Rory Sutherland’s 10 Rules of Alchemy

Rory Sutherland is a vice president at Ogilvy in the UK. His YouTube videos advertise and promote the powers of myth, emotion, creativity, and passion. He tells good stories. He nods to reason, logic, and rationality because those are the proof of known, workable solutions. Sutherland’s thesis is that if we have a problem now it must be logic-proof or it would already have been solved and would not now exist. 

This is my summary. I recommend that you watch the video for yourself with CC:Closed Captions on. 

Rory Sutherland’s 10 Rules of Alchemy

1. The opposite of a good idea can be another good idea. When we narrow down all options to the single rational choice, if it fails, no one can be blamed because they followed the data and the model. In fact, problems often have multiple solutions, different alternatives for other people whose values are not our own. 
2. Do not design for the average. Look for the extreme. The average person will reject the unknown until other people make it a trend. Go for those other people.
3. It does not pay to be logical when everyone else is logical. To overcome your competition in the market, find the errors in their models and meet those needs. He points out that every military seeks to design and implement surprises. 
4. The nature of our intentions is the source of our internal tensions. His example is extreme though telling. His best hotel experience was in an East Berlin pad that must have been a police cell. If you were looking for a Ramada Inn you were going to be disappointed, but he wanted the experience of an East Berlin vacation and he was ecstatic. Know your true intentions and it will minimize your emotional tensions.
5. A flower is just a weed with an advertising budget. Nature rewards and invests in reproductive strategies that are effective, even when seemingly inefficient. 
6.  Logic kills off magic. The payoff for magic is the change in perception. Apple changed the perception of the computer. 
7. A good guess plus empirical observation is still science. You can have a lucky guess and be right. **See below.
8. Test the counter-intuitive things because nobody else will. Businesses must mainly follow the rational and logical and the data-driven because that is what is known to work. You still must set aside space—I take that to mean organizational as well as physical—to test random journeys.
9. Rationality is a tool. If it is your only tool, then you are playing golf with just one club.
10. Dare to be trivial. The butterfly effect is that a small change can have a large consequence. Add one sentence to the script of a call center and see what change it brings. 
11. Do not limit yourself to ten rules. Rational people are everyone else. So, if there is a problem not solved now, it is logic-proof or would not exist. Be creative.
12. Dare to look stupid. “Why do people dislike standing up on trains?” In fact, some prefer it for a moderate ride of 20 to 30 minutes because they have been sitting in a chair all day. If you notice, some people still stand even after sufficient seats have been vacated. For others, it might be the physical challenge of juggling one’s kit after you are already latched on to a pole. Ultimately, now we have privileged window seating perhaps with a tray or armrest and so on, and with others forced to stand in the middle with not much to do. He asks, what if, instead, we had rows of seats in the middle with the spaces near windows specially designed for restful standing, perhaps with cellphone chargers as well. Now, it looks different.
13. Create net utility with a multivariate choice. Give people choices that optimize or minimize more than one variable and in disproportion so that whatever the outcome for the individual, you bring less regret. This is adaptive preference formation, a narrative for the support of choices.

** (Rory Sutherland cites Paul Feyerabend in asserting that advances in science have not come from applications of the scientific method but from intuition and insight. What the postmodernists ignore and would have us ignore in their program against reason is that you can only prove that your intuitive insight is truly scientific by following the scientific method so that you first and then others can test and replicate your work. Otherwise, you have nothing. The flash of insight and awareness can only be a reward for the rational, logical, empirical, experiential modes of learning as the preparation for better understanding and, ultimately, therefore, material abundance.) 

PREVIOUSLY ON NECESSARY FACTS

Entrepreneurship 

Innovation and Discovery 

The One Percent are the Atlases 

Shrugging the Stigma of Success 

AMERICAN LABOR DAY 2025: Why I Work

These quotations are from The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand, most of them spoken by the story's hero, Howard Roark. 

