<p>In the social sciences, it is extremely common to provide an outline of a paper with sentences similar to “I intend to show that…”, “I first analyze the effects of…”, and so on. Personally, I avoid such constructions by replacing the “I” with “this essay” when called upon to provide a roadmap statement in my thesis. This is not to say, however, that my method is better. I only write as I do because I am generally obsessed with style in essays, and I consider the first-person very anti-stylistic.</p>
<p>In literary analysis, the first person is considered extremely unsubtle. More artful introductions and theses are preferred. You will likely never find a well-received literature paper with sentences the first- or second-person.</p>
<p>It all depends, however, on the tastes of the professor. Even this absolute has caveats. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think this may be the most accurate explanation. I remember in middle school that many of my peers preferred to write almost exclusively in the first person, and it harmed their writing severely. Not only did they sound childish and petulant, their continued use of “I” and “me” and “my” led them to focus on unsubstantiated opinions and feelings, rather than on actual argument.</p>
<p>I do not think they yet understood the in-kind difference between “I intend to show…” and “I think this story sucks.”</p>
<p>I just asked some of my roommates, and of the four that have taken courses in the humanities, only one says his professor didn’t frown upon use of “I.” Social scientists do not share this aversion.</p>
<p>Wow! So many different wonders of “I”… In english it would be a trick to make you thinks more and make a better voice. In science lab reports, “I” wouldn’t be use because there is no I did this or that however our science teacher let us use “you” a word forbidden by Engish classes -_-</p>
<p>But it just makes sense to use “I.” Why should you pretend that you didn’t write that paper? That it’s your thinking going into it? It doesn’t make you sound pompous, it makes you sound assured–you’re taking responsibility for what comes next.</p>
<p>my own guess is that the writing guidelines we’re fed as kids do a much better job of making student’s writing seem more passable to teachers than they do of actually improving student’s writing in any substantive way. </p>
<p>the “i” thing might have to do partly with simple aesthetic preferences too, like why we’re discouraged from using overly repetitive language or sentence structure, even when it might increase clarity.</p>
<p>But you’re trying to legitimize an opinion, which already implies a bias. You can strengthen your argument further by addressing counterarguments and refuting those though.</p>
<p>The second one. The first one more accurately reflects the fact that you have to <em>show</em> that MLK Jr. was not a pacifist instead of declaring him to be one (good luck with that by the way ;P).</p>
<p>i can’t really see how the declared intent to show in the first person is something that would make a claim sound less biased to someone - personally i’ve never really associated someone’s capacity or desire to support a claim with the unbiasedness of that claim. </p>
<p>if it does, my guess is your brain has been restructured to respond to “I intend to show” differently than most people.</p>
<p>Or, more likely, you rationalized your dishonest answer as being honest because protecting your conception of “I” to us and to yourself is important to you - more important than being open to adjusting your beliefs about using “I” so they might be more in line with the reality we all cohabit.</p>
<p>^^There’s actually a very incorrect, though well-written, essay I’ve read on that topic. The essay persuaded me up until the point that I decided to check the sources. Totally misrepresented every one.</p>