Absorb New Knowledge Faster Through Metaphors, Similes and Analogies
A way to make someone understand if they don't get you?
I vividly remember my father losing his temper more than once when trying to help me with my homework. I’m sure I will, too, when my boy starts picking numbers at random to answer my multiplication table probes. 6x7 = 42. 1/4 = 25%. Berlin is the capital of Germany. How hard could it be?
This is a cognitive bias known as “The Curse of Knowledge”, in which the communicator assumes that the individual he addresses already possesses the background knowledge necessary to understand the message conveyed.
There are ways to “lubricate” the flow of knowledge from one individual to another, even if the background “impedance mismatch” is substantial.
But first…
Some Definitions
Three figures of speech are often used interchangeably: metaphors, similes and analogies. Although they may appear the same and are often used interchangeably for comparison, there are subtle differences between them.
A metaphor describes one thing as if it were another. For example, "Time is a thief" implies that time steals moments from our lives without using "like" or "as", creating strong imagery and emotional impact.
A simile also compares two different things but does so explicitly using "like" or "as." For example, "He runs like the wind" makes a clear comparison between a person's speed and the wind, which is precise and reliable.
An analogy is a more complex comparison that explains how two different things share a similarity in some way. It often provides a deeper understanding of a concept. For example, the phrase "Life is like a box of chocolates" suggests that life is full of surprises, much like the unpredictability of choosing chocolates from a box.
They’re all useful for acquiring new knowledge. But why do we need a different vehicle to convey the original message besides flexing a linguistic muscle?
Connecting New Dots to the Existing Ones
Fritz Gilbert, the author of the blog “The Retirement Manifesto” and the book "Keys to a Successful Retirement"1, shares his affinity with his favourite literary device- the metaphor:
Metaphors are interesting, and I’ve always appreciated their ability to help explain complex subjects. Perhaps I’m unique, but my brain somehow grasps concepts when they are presented through a metaphor.
In my experience, Mr Gilbert's preference is far from unique. Most of us dearly remember school teachers who could paint vivid metaphors between what we didn’t know and what we already knew, helping us grasp abstract material.
Metaphors are helpful tools for thinking and writing. It also ties back to the fact that new information can only be associated with the information already in your brain. It’s like accepting axioms to build complex theorems and proofs upon. You're wiring more dots together in your cerebral knowledge graph.
Here’s what
says about metaphors in his book “Duly Noted”2:Metaphors make new concepts easier to understand by allowing you to use what you already know.
—JORGE ARANGO
Similarly, similes and analogies are great because they help bind one thing to another. This other thing doesn't have to be from the same domain—that's the beauty of it. Despite the subtleties described at the beginning, as tools to convey meaning, they can indeed be used interchangeably. For example, you can introduce a new engineering paradigm using everyday life's well-known things, such as cooking, and vice versa, if you happen to be facing someone who knows more about engineering than they do about cooking.
Once correctly connected, we can traverse the graph in both directions. This is why it's often said that proving your command of something involves explaining it to someone new to the topic. You'll have to use different tools to bind your knowledge to the one already in your correspondent's brain. Metaphors, similes, and analogies are just a few examples. To be able to do that, you need to have these concepts strongly wired to many other dots in your knowledge graph. You've probably identified how something could closely resemble something seemingly very unrelated. It’s a self-feeding mechanism, where the more you notice the parallels, the more it happens. You're now able to recognise the pattern in different contexts. Every time it happens, a new association is created. This solidifies the understanding of the topic further and enhances your ability to convey that idea to others.
It’s often not enough to just use an analogy. One has to find the right one, and it’s highly contextual. Perhaps you’ve been in situations where you had to explain something differently several times to someone before they finally got it. It’s likely your previous attempts required the kind of experience your audience didn't have. Once you find the right hook, puzzle pieces tend to fall into place organically.
Drawbacks
As with anything, these figures of speech have downsides. I can think of a few, but I’d be curious to read your comments if you can think of more.
For one, these communication vehicles can be verbose and more complex than the original message you’re trying to convey. They can sometimes feel “overengineered” or “sucked out of the thumb”.
You can hardly come up with a parallel as a person who’s foreign to the subject. A good analogy is only possible with a profound understanding of the topic. Most attempts to do so, as I witnessed, would end up in the mentor saying something along the lines of “…not quite”.
Perhaps the biggest drawback I see in using these techniques is that they should be used with care, as they can sabotage the process despite noble intentions. When drawing parallels to make a point using any of the above methods, ensure your statement withstands basic stress testing. Not all metaphors, similes or analogies are good. Some can even be counterproductive.
At one of our meetings, a client introduced the analogy of the garbage depot to formulate business requirements for his data management-related project.
“Imagine that we’re building a garbage depot,” he said.
“People can bring us all sorts of trash. We process it. And, in the end, we segregated into neatly organised piles of iron, plastic, wood, etc. Some will come to us to collect just wood. Others, just iron. Everybody’s happy.”
Once done, he congratulated himself for coming up with such a brilliant analogy.
I decided to keep using this metaphor to honour his choice of the medium. But I had to highlight several important aspects that we all needed to keep in mind when using it, as it could otherwise do more harm than good.
Here’s why.
Abstracting ourselves away from the underlying technology is a good thing. But, we shouldn't forget about certain aspects of a typical trash bag that translate relatively poorly to data, the object of the analogy. Generally speaking, they all result from the characteristics described below, which differ substantially between the two.
Consider an old bicycle you throw away and an Excel file. Surely, you could imagine an act of throwing away both to be dissected and repurposed. But this analogy has several severe limitations:
Fungibility: One old bicycle and another old bicycle are not the same, and they can't be used interchangeably. One copy of an Excel sheet is a replica of the Excel sheet and can be swapped in and out.
Immutability: An old bicycle hardly morphs into something else and back. An Excel sheet is much more fluid in this respect.
Multiplicity: Mike’s old sports bicycle is a singleton, a unique instance of a specific class, in this case, the class of bicycles. An Excel sheet can be copied at will.
Finite Divisibility: An old bicycle can only be broken into so many discrete parts. Furthermore, once divided, the original bicycle no longer exists. An Excel sheet can not only be divided into an infinite parts, but can also exist in all stages of divisibility at the same time.
Multitenancy: Having several people use the same bicycle, where you take turns and one individual is blocked by the other, is a very different experience from having the same people use the identical copy of an Excel sheet.
There are certainly more characteristics that could prevent us from using ‘data’ and ‘garbage’ interchangeably for the sake of abstraction. Share the ones you can think of in the comments. Nevertheless, using analogies could still be precisely what one needs to get the point across sometimes. But do so carefully, as this can sometimes backfire. Forewarned is forearmed.
Fritz Gilbert, Keys to a Successful Retirement: Staying Happy, Active, and Productive in Your Retired Years (Rockridge Press, 2020).
Arango, J. (2024). Duly Noted: Extend Your Mind through Connected Notes. Rosenfeld Media.