 “I have, let’s say, sixty years to live. Most of that time will be spent working. I’ve chosen the work I want to do. If I find no joy in it, then I am only condemning myself to sixty years of torture. And I can find the joy only if I do my work in the best way possible to me. But the best is a matter of standards—and I set my own standards. I inherit nothing. I stand at the end of no tradition.”  (Plume Edition, 1994. Page 16)

“An open car drove by, fleeing into the country. The car was overfilled with people bound for a picnic. There was a jumble of bright sweaters, and scarf fluttering in the wind; a jumble of voices shrieking without purpose over the roar of the motor, and overstressed hiccoughs of laughter; a girl sat sideways, her legs flung over the side of the car; she wore a man’s straw hat slipping down her nose and she yanked savagely at the strings of a ukulele, ejecting raucous sounds, yelling, “Hey!” These people were enjoying a day of their existence; they were shrieking to the sky their release from work and the burdens of days behind them; they worked and carried burdens in order to reach a goal—and this was the goal. (Plume Edition, 1994. Page 131)

 “… There will be thousands passing by your house and by the gas station. If out of those thousands, one stops and see it—that’s all I need.”

“Then you do need other people, after all, don’t you, Howard?”

“What are you laughing at?”

“I’ve always thought that you were the most anti-social animal I’ve ever had the pleasure of meeting.”

“I need people to give me work. I’m not building mausoleums. Do you suppose I should need them in some other way? In a closer more personal way?” (Plume Edition, 1994. Page 158)

DefCon 512 June 2013

“Why are you a good architect? Because you have certain standards of what is good, and they are your own, an d you stand by them. I want a good hotel, and I have certain standards of what is good, and they’re my own, and you’re the one who can give me what I want. I’m doing—on my side of it—just what you’re doing when you design a building. Do you think that integrity is the monopoly of the artist? And what, incidentally, do you think integrity is? The ability not to pick a watch out of your neighbor’s pocket? No, it’s not as easy as that. If that were all, I’d say ninety-five percent of humanity were honest, upright men. Only, as you can see, they aren’t. Integrity is the ability to stand by an idea. That presupposes the ability to think. Thinking is something that one doesn’t borrow or pawn. And yet, if I were asked to chose a symbol for humanity as we know it, I wouldn’t choose a cross nor an eagle nor a lion and unicorn. I’d choose three gilded balls.” – Kent Lansing. (Plume Ed., 1994. Page 321)

“I love doing it. Every building is like a person. Single and unrepeatable.”

(Plume Edition, 1994. Page 480)

“From different states, from unexpected parts of the country, calls had come for him: private homes, small office buildings, modest shops. … The story of every commission he received was the same: “I was in New York and I liked the Enright House.” “I saw the Cord Building.” “I saw a picture of the temple they tore down.” It was if an underground stream flowed through the country and broke out in sudden springs that shot to the surface at random, in unpredictable places. They were small, inexpensive jobs—but he was kept working.” (Plume Edition, 1994.  Page 533)

Austin Astronomical Society
13 October 2023

“Three quarters of them don’t know what it’s all about, but they’ve heard the other one-quarter fighting over your name and now they feel they must pronounce it with respect.  Of the fighting quarter, four-tenths are those who hate you, three-tenths are who feel they must have an opinion in any controversy, two-tenths are those who play safe and herald any new ‘discovery,’ and one-tenth are those who understand.” (Plume Edition, 1994. Page 536)

“One cannot collaborate on one’s own job. I can co-operate, if that’s what they call it, with the workers who erect my buildings. But I can’t help them to lay bricks and they can’t help me to design the house.” (Plume Edition, 1994.  Page 569)

American Numismatic Association
Rosemont (Chicago) 2019

“Roark got up, reached out, and tore a thick branch off a tree, held it in both hands, one fist closed at each end; then, his wrists and knuckles tenses against the resistance, he bent the branch slowly into an arc. “Now I can make what I want out of it: a bow, a spear, a cane, a railing. That’s the meaning of life. … Your work.” He tossed the branch aside. “The material the earth offers you and what you make of it.” (Plume Edition, 1994.  Page 577)

American Numismatic Association
Chicago Virtual 4 August 2020

“But first, I want you to think and tell me what made me give years to this work. Money? Fame? Charity? Altruism?... You see, I’m never concerned with my clients, only with their architectural requirements. I consider these as part of my building’s theme and problem, as my building’s material—just as I consider bricks and steel. Bricks and steel are not my motive. Neither are the clients. Both are only the means of my work. Peter, before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the secondary consequences. The work, not the people. Your own action …”  (Plume Edition, 1994.  Page 604)

PREVIOUSLY ON NECESSARY FACTS    

Money as a Crusoe Concept. 

Mutiny Aboard the San Antonio 

Recent Astronomical Observing 

LIKE SOMETHING OUT OF ATLAS SHRUGGED

Ayn Rand kept a "Horror File" of current news reports validating the worst aspects of her fictional universe in Atlas Shrugged. She said that she did that because often, in casual discussions at social occasions, someone would assert, "No one really believes those things!" or "No really says that." Well, yes, someone does and not just a random person but someone with social capital and personal status. 

