3 ms·
Asking this question is a good place to start, but the answer goes way beyond mere reluctance. I would say that many people are very intelligent in ways that ou
by strait 17y ago
Asking this question is a good place to start, but the answer goes way beyond mere reluctance. I would say that many people are very intelligent in ways that outstrip their ability to communicate this knowledge effectively. Natural written languages are very blunt instruments in contrast to the highly-involved abstract concepts that our brains are capable of 'discovering'. Some things are very difficult to explain effectively and take much patience, forethought, style, and lengthy prose. Fewer are talented in this area, or you might say that certain skill sets intersect less frequently. (Talented writers and talented mathmeticians/scientists). Even great professors often struggle with explaining things in layman's terms.
Take the English laguage, for example. Very flexible, but still feeble at tranferring highly abstract concepts. It wasn't designed/evolved for this purpose, so this is not surprising. Talented writers can get quite far on the abstraction scale, before text becomes a verbose and confusing mess, but there must exist a potential space for a future spoken/written language to be created, better suited for explaining abstractions, somewhere between the current common natural languages and terse mathematical notation (which itself requires much textual explanation).
- dbz 17y agoI see your point and I'll add to it. Along with difficulty in producing an explanation, there is difficulty in allowing the other person time to understand. -> This requires patience, and a lot of people I consider smart have very little patience, which makes it hard for them to explain things and often times I will see them stop explaining something to someone, or simple not starting the explanation because they view it is a lost cause.
- strait 17y agoYes, imagine being so intelligent that after 5 seconds of interaction with someone, you will mentally accurately predict a 6.8 percent chance (+/- 2) that they will eventually pick up on what you are explaining at all. So, now after 10 times with a 5 percenter, you one day realize there was less than half a chance all along, and get into a severe lonely depression and eventually end up writing highly obscure technical books that the sensationalistic bloggers will never read, leading them to blog about 'all those selfish and silent smart people.'