If you're using a blunt instrument to measure a nuanced result, you're going to lose some of your nuance. If I say "Dogs are members of Canis familiaris" and s

If you're using a blunt instrument to measure a nuanced result, you're going to lose some of your nuance. If I say "Dogs are members of Canis familiaris" and someone else says "no, those are wolves" and a 3rd person asks me "How likely is that guy to know what Canis familiaris is" based on me asking him the question "Do you know what Canis familiaris is?" I'm going to get the answer wrong 100% of the time, because of my "perception" of things. This is meaningless however, because some facts are facts, and not everything is "shades of gray". Also vice versa. Saying "there's a perception gap" when two people aren't even having the same conversation doesn't feel like the blame should be on either person. In this case, the observer who's trying to draw a conclusion is drawing a pointless conclusion/asking trap questions.