Personally, I believe that from both an engineering standpoint and a market perspective, newer energy sources will eclipse oil and coal just as those outshone hardwood and charcoal. At the same time, I also believe in spontaneous order very well enucniated in Leonard E. Reed's essay, "I, Pencil" (Foundation for Economic Education here). 

Furthermore shutting off the oil that supplies you with heat and light and transportation will not deliver to me a solar-powered car, or a plasma power plant for my home.

More to the point, I believe that the people who oppose the production and delivery of oil today do not care if you have heat, light, and transportation (or food). They have them. So, they are satisified. And they have the leisure time to engage in an anti-industrial revolution. 

PREVIOUSLY ON NECESSARY FACTS

Jerry Emanuelson's Algebraic Proof of Ricardo's Law of Association

What is Legal Tender?

Money is Speech

Debt: The Seed of Civilization

The Fountainhead: an exploded view of one scene

We lose the past too easily. Ayn Rand was born in 1905. In The Fountainhead, anyone of mature professional status 1922-1942 would have been a generation older. Rand studied in an architect’s office, working for free in order to understand the craft and the business. I was pleasantly surprised to be informed by another book of an underlying tradition in engineering design. It was an eye-opener.

From The Fountainhead:

“You will kindly explain yourself,” [said the Dean].

“If you wish. I want to be an architect, not an archaeologist. I see no purpose in doing Renaissance villas. Why learn to design them, when I will never build them?” [replied Howard Roark].

“My dear boy, the great style of the Renaissance is far from dead. Houses of that style are being erected every day.”

“They are. And they will be. But not by me.”

“Come, come, now, don’t be childish.”

“I came here to learn building. When I was given a project, its only value to me was to learn to solve it as I would solve a real one in the future. I did them the way I’ll build them. I’ve learned all I could learn here—in the structural sciences of which you don’t approve. One more year of drawing Italian post cards would give me nothing.” 

 

From The Pencil: A History of Design and Circumstance by Henry Petroski, Alfred A. Knoff, 1990:

Although orthographic projection was used in Albrecht Dürer’s 1525 book on the geometry of drawing, and theoretic foundations were laid down in Gaspard Monge’s 1795 book on descriptive geometry, the techniques and conventions derived from the work of these pioneers did not become universally employed in what has come to be known as mechanical or engineering drawing until the nineteenth century, when it became virtually indispensable for conveying information to machine shops and iron foundries. Up until about the middle of the nineteenth century, engineering drawing was learned in the long tradition of architectural drawing, and many early machines, such as large steam engines, were designed with iron structural elements cast in the forms of columns of the classical orders. Functional brackets were adorned with the classical motifs that students had learned in drawing classes, which consisted largely of copying increasingly complex architectural drawings, and one can only speculate on how much of what came to be known as Victorian architecture and structure was influenced by this practice. 

 

Through the middle of the nineteenth century architectural drawing was learned by most, though not all, draughtsmen by tracing. Hence technique was learned at the expense of theory. …  The mid-nineteenth century state of the art of engineering drawing was recorded succinctly in the preface to one of the earliest textbooks on the subject, An Elementary Treatise on Orthographic Projection, Being a New Method of Teaching the Science of Mechanical Engineering by William Binns. According to Binns…:

“… the usual mode of teaching… is from the ‘flat’—that is, from copy—the practice being to lay before each student of the class a drawing of some part or parts of a structure which he is requested to copy. This being done, another drawing, probably more elaborate, is laid before him; and the same course is pursued until he becomes tolerably expert with his instruments and brushes, and eventually able to make a very creditable or even highly finished drawing from copy. If, however, at the end of one or two years of practice the copyist is asked to make an end elevation, a side elevation and longitudinal section of his black-lead pencil, or a transverse section of the box containing his instruments, the chances are that he can do neither the one or the other.”

 

PREVIOUSLY ON NECESSARY FACTS

The Genius of Design 

Science Fair: A National Geographic Film 

Absolutes and Objectives 

There Really Are “Civil” Engineers 

 

 

 

THE MAP THAT CHANGED THE WORLD

William Smith (1769 – 1839) drew the first geological maps of England. He was born into a culture that was certain that the world had been created at 9:00 AM on Monday, October 23, 4004 BC.  He died twenty years before The Origin of Species was published.  Yet, he invented the predictive science of geology by marking time with fossils.  In the hour of his success, his work was stolen shamelessly by the gentlemen of the Geological Society.  He was forced into debtor’s prison and spent 20 years homeless, working as best he could in the rural countrysides and counties far from London.

