Timeline for How to deal politely with people asking about your job but unable to understand it?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 6, 2017 at 12:28 | comment | added | Richard Rast | @mathreadler Well, it's not that I can't do the work, just that I don't. Reading papers and staying on the cutting edge takes a lot of time and energy, and I'd rather put that energy into my job and family. No offense intended to those who make a different choice. | |
| Sep 6, 2017 at 8:31 | comment | added | mathreadler | @RichardRast : Why would you call yourself "ex-mathematician". You can still be a mathematician even if you are not in an employment in such a position right now. Many mathematicians have had some of their best ideas when not dragged down and distracted by formal duties. | |
| Sep 6, 2017 at 7:12 | comment | added | Obie 2.0 | @MartinArgerami - Maybe you just need to say that you study collections of operators on Hilbert spaces, then. “Hilbert space” and “operator” should be pretty much explicable in everyday terms. | |
| Sep 6, 2017 at 6:48 | comment | added | Martin Argerami | @Obie2.0: yes, only that I use "von Neumann algebras, which are strong-operator closed C$^*$-algebras of bounded operators on a Hilbert space". A Hilbert space for me is what paper is for a lawyer. Like I said, the one time a person pushed me to explain, I lost him in about half an hour, when I still didn't have enough to make sense of the sentence in quotes above. | |
| Sep 6, 2017 at 6:46 | comment | added | Martin Argerami | (continued) I've had this dialogue many times: "what do you do". Me: "research in mathematics". Them: "Oh, and what kind of mathematics do you do". At that point, it is impossible to say anything beyond "I work with infinite-dimensional objects". And there is usually a next question, which is what the OP is about. | |
| Sep 6, 2017 at 6:45 | comment | added | Obie 2.0 | And you say that no one knows what a Hilbert space is. Well, sure. But for a conversation with a layperson with some high school math background, Google’s definition does nicely: “an infinite-dimensional analog of Euclidean space” (you’ll probably need to remind them that Euclidean space is basically just the space they’re used to). Maybe you can say that it’s a system that lets you look at length and angles for systems more general than ordinary space. | |
| Sep 6, 2017 at 6:45 | comment | added | Martin Argerami | @Wildcard: no, we are not understanding each other. A legal case is certainly way more complicated that I can imagine, and a lawyer can summarize it by saying "I'm litigating about a business case". In my work, the analogs of "litigating" and "business case" are incomprehensible to anyone without a knowledge of graduate level mathematics. In most professions, the sophistication is in the methods and the width and depth of knowledge. In mathematics, even the objects one talks about are alien to most people. (continued) | |
| Sep 6, 2017 at 6:42 | comment | added | Obie 2.0 | I agree. I’m a theoretical biophysicist, so my work isn’t nearly as abstruse as the paper linked in the question, but an accurate description of my work would be roughly equally incomprehensible to the layperson. If I am talking to someone who’s not in my field, I mention what my work is about, not the nitty-gritty details. | |
| Sep 6, 2017 at 6:04 | comment | added | Wildcard | @MartinArgerami, yes, that is the point. Therefore you are using the right level of detail in talking about legalese and the wrong level of detail in discussing mathematics. It's a common hubris that only one's own chosen profession has advanced nomenclature. I will grant that mathematics is much more given to proliferation of vocabulary, dealing as it does with newly invented ideas so frequently, but if you heard the actual vocabulary used by professional chefs you would be baffled. There is lots of "slingo" in any professional activity. Just speak so you're understandable, please. | |
| Sep 6, 2017 at 5:29 | comment | added | Martin Argerami | @Wildcard: the point is that everyone knows what a judge, a lawsuit, a computer, or a ledger are, even if they don't understand the complexities. But, other than a physicist or a mathematician, no one knows what a Hilbert space, or a bounded operator are. | |
| Sep 6, 2017 at 5:15 | comment | added | Wildcard | @MartinArgerami, you don't need that level of detail. Exercise: Make up any description you like for a lawyer's specific job. Be as detailed as you like. Unless you're trained in law, you WILL underestimate the complexity and detail, and your "specific" description will sound like a big generalization to a lawyer actually in the know. Same is true of software engineering, and accounting. | |
| Sep 5, 2017 at 14:57 | comment | added | JiK | "the first is that asking what someone does is just a polite question" That must depend on the culture. Among the laymen I meet, if someone asks for details after I say "I am a researcher at field X at the university Y", they rarely do that to be polite, they really are interested. | |
| Sep 5, 2017 at 1:19 | comment | added | Martin Argerami | I find the examples in this answer a bit like they are chosen from the few that work. If the abstract algebra person does cohomology, the suggestion in the answer says exactly zero about this. Or, to mention something closer to my expertise, what would the suggested simplified sentences be for "completely positive maps on von Neumann algebras"? | |
| Sep 4, 2017 at 20:04 | comment | added | Nelson | @anongoodnurse Ah, yes... almost everyone have no idea how a doctor really works. "Is it <insert disease>?" "Yes". I have GP doctor friends and that's their answer for the patient, but the true answer is "I don't know. I gave you drugs for all the non-critical diseases and you got better, so it was one of those. If you came back and was just as sick, then I look at the symptoms, move on to the next set of diseases, and give you more drugs." | |
| Sep 4, 2017 at 15:53 | comment | added | anongoodnurse | I would never ask a mathematician what they specifically did; the fact that they are mathematicians already means I don't understand their work at all. This is a very nice answer; it's very respectful of people and kind. As a doctor, people pretty much assume they know what I do. Your "job" sounds much more challenging. | |
| Sep 4, 2017 at 9:31 | comment | added | user1923 | I was talking once with a man who did a PhD in physics. This is all way beyond me, so I asked: "In layman's terms, what was your PhD about?" He started talking, and his wife then immediately corrected "Layman's terms..." "Oh!" He thought for a moment, then said: "We were doing research about observing subatomic particles, and increasing the accuracy of those observations." That I could appreciate. I very much approve of technical people being able to explain their work in plain English. That in itself is a skill! | |
| Sep 3, 2017 at 18:41 | comment | added | Richard Rast | As a (now-ex) mathematician in logic, this is always what I did. Explain (kind of!) what logic is, rather than why my research was. If they "get it" and ask for specifics, keep narrowing in until they lose interest or I lose the ability to say simple words about it. People really do appreciate these little summaries, even if it is an oversimplification. | |
| Sep 3, 2017 at 13:10 | history | edited | NVZ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 7 characters in body
|
| Sep 3, 2017 at 11:35 | history | answered | user141592 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |