If you can't explain something clearly to an intelligent individual, you probably don't understand it.

You may explain something clearly, and sometimes people still don't understand it. In fact, when they don't understand they often complain that it wasn't clear. What's clear isn't always clear.

If you can't explain something clearly to an intelligent individual, you probably don't understand it. — Txastopher

If you understand it and you explain it clearly and your interlocutor is sufficiently intelligent then he or she will understand you.

Being more clear isn't the same as dumbing it down.

An example would help because this is a highly circumstantial topic. Depending on the context you maybe should or maybe shouldn't dumb it down.

If you speak too intelligently some people might not understand you. If you are given instructions, you explain in a simple way or one which most will understand. The other day I had a coworker get on my case for not being more literal. I was told I am suppose to use "correct terms" when speaking. This was a lead as well. Should I dumb it down, or should people be intelligent enough to figure things out? — SherlockH

I'm an engineer. Most of what I do is explain things. My audience usually includes other technical people, people who are familiar with technical issues but not technical themselves, and the public. There is a certain irreducible amount of technical language I have to use, but I don't usually have trouble making myself understood. It's true, the issues I'm explaining are not difficult to understand. I'm not a mathematician or physicist working on complicated issues. I'm a civil and environmental engineer cleaning up contaminated soil and groundwater.

Clarity and structure are what matters. Those and knowing your audience and what they have the capacity, education, and experience to understand.

Far too often those of above average intelligence succumb to the same instinctive emotions as everyone else because they are smarter. Anyone who is truly considers themselves more intelligent knows in some corner of themselves that once you see past the emotions of aggravation, impatience and so forth, including those trigger by the targeted experiences of some who stood out early for their intelligence, you realize that it is part of the burden and responsibility of your intellect. Nature didn't single you out to be smarter because you are awesome. With it comes the responsibility to consider, create and contribute. With that comes doing what necessary to communicate what you know to those who have a harder time grasping it. You are meant to enhance and expand the knowledge of the species. I read somewhere that a 30 point gap in IQ's can significantly impact communication. Seems to me if I'm at the higher side of that range its really up to me to get the information across. I hear people like visuals :)

"Simplifying" and "dumbing down" aren't the same thing. Dumbing down applies to situations where complex abstractions (like 'hermeneutics' or 'quantum mechanics') are recast in terms so basic most of the meaning is lost. Simplification of instructions involves careful organization of steps, word choices that are appropriate to the audience and the situation, and clear delivery. Plus, the person on the other end needs to be receptive, paying attention, and interested.

Clarity can be difficult to achieve in an unplanned (ad lib) situation. It may not be anyone's fault.

Most newspapers were, at one time, written at a 6th-grade to 8th grade level. Newspapers need to be accessible to as many readers as possible (for revenue purposes) without making it so simple complicated issues can't be discussed. Leading national newspapers like the New York Times are likely to be pitched at a higher reading level (maybe 10th to 12th grade) than the West Cupcake Weekly Advertiser.

Your thread, "When You Sold Your Soul To The Devil" -- your OP, Hanover's response, and 1 paragraph of 0-9's quoted text from Oscar Wilde -- reads at the 8th grade level according to the Fry/Ragor readability formula.

Your thread, "When You Sold Your Soul To The Devil" -- your OP, Hanover's response, and 1 paragraph of 0-9's quoted text from Oscar Wilde -- reads at the 8th grade level according to the Fry/Ragor readability formula. — Bitter Crank

Must be dumbing it down for us.

Nature didn't single you out to be smarter because you are awesome. With it comes the responsibility to consider, create and contribute. With that comes doing what necessary to communicate what you know to those who have a harder time grasping it. You are meant to enhance and expand the knowledge of the species. — MiloL

Yes, we are all intellectual superheros.

West Cupcake Weekly Advertiser. — Bitter Crank

Don't be a hater. This was a great paper until Murdoch bought it.

I am suppose to use "correct terms" when speaking — SherlockH

Supposed*

I was told I could only speak in literal terms. I used terms that make sense in an abstract sense. Like saying "This place is a ghost town" would be met with "ghosts are not real". To which I would correct "I mean it lacks people and activity". I have to take into account not everyone is at my level though. Maybe im wrong and should not get angry with people.

I was told I could only speak in literal terms. I used terms that make sense in an abstract sense. Like saying "This place is a ghost town" would be met with "ghosts are not real". To which I would correct "I mean it lacks people and activity". I have to take into account not everyone is at my level though. Maybe im wrong and should not get angry with people. — SherlockH

Do you realize how condescending that sounds? I'm sure the people you are trying to explain things to pick up on that.