William Smith’s father was a blacksmith and so his formal education was minimal. But he was determined to make something of himself; and by 1794, he worked as a surveyor for the construction of canals.  Eventually and soon he was recognized as the man who could solve practical problems in draining farm fields and predicting where profitable coal fields were to be found.  He recorded his daily work in a continuous multi-volume journal. 

Those notes let him create a series of huge colored maps showing the rocks and strata of England.  (He eventually included more of Britain.)  The keys to his work are two interlocking discoveries.  First, the rock strata are uniform.  Everywhere the strata are the same. Even if some (unknown) process or force (apparently) has displaced or tilted the layers, they can be logically reconstructed into a continuity.  Second, while sandstones and marls and limestones and all the others are to be found repetitively layer upon layer in succession they can be differentiated one from another by the fossils within them. No identical fossil forms ever appear in two different layers of the same kind of rock.  Simpler forms of the same animals are found lower down. 

We know now that cycles running millions of years repeatedly created land, drowned it, and then lifted it up, separating some plates as others collided.  Smith knew nothing of that; and neither did anyone else.  The dilettante gentlemen who robbed Smith of his creation debated whether all rocks precipitated from the ocean or whether all rocks were born of volcanoes.  Anything more complex was beyond their range.  Smith, however, was not at all a British Empiricist.  The men who stole his work were.  Their chief, George Bellas Greenough, denied the validity of theory.  But Smith’s work depended on it. The gentlemen of the Geologic Society attempted to produce their own map (from Smith’s work) without theory, and failed.  They had to admit to the correctness of Smith’s method, as well as to the value of his labors.

Simon Winchester’s biography of William Smith takes you into the fields of England.  He stops to explore and explain.  His college degree from St. Catherine’s Oxford is in geology.  However, after exploring Greenland, among other adventures, most of his career has been in journalism.  (His website here.) Winchester has several popular books to his credit. I read The Professor and the Madman about the Oxford English Dictionary over a decade ago.  His most recent book is The Men who United the States: America's Explorers, Inventors, Eccentrics and Mavericks, and the Creation of One Nation, Indivisible.

ALSO ON NECESSARY FACTS

Great Scientific Experiments

Claude M. Watson

Seeing in the Dark: Amateurs and Astronomy

Fantastic Voyages: Teaching Science with Science Fiction

Misconduct in Science and Research

Venture Capital

“Writing the check is the easy part.” Genentech, Apple, Intel, Cisco, Oracle, … none of them would exist, nor would a hundred others that created billions of dollars worth of new wealth by delivering new inventions.  More than the money – though there was that – venture capitalists brought expertise in management and marketing, guiding start-ups, connecting people with each other, sometimes even making the most difficult of all decisions, to fire the founder CEO for the good of the company.

 

Everyone knows Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak; many recognize Nolan Bushnell, Gordon Moore, and Mike Markkula.  Fewer have heard of Arthur Rock, Tom Perkins, or Don Valentine.  Something Ventured (website here) is their story, the viewpoint of the venture capitalist.  They are a humble lot.  At the end of the movie, they admit that writing the check is the easy part. Without the inventors, the creators, the innovators, the visionaries, the venture capitalists would have nothing in which to invest.  But, invest they did – and do. 

 “They saw opportunity where others only saw risk.”

Arthur Rock was working as an investment banker when his firm received a letter from a group of engineers and scientists who were unhappy working for Nobel laureate William Shockley and were looking for an employer to take them all as a group.  Rock convinced them to start their own company.  Rock approach thirty-five companies – Chrysler, National Cash Register, Curtiss Wright, Borg Warner, Ford, Champion, Motorola, Magnavox, … - and no one wanted to invest.  Then, Arthur Rock met Sherman Fairchild.

Fairchild Semiconductor led to the “Fairchildren” the entrepreneurs within the “Traitorous Eight” of Shockley’s lab who would go on to form their own firms with other venture capitalists backing them. 

“I do not know how to write a business plan. I only know how to read them. We start at the back; and if the numbers are big we read the front to see what kind of business it is.”  (Tom Perkins investor in Genetech, AOL, Compaq, and Amazon).

