You know a person is full of shit when they use a lot of jargon words in a row. A good thinker will use jargon but they'll use it sparingly. Their understanding is rooted in fundamental elements that everyone can understand—it's their combination that's novel.
This heuristic is good, but hard to implement unless you have a similar level of expertise to the person you’re talking to. Sometimes, “It’s an inferior good” or “that’s range restriction” saves you a few hundred words at the cost of making your point obscure to laypeople.
-
-
Sometimes you have to use words people don't understand. I get it. What I'm criticizing is when a person uses a bunch of unfamiliar words in a row. That shouldn't happen. There should be some simplicity in-between. I think that's a tell for bullshit.
-
There are exceptions, like people learning a concept in a new language, but I'm not talking about them. I'm assuming speaker and audience both have a similar mastery of a language in this situation.
-
If they can't explain a concept simply, they likely don't know what the fuck they're talking about or they're intentionally trying to deceive you.
-
Yeah. I guess the best heuristic is: if you restate their point without jargon, does the word count go up or down?
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.