They said they did not understand it. They keep correcting me when I use terms that are not literal. I had a freind who was an expert at computers and I often did not understand them as I was not at the same level. So I realize not everyone is the same and thought maybe I was being a jerk for getting angry.

Who's unfamiliar with that expression? ...

It seems if it's your job to explain something, and the people you're to explain it to don't understand it, then you've failed in your job. You can't blame them for your failure.

My coworkers who dont seem to understand abstract terms and phrases. I do sometimes simplify instructions in terms of step by step to make it simple. Just this seems to be basic English skills they seem to be lacking. So I expected they would understand abstract ideas and terms better.

Say to us what you said to them and then we'll be the judge of whether it's you or if it's them. If it's them, we'll sympathize. If it's you, will ridicule.

Jesus, what kind of people are you working with? Are you working in a sheltered workshop for autistic literalists, or something? Are these people not native English speakers (or even competent English speakers)?

I have noticed that some people seem to lose the ability to interpret figurative language (like "This place is a ghost town"), metaphors, puns, similes, and so on as they age. Is it an early sign of dementia? I sometimes wonder.

There are also people who seem to have had all imaginative ability washed out of their brains, and anything that isn't obviously literal disturbs them.

Or maybe they just don't like you.

Using metaphorical language is not necessarily more intelligent than using literal language. A common metaphor like "ghost town" should be understood by every native speaker of standard American or British English. If they're not, there's your answer and they're not dumb for misunderstanding.

The first thing I'd explain to them is that all language is a crude symbolic representation of a thought, therefore making the distinction between figurative and literal one more of degree than type. Some may disagree, and I'd allow hearty debate to follow. Once you feel sufficient discussion has been permitted, I'd explain how to put the staples in the staplers or whatever it was you sought to explain.

I seem to have the opposite problem. I use big words that are made up to try to impress co-workers. Words like “retransferrulence” and “unremidullant” can have varied uses, depending on the situation. Lotsa fun. Nevertheless, they still have to dumb it down considerably when talking to me, if any work is to be done. Otherwise, we end up standing there cromulantly scratching our heads. :nerd:

Once all the ghosts left town, the town was oxymoronically a ghost town.

And once all the oxes had left the oxymorons, the oxymorons were moronically no longer self-contradictions.

(+The Thai word for "ox" also means "moron" so under a syllabillic translinguistic analysis, it's a literal/semantic self-reflexive contradiction.)

Nevertheless, they still have to dumb it down considerably when talking to me, if any work is to be done. Otherwise, we end up standing there cromulantly scratching our heads. — 0 thru 9

I'm sure they're only trying to help you embiggen yourself.

Far too often those of above average intelligence succumb to the same instinctive emotions as everyone else because they are smarter. Anyone who is truly considers themselves more intelligent knows in some corner of themselves that once you see past the emotions of aggravation, impatience and so forth, including those trigger by the targeted experiences of some who stood out early for their intelligence, you realize that it is part of the burden and responsibility of your intellect. Nature didn't single you out to be smarter because you are awesome. With it comes the responsibility to consider, create and contribute. With that comes doing what necessary to communicate what you know to those who have a harder time grasping it. You are meant to enhance and expand the knowledge of the species. I read somewhere that a 30 point gap in IQ's can significantly impact communication. Seems to me if I'm at the higher side of that range its really up to me to get the information across. I hear people like visuals :) — MiloL

YES!!!!
I agree with EVERYTHING you said AND I managed to read your whole response without my eyes glazing over in loss of understanding like just happened to me with T.Clark's post above. People just assume that you are on the same thinking level and learn the same as them and that can be very intimidating to even consider asking a question of. However your approach makes it clear that you understand people like me, people who feel and are fundamentally rooted in emotion. That approach sets my curiosity on fire and I am wanting to learn because it feels like we are learning it together....I am not sure that makes sense but it is a very emotional part of learning for me.

Having said that, my son who is in college is in such a high level math class that when he comes home and interacts with the family, he has a hard time converting back to basic math. I realize it sounds absurd but you can see him having to work at turning down his knowledge to entertain such simple math problems.

Talk to people at the level they themselves talk. People vary in intelligence, but if you are yourself intelligent, you should be intelligent enough to talk to people at their level - if communication is your aim.

However your approach makes it clear that you understand people like me, people who feel and are fundamentally rooted in emotion. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

What a unique identity to adopt.

Having said that, my son who is in college is in such a high level math class that when he comes home and interacts with the family, he has a hard time converting back to basic math. I realize it sounds absurd but you can see him having to work at turning down his knowledge to entertain such simple math problems. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

So for instance you’re serving tea and ask, “one lump or two?” And he’s doing mathmatical simulations to determine the optimal quantity of sucrose to consume for the next hour?