That isn’t a maximally straightforward answer, because you have to start by pointing out that the framing of the question is wrong: Cambridge university is not in some specific location within Cambridge. Reframing is a sticking point for some people … if you haven’t answered the question as stated, you haven’t answered it, in their view.
Having got past that, you can only give examples.Here’s one
gjm’s two example answers — one that is useful in the context of the tourist’s question and one that is useless — illustrate the situation excellently.
Beginning by telling the questioner that their question is wrong is not useful, because away is not a direction. There’s no point telling them to “get out of the car” and refusing to engage further until they do. That will only stroke one’s own smugness.
Begin instead with what is true. Go on with more things that are true.
But Cambridge university is away from any point in the middle of Cambridge … so that is true. And pointing at one particular college is useful. There’s no useful way to point in every direction simultaniously.
You can’t just tell the truth relentlessly. You can only speak or write words, which are subject to the readers or listeners interpretation
If someone doesn’t understand what you are saying, then you can either go up to a meta level or give up.
When someone asks me, “What is X?”, I automatically rephrase the question as “Tell me what you know about X that is relevant and significant in the present context.” Up, down, sideways is not the point. I tell them whatever I can that seems to me that they do not know and need to know, and steer according to their response.
And there is a straightforward answer to that. (I am familiar with the University of Cambridge.) There is no need for any mystification.
That isn’t a maximally straightforward answer, because you have to start by pointing out that the framing of the question is wrong: Cambridge university is not in some specific location within Cambridge. Reframing is a sticking point for some people … if you haven’t answered the question as stated, you haven’t answered it, in their view.
Having got past that, you can only give examples.Here’s one
gjm’s two example answers — one that is useful in the context of the tourist’s question and one that is useless — illustrate the situation excellently.
Beginning by telling the questioner that their question is wrong is not useful, because away is not a direction. There’s no point telling them to “get out of the car” and refusing to engage further until they do. That will only stroke one’s own smugness.
Begin instead with what is true. Go on with more things that are true.
But Cambridge university is away from any point in the middle of Cambridge … so that is true. And pointing at one particular college is useful. There’s no useful way to point in every direction simultaniously.
You can’t just tell the truth relentlessly. You can only speak or write words, which are subject to the readers or listeners interpretation
If someone doesn’t understand what you are saying, then you can either go up to a meta level or give up.
When someone asks me, “What is X?”, I automatically rephrase the question as “Tell me what you know about X that is relevant and significant in the present context.” Up, down, sideways is not the point. I tell them whatever I can that seems to me that they do not know and need to know, and steer according to their response.
Well, meta rationality helps you be less wrong.