Would you blame the Butterfly?:
Interplay of Consequences, Ambiguity and Responsibility

4. Findings 
The following themes will first introduce a recurring pattern in writing style, and then explore its potential links to an individual’s tendency.

Emptiness – Reticent
The writing adopts spatial pause. Punctuation marks like the em-dash (—), semicolon (;), and comma (,) are actively used to fragment clauses and isolate thoughts. Rather than relying on subordinate clauses, the writing favours short, independent units that convey reflection piece by piece. Even when long sentences appear, they are typically followed by sharp turns—often via brief clauses that revise or reframe the original message.

Verbosity is avoided. Words are chosen with care, and each carries deliberate weight. Be-verbs are often excluded. Between sentences, silence is maintained—interrupting flow to control rhythm. The overall tone leans toward reticence, as if the writer is withholding speech, or speaking only when absolutely necessary.

Texture – Elusive
This writing style externalises abstract and invisible elements—such as emotions, concepts, or states—by materialising them into objects and assigning them roles or symbolic functions. Rather than using traditional forms such as metaphor or simile, the writing often relies on symbolic objectification: a concept is reassembled through layers of transformation—first by rendering it visible through tangible imagery, and then by personifying it. For instance, a 'role' is given to an 'actor', who then performs it—blurring the lines between symbol, action, and attribution.
The choice of vocabulary also reflects this strategy: ordinary yet unexpected words are preferred, leaving interpretative space. Concepts are broken down, retextured with added dimensions, and then reassembled. In this way, the abstract is not only visualised but made deliberately difficult to grasp—elusive by design. I often think: I will let them read, but not easily.

Balance – Tentative
There is a strong inclination toward balance, especially through juxtaposition of verbs and clustering of nouns. Verb pairs are frequently used to contrast two opposing actions or states. Nouns, in turn, are grouped into trios—similar yet subtly shifting in meaning.

Macro-level concepts tend to be symbolised or abstracted, whereas micro-level contexts are described in sensory and specific terms. A recurring cognitive habit is to interrogate a single word across layers—is it the cause or the effect? Is it a precondition or a side effect? Expressions such as “beyond” and “above” appear frequently, revealing an obsession with what lies outside the frame. Likewise, modal verbs like “may” and “might” dominate over “can” or “should”, suggesting a default position of uncertainty, reservation, and suspended judgement.

Passivity – Self-effacing
Passive constructions are abundant, both grammatically and conceptually. Words ending in -ed, past participles, and passive voice appear frequently, reflecting a sense of inevitability or powerlessness—as if things have happened to the speaker rather than by the speaker. There is a tendency to trace how things have come to be, rather than to define their present state.
Even when introducing new concepts, the language often leans toward passivity. Recurrent themes include the fear of influence, rejection of authority, disclaiming of power, and positioning oneself as an observer. This tendency is not just stylistic but thematic, revealing a reluctance to assert responsibility, and a preference for being acted upon, rather than acting.