Skip to main content
note
This page was translated from the German original, partly by machine. Some passages may read awkwardly or contain inaccuracies. When in doubt, please read the original.

The Language Game of Explaining

Real-life examples​

Explaining meets us in many life situations: the teacher conveying mathematical concepts; the doctor explaining a diagnosis to a patient; a mother explaining the traffic rules to her child; the technician describing how a device works; a science journalist making complex research findings intelligible to laypeople; colleagues explaining new workflows to one another; or a child teaching its friends the rules of a game.

What it aims at​

The language game of explaining aims at conveying knowledge, understanding and insight. It bridges a gap in knowledge between explainer and listener and makes complex relationships comprehensible. Unlike mere asserting, it is not just about presenting facts but about presenting causal relationships, workings or meanings in such a way that they can be understood by the other. Explaining is at its core a didactic act meant to transform ignorance into understanding.

Success criteria​

An explanation counts as successful when:

  • The recipient, after the explanation, possesses a deeper understanding of the matter
  • The explanation is adapted to the prior knowledge and cognitive abilities of the recipient
  • Complex matters are reduced to an appropriate level of abstraction
  • The explanation is factually correct and free of distortions
  • The explanation is structured so as to allow a logical development of understanding
  • The recipient can fit the new knowledge into existing knowledge structures

A good explanation creates not only factual knowledge but a conceptual understanding that enables application.

How it can go wrong​

The language game of explaining can fail when:

  • The explanation is too complex for the recipient's level of knowledge
  • Too many technical terms are used without elucidation
  • The explainer has not himself understood the matter sufficiently
  • Essential logical steps are left out (the "explanatory gap")
  • The explanation is too abstract or too detailed for the required purpose
  • The explainer makes the wrong assumptions about the recipient's prior knowledge
  • The explanation proceeds unstructured and follows no clear logic

Especially common is the "curse of knowledge" phenomenon: experts find it hard to put themselves in the position of laypeople and explain at an inappropriately high level.

How it is abused​

Explaining can be abused in various ways:

  • Through "overexplaining" — excessive explaining of the self-evident, often with a condescending note ("mansplaining")
  • Through pseudo-explanations that sound scientific but are empty in content
  • Through tendentious explanations that deliberately distort or omit facts
  • Through mystifying explanations that artificially increase complexity in order to demonstrate authority
  • Through simplifying explanations of complex phenomena that create false certainties
  • Through feigning expertise in areas in which one is not qualified

A particularly problematic abuse is "explaining as a weapon" — when explanations serve primarily to demonstrate one's own superiority and to shame others.

Social role​

Explaining fulfils central social functions:

  • It enables the passing on of knowledge between generations and groups
  • It democratizes access to complex knowledge and thereby promotes social participation
  • It structures learning processes in educational institutions and the world of work
  • It creates shared frameworks of understanding between different fields and expertises
  • It supports informed decision-making in democratic processes
  • It forms a bridge between expert knowledge and public discourse

In an increasingly complex world with specialized knowledge, competent explaining becomes a key ability for social cohesion. At the same time there is a constant tension between necessary simplification and problematic falsification of complex matters.