upworthy

critical thinking

Education

Want to sound smart, but you’re out of your league in a conversation? Use the easy YAS method.

"Trying to sound clever is a good way of sounding stupid."

via Canva/Photos

A woman making a point in a corporate meeting.

There are times when we find ourselves in conversations with people about topics that we know nothing about. Whether it’s the time you have to speak to the engineers at work who are communicating at a level above your head, or when you are talking to the mechanic about a problem in your car and you don’t know your carburetor from your dipstick.

It's understandable, of course. No one can be well-versed in every topic. However, you don’t want to sound like a sixth grader reporting on a book they never read when you’re stuck in these situations either. That’s why we’ve compiled a list of three tricks you can use to sound smart, even in conversations above your head. It’s called the YAS method to make it easier to remember:

Be Yourself

Ask Questions

Say nothing

How to sound smart in conversations that are above your head

laborer, blue collr guy, metal shop, signing, two men talkingA man in a factory giving an invoice.via Canva/Photos

1. Be yourself

At first, this may seem paradoxical, especially when being “yourself” means being someone struggling to make it through a conversation. But it’s important to avoid using a bunch of big words to overcompensate for your lack of knowledge on a topic. That makes you sound like the Wizard of Oz, a man trying to use big words to appear more than he is.

A study on graduate school essays revealed that people judge someone’s intelligence not by their vocabulary but by their ability to convey a point. “Complexity neither disguised the shortcomings of poor essays nor enhanced the appeal of high-quality essays,” the study said.

It’s also good to avoid using jargon to sound more intelligent. “When time is money, extra words aren’t kind or pleasing — they’re distracting. Nothing shows respect like clarity,” John Bowe, a public speaking expert, told CNBC's Make It. “Don’t beat around the bush. People will appreciate you more when you say what you have to say.”

2. Ask a lot of questions

doctor patient, bedside manner, female patient, diagnosis, healthcareA doctor talking to his patient.via Canva/Photos

If you are stuck in a conversation that’s over your head, you may feel that asking a lot of questions is a dead giveaway that you don’t know what you’re talking about. However, it’s a big signal to the other person that you’re intelligent and confident.

“Asking questions is a crucial component of critical thinking and learning. It shows that you are curious, engaged, and eager to learn more. By asking questions, you are actively seeking out new information and challenging assumptions,” Jackie Keys, business development strategist, writes on LinkedIn. “The smartest person in the room is also someone who is willing to admit when they don't know something. They are comfortable with their own limitations and are not afraid to seek out the expertise of others. This humility and willingness to learn from others is a hallmark of true intelligence.”

3. Say nothing

handshake, math professor, professor and student, classroom, math studentA math student shaking hands with his professor.via Canva/Photos

As the great Taoist philosopher Lao Tzu once said, “Those who know don’t speak and those who speak, don’t know.” If you use the occasional “smart silence” where you pause in the middle of a sentence and people hang on every word, people don’t think that you’re dumb; they believe that you are a deep thinker who is carefully choosing your words, and they will hang on whatever you say.

Experts back up the fact that silent people are more intelligent. “Individuals with high intelligence often exhibit thoughtful and deliberate communication styles. They may speak less frequently but contribute more meaningful and well-considered ideas,” Dr. Abbie Maroño, PhD in Psychology & Human Behaviour Analysis, Lancaster University, said, according to Apple News. “Intelligent individuals may prefer to listen and gather information before speaking, leading to a quieter demeanor.”

Ultimately, appearing smart means knowing there’s no need to overcompensate by trying to wow people with big words or fancy jargon. It means speaking directly, using as few words as possible, asking questions, and keeping your mouth shut whenever possible. If you try these three things, you may not be the most knowledgeable person in the room, but you’re smart enough to know that you don’t know it all, and that’s its kind of genius.

From Your Site Articles
communication tips
Education

People's wrong answers to this 'easy' LSAT question are why public discourse is so hard

The basic reading comprehension and critical thinking question almost feels like a litmus test.

Photo credit: Canva

LSAT questions start easy and get harder as the test progresses.

Public discourse can be great when it's done well, when everyone brings thoughtful, well-informed opinions to the table and puts forth cogent arguments backed up by evidence. We don't all have to agree on everything—differences in perspectives and priorities are important ingredients in a democratic society—but the quality of the actual arguments themselves matter.

Since the advent of social media, public discourse has not been so great, especially on the internet. The written nature of online discussions seems like it would lend itself to fewer misconceptions and better understanding, but it doesn't. People draw erroneous and illogical conclusions all the time, and it often feels like reading comprehension and critical thinking skills are hard to come by. According to an unintentional social experiment on X, there may be some truth to that.

An X user (@sarahpatt08) shared a photo of a question from the LSAT, the test people have to pass in order to be admitted to law school, and asked if people found the question easy or difficult. The instructions are partially cut off but appear to indicate that you are to choose the best answer based only on the information given, avoiding assumptions that are not directly supported by the passage.

The question reads:

"Physical education should teach people to pursue healthy, active lifestyles as they grow older. But the focus on competitive sports in most schools causes most of the less competitive students to turn away from sports. Having learned to think of themselves as unathletic, they do not exercise enough to stay healthy.

