Daft_ishWhat are some things you do to check yourself from being a 'know it all'?
Empathy.
One of my pet peeves is when I ask a question of someone, and they reinterpret my question (without communicating that reinterpretation), then give me the answer to THEIR question.
I’ll be the first to say that is possible for someone to form their question wrong, but I give them the benefit of the doubt and give them the answer to their question FIRST, and then restate the question I think they want for the answer I think they’re looking for.
Their question: “What time does the plane take off for Chicago?”
My answer: “11AM, but think you’re asking because you want to know when I’m leaving. I decided to drive instead of flying and will be leaving at 9AM.”
I allow for the possibility that their question IS the right question and give them their answer immediately, even though all of the conversation context suggests they’re not interested in the plane departure, but instead my travel plans. Doing this avoids so many annoying conversations of confusion and frustration on both people’s parts.
When asked on an informational topic, I give the one or two sentence answer, then ask “Does that answer your question or would you like more detail?” Lots of times people want just a short answer, but a surprising amount they ask for more detail and I’m happy to give it. Consent is important.
Lastly, I assume I’m missing information and can learn from others. When someone says something that doesn’t match my understanding, I ask them to explain it so I can learn. I’d rather have correct knowledge than be “right”.
ZagorathOne of my pet peeves is when I ask a question of someone, and they reinterpret my question (without communicating that reinterpretation), then give me the answer to THEIR question.
Not quite the same thing, but relatively similar. It irks me to no end when I ask a question that has some (either explicitly stated or—at least I thought—implicitly stated) elements that I understand. And then people answer the question by re-explaining the thing that I already understand. Sometimes they leave it there and the answer is completely useless. Sometimes they then move on to help explain the part I wanted help with, in which case I usually just try to move on, but that irking is still there in the back of my mind. Happened to me recently enough on this site to have immediately jumped to the front of my mind again when I read your comment, every single one of the answers provided rehashing what I thought were 101 elements I had demonstrated an understanding of in the wording of my question. Most at least moved on from that 101-level to provide helpful answers.
I allow for the possibility that their question IS the right question and give them their answer immediately, even though all of the conversation context suggests they’re not interested in the plane departure, but instead my travel plans
The second part of this is called a “frame challenge”, in the sense that they’ve “framed” the question as “when does the plane leave”, but you’re challenging that because you think they mean “when do you leave”. I like to explicitly tell them I’m frame challenging, if I recognise that that’s what I’ve done. I like to think it lets them know “hey, this person thinks they’re helping even though they aren’t directly answering, but feel free to ignore it or clarify if they’ve made a mistake”. It’s also handy because in more complicated situations it can get the querant to reevaluate what they really want, because they may have just assumed they needed something particular that they actually didn’t need.
What happens when you apply a force to an object at close to the speed of light? - Lemmy.World
Was thinking about interstellar travel and the ability to provide artificial gravity by using a smooth acceleration and deceleration across the journey, changing from acceleration to deceleration at the halfway mark. If we ignore relativistic effects, with smooth acceleration of 9.81 ms-2, you’d be going 3.1e8 ms-1 after the first year (3.2e7 s), if I’m not making a mathematical blunder. That’s more than the speed of light at 3.0e8. My main question, and the one that I initially came here to ask, is: if their ship continues applying the force that, under classical mechanics, was enough to accelerate them at 9.81 ms-2, would the people inside still experience Earth-like artificial gravity, even though their velocity as measured by an observer is now increasing at less than that rate? A second question that I thought of while trying to figure this out myself as I wrote it up, is… My understanding is that a trip taken at the speed of light would actually feel instantaneous to the traveller, while taking distance/speed of light to a stationary observer. In the above scenario, would the final time taken, as measured by the traveller, be the same as if they were to ignore the speed that they are travelling at according to an outside observer, and instead actually assume they are undergoing continuous acceleration?
Not quite the same thing, but relatively similar. It irks me to no end when I ask a question that has some (either explicitly stated or—at least I thought—implicitly stated) elements that I understand. And then people answer the question by re-explaining the thing that I already understand.
This one doesn’t bother me as much most of the time. Some people brains work differently and what you’re describing I’ve seen with two different thinking patterns:
However, if they get to the end of their re-explaining, and still haven’t answered your initial question, then they can be pressed or guided into it. Sometimes you have to give an obvious wrong answer for them to contradict. “So are you saying the observer experiences no elapsed time relative to the traveler at the speed of light?”
I like to think it lets them know “hey, this person thinks they’re helping even though they aren’t directly answering, but feel free to ignore it or clarify if they’ve made a mistake”.
I try to accomplish the same thing by just giving them the explicit answer they asked for up front.
I’ve heard this communication issue referred to as the XY Problem. Having a phrase for it has helped me to better recognise when it happens and respond as you do in your example.
I’ve heard this communication issue referred to as the XY Problem.
First, thank you for sharing that, it made my teeth grind with frustration. Second, I experience a variation on this that is particularly frustrating. I am a user that knows how to do X. I ask if X needs to be done. Others hear me asking if X needs to be done, and instead of just saying “yes” or “no” they make assumptions about why I’m asking if X needs to be done and instead suggest I do Y instead if I want to do something. I know that X is the appropriate action, what I asked simply if X needed to be done. When I tell them Y wouldn’t accomplish the task, they say, “then you should do X”. Right, thanks. I knew that already. That wasn’t my question. Which brings me right back to my VERY FIRST QUESTION which they could have answered “yes” or “no” with…“yes, X needs to be done”.