When Dr. Tom Kodadek spoke to the post-doctoral biological student association at the University of Texas (see Disruptive Diagnotics here), he touted “angel funding” and warned against venture capitalists who take 30% of your firm.  Like a good scientist, he admitted that his narrative was a personal story.  Thirty percent is much less than the half that others have been willing to trade for $1 million or $2 million in start-up funding for an idea that might be (at best) three pages badly written.  Venture capitalists have vision.

“We turned down Jobs and Wozniak.” (Don Valentine) “What are you going to do with a computer in your home? Put recipes on it?” (Pitch Johnson)  “I sent my partner down to look at it and he said, the guy kept me waiting for an hour and he’s very arrogant, and of course that was Steve Jobs!” (Bill Draper)  “They offered me a third of Apple Computer for $50,000 and I said, ‘Gee I don’t think so… … but I said, ‘Call Don Valentine.’ (Nolan Bushnell)

“… and Steve asked me, What do I have to do to have you finance me and I said, you need someone who knows marketing and distribution and he said, Fine, send me three people and one did not like him and one he did not like and the third was Mike Markkula. Mike Markkula worked with me at Fairchild before he worked at Intel.” – Don Valentine. 

Mike Markkula wrote the check for Apple and his first order of business as CEO was to build a board of trustees and his first call was to Arthur Rock.  “Arthur said, ‘I want to put some money in that company,’ and I said, ‘Then you have to come on the board.’ His expertise was in marketing and distribution and how to choose people.”

“I was 32. I was retired from Intel, but that’s what I did on Mondays: I helped people write business plans, just because I liked meeting bright people with fire in their belly. ... The business plan said that with $142,000 we could be cash flow positive in nine months.” – Mike Markkula about Apple.  

• Mike Markkula -- $142,000 

• Arthur Rock -- $57,000  

• Don Valentine -- $150,000  

• Apple's 2010 Market Value: $220 billion

The Austrian School of Economics advocates consistent laissez faire.  They are different from the Chicago School, made famous by Milton Friedman.  The Chicago school argues macro-economic policies with its Keynesian rivals.  The Austrians focus on individuals.  Israel Kirzner, Frank Knight, Peter Klein, and others have attempted to understand and formalize—and continue to investigate – entrepreneurship.  However, as individualists, they argue what the word means, not how to produce more of the same by some cookie-cutter process.  That cannot be done.

The "Traitorous Eight" of Shockley Semiconductor
Who Formed Fairchild Semiconductor

Arthur Rock grew up clerking in his father’s candy store from the time he was six or seven.  Don Valentine’s father was a union organizer and once he understood what a union was, they fought constantly.  Dennis Kramlich was about twelve or thirteen when he bought half a freight car of light bulbs from Sylvania and sold them from his wagon.  “I called it the Bright Boy Lightbulb Company.”  Tom Perkins earned a degree in electrical engineering from MIT and found the work incredibly boring. He then went to Harvard Business School where his professor, George Doriot, taught a unique class in entrepreneurship.  (Doriot’s own company, American Research and Development, made only one insightful commitment, to Ken Olsen’s Digital Equipment Corporation.) Doriot’s students included Perkins, Kramlich, Pitch Johnson, and Bill Draper. 

"These were companies with a lot of things missing.  And our approach was always, ‘Is our Rolodex strong enough to help these people?’”  -- Don Valentine.

This film glorifies the essential individualism of investment capital and entrepreneurship. No formula exists. No formula can exist. Each of the venture capitalists in this documentary has a unique narrative. In every case it reduces to the same primary: “I thought that it was a good idea.” Not everything turns a profit. Ultimately, something does, some ventures do. 

“At the time we started Genentech, there was no such thing as genetic engineering. The risks were enormous.” 

A quarter million invested in Genentech in 1976 became $47billion when sold to La Roche in 2009.  Five million invested in Intel became $90 million.  $1.4 million invested in Tandem Computers in 1974 became $3 billion when Compaq bought the company in 1997.

I was told by a guy at Salomon Brothers, "We’ve heard the pitch, but you did not go to Harvard Business School.”  -- Don Valentine, founder of Sequoia Capital, investors in Apple, Cisco, Oracle, Electronic Arts and LSI Logic. 