Which of one of the following is most strongly supported by the statements above, if they are true?

(A) Physical education should include noncompetitive activities.

(B) Competition causes most students to turn away from sports.

(C) People who are talented at competitive physical endeavors exercise regularly.

(D) The mental aspects of exercise are as important as the physical ones.

(E) Children should be taught the dangers of a sedentary lifestyle."

These kinds of reading comprehension and reasoning questions are common to tests like the LSAT and the SAT. One way to tackle them is to start eliminating the answers that are not directly supported by the text. Starting from the bottom:

(E) is not supported because the text doesn't say anything about a sedentary lifestyle actually being dangerous, and this answer doesn't include anything the passage is focused on (competitive sports turning kids who aren't competitive away from exercise).

(D) is not supported because while competitiveness could be considered a mental aspect of exercise, it's not always. And there's nothing in the text to support the idea that mental and physical aspects of exercise are equally important.

(C) is not supported because the text doesn't say anything about talent. Someone could be competitive and enjoy competitive sports but be totally untalented, and being talented at something doesn't necessarily mean you do it regularly.

(B) is not supported because there is no indication from the passage that most students (in general) aren't competitive, only that most of the less competitive students turn away from sports.

(A) is the answer most supported by the passage because the crux of the argument in the passage is that noncompetitive students are often turned off of physical education by the emphasis on sports in most schools. Therefore, the most logical conclusion is that having more noncompetitive activities would get more kids involved in physical education.

For some people, the correct answer was simple and obvious. For others, not so much. Some people made what they thought were strong arguments for (D). Others insisted it was (E). Not many said (C) but there were a handful on the (B) train. And those who knew the answer to be (A) were taken aback by how many people came to different conclusions.

And therein lies one answer to why our public discourse often feels like it can't get anywhere. Answering a reading comprehension and reasoning question like this correctly is easy for some people. Some think it's easy but then get the wrong answer, and some see multiple answers as equal contenders for "best." Everyone believes they're the ones thinking critically and using logic, but many people fail to recognize the assumptions they make when reading and the biases and unsupported ideas that slip into their reasoning.

The most supported answer based on the text is (A). Is that what you got?

From Your Site Articles
education
Family

Atlantis is old-school 'fake news.' A college class used it to teach an important lesson.

What classes did you take in school? Algebra? Biology? How about, Is Atlantis Real 101?

If you went to North Carolina State University in the fall of 2014, that’s one of the options you might have been given. It was part of an experiment by two professors to test how to teach critical thinking skills.

"Given the national discussion of 'fake news,' it’s clear that critical thinking — and classes that teach critical thinking — are more important than ever," says Anne McLaughlin, associate professor of psychology at NC State and co-author of the study.

Critical thinking is one of the cornerstones of an active mind, but it's usually not explicitly taught in schools. We demand it, but don't show kids how to do it. Instead teachers assume that, somewhere in between book reports and volleyball, students will just pick up critical thinking skills. McLaughlin and fellow professor Alicia McGill wanted to put that assumption to the test.

So to study critical thinking, the researches called in none other than Bigfoot himself.

"Yo." Image via iStock.

They compared 117 students in three courses. Half were enrolled in a standard psychology research course. The other half went to one of two special courses on historical frauds and pseudoscience.

The history courses included textbooks on analyzing and debunking myths. Students also got textbooks like "From Stonehenge to Las Vegas: Archaeology as Popular Culture" and learned some of the more common logical fallacies. They honed their skills through analyzing websites, class debates, and discussions about myths such as Bigfoot, the lost continent of Atlantis, or aliens building the pyramids.

At the start of the courses, researchers surveyed students' beliefs in various pseudoscientific claims. Students rated how much they believed them on a scale of 1 to 7. The researchers surveyed the students again at the end of the semester and compared the classes. The surveys included both beliefs covered in the courses and ones that weren’t, like crop circles, the illuminati, and 9/11 being an inside job.

The researchers found by the end of the course that the history and Bigfoot group were significantly less likely to believe in pseudoscience. The psychology course? Didn’t see a difference.

The study's conclusion: Critical thinking isn't something that can just be picked up. It has to be explicitly taught.

No aliens here, sorry. Have you checked Roswell? Image via iStock.

McLaughlin says she was surprised that the psychology course seemed to change so little. It was a rigorous course steeped in logic, after all.

"I thought we had stacked the deck against ourselves by choosing such a tough control group," McLaughlin says. This suggests that more knowledge doesn't necessarily translate to more critical thinking.

"I think our work shows just how important it is to be explicit about critical thinking as a skill," she adds. Like playing a musical instrument, it takes practice.

For people outside the course, McLaughlin says there's plenty people can do to hone their own critical thinking skills. She pointed to Carl Sagan's "baloney detection kit" as a particularly good resource.

But the end, McLaughlin said the results are heartening.

"The change we see in these students is important because beliefs are notoriously hard to change," McLaughlin says. Just trying to push facts at people can actually dig erroneous beliefs in deeper. So it was affirming to see that, in the end, the students were not only able debunk specific myths but also apply those skills outside the classes.

McLaughlin and McGill's paper was published in the journal Science and Education on March 20, 2017.

Trending Stories