Reddit mentions of Style: Toward Clarity and Grace (Chicago Guides to Writing, Editing, and Publishing)

Read this book, and learn to apply the methods within it:

https://www.amazon.com/Style-Clarity-Chicago-Writing-Publishing/dp/0226899152

I learned to write from this book, and have since worked as a professional writer, editor, and writing instructor.

If you wish to write with sophistication, or with a plainspoken, bulleted style, there are books on that.

If you want something more general purpose, there is this

I work in Fintech. I'm trying to think of things that I would consider important which don't apply to Software Engineering in general and I'm not really coming up with anything. I guess:

• Have a vague idea of what double-entry bookkeeping is? Know what a ledger is?
  
  
• Be somewhat more concerned with stability, well-testedness, and correctness than the average?
  
  
• Have some understanding of how to think about laws and how to talk with product managers to make sure you're building in compliance with laws.
  
  But yea, the things to focus on are good software engineering skills:
  
  
• Know how to concisely communicate how something works or could work or doesn't work. (How to learn this: work on problem sets in a study group & Help others out when they are confused. Read Style: Towards Clarity and Grace )
  
  
• Know how to write well-structured automated tests. ( The Goat Book is a decent intro )
  
  
• Ability to ask why a project needs to happen until you've got a sufficient answer that would let you change the technical decisions or decide that the project can be cut down in scope or needs to be increased in scope.
  
  
• A solid understanding of relational databases. (This course is good. Skip XML. Don't skip Relational Algebra.
  
  And some other things like /u/general_00 and others mention.

Parsimony, man. Figure it out.

> Your argument is that tribalism is the problem ! This is not true. Bad ideas are still bad ideas whether or not rooted in positive social constructs and behaviors or desctructive ones. If you need specific religious examples from written text to demonstrate this concept then we have a bigger challenges at hand.

How do you define a 'bad idea?' Is it an idea that's scientifically untrue? One that's unfalsifiable (and, therefore, might be true)? You can't just vaguely call religious ideas "bad," provide a dire warning against them and leave the conversation at that.

This book might help

Style: Toward Clarity and Grace (Chicago Guides to Writing, Editing, and Publishing)

You have linked to Amazon.com. Please consider using Amazon Smile instead to donate to your favorite charity for free.http://smile.amazon.com/Style-Clarity-Chicago-Writing-Publishing/dp/0226899152.

Style: Toward Clarity and Grace offers the best instruction on writing at the sentence level.

Buy and read Style:Toward Clarity and Grace (get a later edition if you can). This little book explains what’s wrong with your sentence and how to rewrite it. I wish I’d found that book ten years ago. It’s the perfect antidote to the kind of bone dry and boring writing that you’ll encounter in any academic institution.

To be clear, the passive voice is not bad in itself, and anyone who reduces writing advice to simplistic and rigid rules such as “never use the passive” is missing the point. The point is more that you use verbs to convey something other than action, and nouns for something other than actual things.

For example, a movement isn’t a concrete thing, but Transcendentalists are concrete people. Characterizing isn’t a concrete action (that’s why it reads so badly in the active voice). Belief is an action, not a thing. And so on.

Get a copy of Joseph Williams's Style: Toward Clarity and Grace. It's the best book I've ever found for improving the flow/clarity of your writing and the quality of your sentences. You should be able to find some dirt-cheap used copies.