• “There are no firm rules in the venture capital business, except that there are no firm rules.”  Reid Dennis
• “I would trust him with my life, but not with my money.”  Eugene Kleiner.
•  "You gotta get money from strong people because weak people don’t invest in tough times, but that is when most of the big winners are created. ”Jimmy Treybig, co-founder Tandem Computers.  
• “I am not interested in entrepreneurs who want to do things our way. I am not interested in entrepreneurs who come with a dress code. I am interested in entrepreneurs who want to something new that preferably becomes big.” -- Don Valentine

 For all of its individualism – and Donald Valentine is a supporter of the Ayn Rand Institute – capitalism depends on the bourgeois virtues of community. (See the works of Dierdre McCloskey.)  To fund Atari, Sequoia found Fidelity Ventures and the Mayfield Fund to share the burden of risk in return for the opportunity of profit.

PowerPoint was like the Night of the Living Dead, a company that never failed, but just sucked a lot of life out of other people…. until it was sold to Microsoft…

Something Ventured movie website here.

PREVIOUSLY, ON "NECESSARY FACTS" 

Entrepreneurship
Atlas Shrugged's John Aglialoro
Capitalist Culture: Cairo 1600

Tribute to Steve Jobs

The One Percent are the Atlases 

How to Hire a Technical Writer

Readability is the only metric.  Microsoft Word offers a readability score under the Grammar & Spelling checker off the Tools menu.  The Readability score has flaws; and it can be tricked.  Those are old problems.  But even a stopped watch is right twice a day.  A programmer can write their own lexical analyzer.  It is just a parser with more rules.  Back in 1990, I wrote one in Fortran to prove to a manager from Digital Equipment Corporation that I write technical documentation at a ninth grade level.  It is not that programmers, engineers, or accountants cannot read.  Rather, when you are in trouble, you need answers.  You are not looking for a literary experience.

 "Austin on Rails" is a meetup for Ruby on Rails software developers.  On Tuesday, May 28, I will be the "Introductory" speaker.  My topic will be "Documentation for Developers."  A software developer can rely on a hefty toolbox of programs for planning code.  Those plans are among the key documents.

Warnier-Orr for Greeting Guests

Ideally, the user manual is the first product. I look to the Warnier-Orr method for that.  According to Warnier-Orr, you start with your intended final output and work back to the primary inputs.  Warnier-Orr helps to plan large data structures.  It can include decisions and loops. Mostly, however, other tools make that work easier.  

Traditional flowcharts are well known. However, they have their own grammar, which is often violated.  For example, lines should not cross.  If they do, you have a potential problem in the flow of work.  Ideally, you should be able to "pick up" a flowchart by its Start, "shake" it, and have it "hang loose" with no tangles.  

For applications with deep and broad arrays of processes, the Nassi-Shneiderman method delivers clear pictures.  

Any significant project will be documented best with several tools. Narratives are among them.  Good technical writing uses short, declarative sentences.  Active voice identifies responsible parties.  The present tense and indicative mood deliver the sense of reality, and intention of purpose.  Convoluted sentences built from subordinate and dependent clauses in passive voice and conditional mood and future tense are concatenated confessions that this stuff should not be worried about.  If it is important, then say so.

Nassi-Shneiderman
for Order Entry

Managers who do not publish professionally think that they need to find a writer who knows some specific package.  After all, their firm has an investment in FrameMaker or InDesign, or RoboHelp.  That investment is quantifiable.  But they never ask me to quantify the readability of my work.  They assume that anyone who claims to be a writer must be good at it.  

Worse, a pernicious sense of democracy lets them believe that all writers are created equal, that we are endowed with interchangeable skills, and replaceable talents, that among these powers are grammar, syntax, and vocabulary; that technical writers are given to project managers to enhance the value of their products, and that when users, customers, and clients cannot find fitness or merchantability in the product, then a long train of abuses will be consequentially deflected to others.  

But I say to you, blessed are the writers.  Ours is the world of ideas.  We are the dream makers.  A writer who does not publish poetry cannot publish schematics.  

You need a master's degree level of literacy to understand the Declaration of Independence.  A child can understand the Sermon on the Mount.  Millions of people have died as martyrs to their religions.  Far fewer went to the barricades for liberal democracy.  Communication matters.  If you  believe in your product or service, then you want other people to accept its truth: you want committed customers.  Information systems win loyalty with technical documents that are alive with the truth of value in the product.

Previously on Necessary Facts: "Documentation is Specification" here.

The Sermon on the Mount is readable at Grade 5.3

Grade level 18.0 to understand the
Declaration of Independence

ALSO ON NECESSARY FACTS
Knowledge Maps
Readability is the only Metric
Documentation is Specification
The Genius of Design
The Art of Typography