One of the major pain-points of working with doctorates and talented people (Bazinga! This one’s for you, Howard Wolowitz!) is their articulation or rather, lack of it.
Let me clarify at the very outset: I am not even remotely an authority on the matter. I tend to over-analyze myself and the audience (even when it’s just a small group of people) so much, that at some point or the other, I lose track of what I am saying and the continuous feedback loop causes the situation to cascade from bad to worse to disastrous. (Slightly off the topic: but speaking of how crazy these people can be, somebody told me he imagines animal heads instead of humans' to overcome the stage-fright and it works!)
That much for that disclaimer.. In this era of opinion overload, do I really have to be perfect to criticize anything?
I am not talking about stage-fright, however. Nor the language, the vocabulary or the grammar. What drives me crazy is just the sheer inability of these people to contain their thoughts and coherently communicate a point. Take this guy, for example: He has a tendency to dwell excessively on corner cases and assumptions and limitations. So, most of his arguments start with ors and buts and of-courses and the main point is lost somewhere in that cobweb. It's such a voluminous barrage of things being hammered on your brain that you don’t even register when he slips in the core idea.
Things ain’t black and white and we live in this fuzzy grey world. Be it Physics, Chemistry, Biology or applied fields, the reality is most of what people theorize is only an over-simplified version of reality. It is usually well understood that modeling things demands that certain conditions are met before anything can hold true. So why talk about things being dependent on seasons and low/high tides and rotation of the moon?
Let me clarify at the very outset: I am not even remotely an authority on the matter. I tend to over-analyze myself and the audience (even when it’s just a small group of people) so much, that at some point or the other, I lose track of what I am saying and the continuous feedback loop causes the situation to cascade from bad to worse to disastrous. (Slightly off the topic: but speaking of how crazy these people can be, somebody told me he imagines animal heads instead of humans' to overcome the stage-fright and it works!)
That much for that disclaimer.. In this era of opinion overload, do I really have to be perfect to criticize anything?
I am not talking about stage-fright, however. Nor the language, the vocabulary or the grammar. What drives me crazy is just the sheer inability of these people to contain their thoughts and coherently communicate a point. Take this guy, for example: He has a tendency to dwell excessively on corner cases and assumptions and limitations. So, most of his arguments start with ors and buts and of-courses and the main point is lost somewhere in that cobweb. It's such a voluminous barrage of things being hammered on your brain that you don’t even register when he slips in the core idea.
Things ain’t black and white and we live in this fuzzy grey world. Be it Physics, Chemistry, Biology or applied fields, the reality is most of what people theorize is only an over-simplified version of reality. It is usually well understood that modeling things demands that certain conditions are met before anything can hold true. So why talk about things being dependent on seasons and low/high tides and rotation of the moon?
Are these know-it-alls trying to show off how comprehensive they can be? Do they actually expect listeners to understand complex points with that esoteric mess they come up with? I mean, for God’s sake, even Einstein came up with special theory of relativity before publishing general version of it! (Not that most people understand either). But there’s this crucial difference between written and verbal communication. No denying that good written content needs some merit - to state the least: basic flow and sound structure. However, a reader still has the luxury to revisit the content and demystify things if so desired. A listener is at far more risk to lose patience and effectively, interest. The whole stint is then just an epic fail!
Elementary, dear Mr. speaker! If you really want the audience to get what you are trying to say, it is paramount you sow simple and gradually build up complex branches. Elon Musk, The Iron Man of this generation (I mean, if anyone’s even remotely close to the title, it has to be him!), in his Reddit AMA, had the best advice on knowledge acquisition/retention I have read so far. And I think it somehow perfectly fits in this context as well:
Hmm.. So as I prepare to put myself through one more hour of absolute frustration next week, what do you recommend I do? Bang my head on the walls? Pull my hair out? (Well, my hairline is already receding.. Won’t his hair be a better idea?)
