nohohankfan :
Ok, long comment incoming. I teach college composition and ALSO love telling my students about how qualifications and concessions are rhetorical assets for them, when it comes to making complex claims for our research projects. But as a fellow rhetorician, I think we could read OP’s post a little bit more rhetorically, with an eye to genre and audience. Instead of telling this young woman to qualify or hedge every part of her post’s statement for rhetorical effect (for what audience?), i would first consider the rhetorical strategy underlying why the intentional choice to boost her statements, the opposite of hedging. If you study rhetoric, i assume you also understand how being hyperbolic can be its own rhetorical strategy, especially on algorithm-driven social media. You pointed out unqualified statements are more bold and sensational, but fail to consider why that would be advantageous for her as a writer/composer. My guess is she is likely looking for commiseration from fellow college students (maybe older ones with more of an explanation for this educational culture shock) and needs to get on people’s FYP’s in order to do that. An ultra-hedged statement is more defensible argumentatively, sure, but almost certainly less funny, and less likely to resonate with her intended audience so strongly. If she posts with hedged hyper-specificity to her own school, her own 3-5 professors, it’s not clear she’s trying to call in other college students at other schools, who have different professors. Specificity would make sense if she was filing a complaint to the administration, or complaining in a class/roommate/sorority group chat, but she’s posting on public social media for an audience that presumably extends far outside of her own classes and own school. Hence: generalization.
2026-09-24 06:03:05