Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

If you can’t explain something in simple terms, you don’t understand it

kottke.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 237 posts

Re: If you can’t explain something in simple terms, you don’t understand it

#131

Post by mtdewcmu »

jknoepfler wrote: post #68

This strikes me as raw arrogance. Complexity is intrinsic to many systems that are subject of expert study. To tell someone who has devoted their career to understanding a complex topic that they don't understand their subject because they can't express it in layman's terms without doing terrible violence to the underlying phenomenon is ludicrous. This is the sort of thing you'd believe if you were an arrogant 20-som…

I think it's meant to apply to a single, atomic concept that the audience is suitably prepared to understand. It couldn't be something like "how to build a car starting from a lump of steel" -- that would not be a single, atomic idea. "How anti-lock brakes work" might be a better idea to explain in simple terms.

Re: If you can’t explain something in simple terms, you don’t understand it

#133

Post by mjevans »

makecheck wrote: post #79

It's not realistic to expect this. If everything could be simplified to this degree, you would never need experts. It is also dangerous to assume this, because that is exactly how we reached the "my uninformed opinion is as valid as your years of experience" aspect of the current political climate. NO, things are NOT as simple as you think they are just because you saw it in the space of a tweet! On the other hand, i…

The best we can say is that if there is a strong consensus among experts that it is, to the best of our current knowledge, correct.

It's at least more correct than someone with zero training in that field. Dissenting opinions among experts should also be considered, by such experts, and the points at which they disagree with the logic or knowledge carefully examined by all.

Re: If you can’t explain something in simple terms, you don’t understand it

#134

Post by dtashima »

freddref wrote: post #13

Feynman also said: "Hell, if I could explain it to the average person, it wouldn't have been worth the Nobel prize." [1] Showing a limitation of the maxim or Feynman's hubris? [1] https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman

Well he made that statement in 1965, and then wrote QED, which is a layman's explanation of his Nobel Prize work, in 1985. So perhaps he set out to prove himself wrong.

QED does explain quantum electrodynamics without any calculus or other math (for example, he uses imaginary clocks as a way to explain wave interference), but I think if the average person read it they wouldn't walk away with even a partial understanding of it.

Re: If you can’t explain something in simple terms, you don’t understand it

#135

Post by [deleted] »

jshelly wrote: post #115
sh87 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever 'taught' anyone anything? When you do, you'll probably get what Feynman was trying to say. Complexity is intrinsic. Just that as a teacher/guide/explainer, you have to gently guide the novices around enough to invoke a sense of curiosity that will drive the pupil to explore on their own. The task at hand here is to make things less overwhelming, not removing or ignoring complexity. For every complex sys…

I think Feynman's statement is a wee bit over the top, and I will say that being able to teach complex things to novices is definitely an art and certainly one which I do not possess

[deleted]

Re: If you can’t explain something in simple terms, you don’t understand it

#136

Post by barce »

Another way of putting this is: If you can't use lego blocks to build something, then you don't understand it. But why would anyone want to recreate Shakespeare using lego blocks, or recreate a motorcycle using lego blocks? I'm sure a 5 year old would love it to pieces. I would rather make a reproduction of a motorcycle with real metal.

Re: If you can’t explain something in simple terms, you don’t understand it

#137

Post by SomeStupidPoint »

jokoon wrote: post #129
jknoepfler wrote: post #68

This strikes me as raw arrogance. Complexity is intrinsic to many systems that are subject of expert study. To tell someone who has devoted their career to understanding a complex topic that they don't understand their subject because they can't express it in layman's terms without doing terrible violence to the underlying phenomenon is ludicrous. This is the sort of thing you'd believe if you were an arrogant 20-som…

Understanding the fine details is one thing, but unless you can really communicate a synthesis or an analogy, it's impossible to really prove you understand something. Nobody cares about a genius who understands something until he can really interact about the subject. Humans work with communication. When you learn about something, you read about it and you process it. To see if you understand it, you must communicat…

I care that the people at CERN can make a working LHC, not that they can communicate it to me succinctly (eg, in under 2 hours).

It's fine that it takes 150-300 hours of back-and-forth communication to transfer the ideas behind how it actually works. That seems like a reasonable amount of time to communicate a complex idea to a novice.

There's also layers of understanding:

The LHC bangs two rocks together hard to see what happens when they break.

The LHC use magnets to accelerate protons fast enough they break apart because it recreates conditions similar to the early universe.

etc.

Re: If you can’t explain something in simple terms, you don’t understand it

#138

Post by ac0kg »

jokoon wrote: post #129
jknoepfler wrote: post #68

This strikes me as raw arrogance. Complexity is intrinsic to many systems that are subject of expert study. To tell someone who has devoted their career to understanding a complex topic that they don't understand their subject because they can't express it in layman's terms without doing terrible violence to the underlying phenomenon is ludicrous. This is the sort of thing you'd believe if you were an arrogant 20-som…

Understanding the fine details is one thing, but unless you can really communicate a synthesis or an analogy, it's impossible to really prove you understand something. Nobody cares about a genius who understands something until he can really interact about the subject. Humans work with communication. When you learn about something, you read about it and you process it. To see if you understand it, you must communicat…

"To see if you understand it, you must communicate it back"

That's one option. You could also apply the knowledge and see if what you think you understand has resulted in a mental model from which you can make testable predictions that correspond to the real-world behavior of the modeled thing.

Re: If you can’t explain something in simple terms, you don’t understand it

#139

Post by Retra »

jknoepfler wrote: post #68

This strikes me as raw arrogance. Complexity is intrinsic to many systems that are subject of expert study. To tell someone who has devoted their career to understanding a complex topic that they don't understand their subject because they can't express it in layman's terms without doing terrible violence to the underlying phenomenon is ludicrous. This is the sort of thing you'd believe if you were an arrogant 20-som…

His point seemed to be that experts who don't know how to converse with non-experts aren't really expert enough to hold the title. If you don't know what concepts you had to use to learn the material, then how can you trust your conclusions?

It's sort of like saying that a mathematician who doesn't know how to prove their results to one who only knows the axioms doesn't fully understand their results.

Re: If you can’t explain something in simple terms, you don’t understand it

#140

Post by zobzu »

"or you just don't have good communication skills" It's a classic fallacy. While it has some truth to it it's not the only single reason to decide if you understand the subject or not.

In fact, "if you make this fallacy, you're a terrible human being" (which is sarcasm here since this very statement includes the exact same fallacy)

Post reply on HN