of Person A, who works in the same office, have been getting on your nerves lately. If you suddenly realize, "Maybe I'm jealous of Person A because they're moving up the career ladder smoothly while I'm struggling at work," that is articulation. You have understood your own inner turmoil more accurately than before and have been able to give it words.

Alternatively, if Person A has a habit of pushing others aside in a high-handed way, and you are still angry about being treated that way in the past, or if you can't forget the hurt look on Person B's face after they were blindsided in the same way, that realization is also articulation. You are able to re-recognize an emotional background that you had been carrying in your heart all along but hadn't grasped at the level of words and thoughts.

However, if you start thinking here, "The reason Person A is always mean to me is actually because they are jealous of me," that is not articulation. It is merely imagination, speculation, and a convenient assumption. This is because the person who interprets it this way has not actually confirmed what is inside Person A's heart.

No matter how plausibly this person explains Person A's inner workings "psychologically" or "logically," it is inappropriate to call it articulation. That is simply called a delusion.

🐟 🐟 🐟

To put it broadly, organizing psychological matters that you can verify yourself through words can be called "articulation," while cooking up convenient explanations about other people's psychology or social structures that you cannot verify yourself is not "articulation."

In other words, organizing your own inner turmoil regarding someone else's behavior is articulation, but fantasizing about "the real reason why that person always does this" is not. The same applies to more generalized topics like "the thinking habits only successful people have" or "what makes a woman cherished."

These are all made up of imagination and interpretation regarding humans and human society. However, as a matter of course, imagination is not fact, and interpretation is not fact. There is no point in being grateful for explanations that are not facts.

🐟 🐟 🐟

Of course, there are many situations where we have no choice but to manage with imagination and speculation when dealing with real-world problems. To live a life with a core, it is also important to have your own framework of interpretation (i.e., a worldview). In the sense of hypotheses or guidelines for action, these perspectives are necessary.

Expressing your own thoughts and feelings properly in your own words is equally important. Your intentions and emotions are important in themselves, so I am not saying for a second that they are wrong or meaningless. Also, I am not saying that it is bad to have subjectivity, as it is the individual's subjectivity that determines what is most valuable to them as a human being.

However, interpretations confused with facts are meaningless, and such assertions are harmful to both the person themselves and those around them. Subjectivity is important, but subjectivity that masquerades as objectivity is harmful and useless.

The person shouting their interpretations will not solve the worries or suffering you face in life. It won't solve work-related problems, and it won't solve relationship problems. This is because it is impossible for real-world problems to be solved without the facts being understood.

They seem to need an audience that will applaud and say, "That's exactly right!" The audience also seems to be desperately seeking such a source of dependency. You can likely see a percentage of people around you joining that crowd as well.

Why are we so confused? Are we so anxious without an "articulated" explanation? Do we have so little self-confidence that we can't feel at ease unless that post has about 10,000 likes? Why do we need others to loudly guarantee "correctness"?

Are we so empty inside that we cannot stand on our own without stuffing ourselves with a mountain of words prepared by others?

Perhaps that is the root of the problem. Why are we so empty? Why do you think that is?

Related Books

The question of "why we cannot feel at ease or satisfied with ourselves as we are" is something I spent a lot of time thinking about in my recently published book, "A Book for Getting By Even If You're Not Good at Relationships". I've also compiled a "sample reading version" in a magazine, so if you're interested, please take a look!

Related Articles

• On people who prioritize "believing" and "asserting" over facts (2024.8.31)

• The reason you can't be satisfied with anything (2026.1.17)

• You must not talk about ideals (2026.4.4)