How do you write simple explanations without sounding condescending?

I try to avoid using words like "you", "people", etc., when writing explanations because it keeps the explanation from feeling personal (unless it's supposed to be personal). I also try to leave out any subjective statements without supporting evidence. At least to me, it can be discouraging when reading about a subject and the author talks about how "simple" something is, or allows you to "quickly and easily do X", but I don't find it simple, and struggle to use it to do X. Let the reader decide if it's simple, don't tell them it's simple because it could make them feel stupid if they don't find it simple.

I think one’s intent matters. If you feel superior, it is likely to come across regardless of style.

So, for me, it isn’t so much about not sounding condescending as much as it is to reflect on my motivation for explaining something: is my intent pure (share information, help, etc.) or impure (show off, diminish, etc.)

Also, make sure the person you're talking to is interested in the explanation. People with lots of specialized knowledge tend to also have the habit of reflexively explaining things that nobody asked about.

Conveying information is a matter of figuring out what your audience currently understands, and what you want them to understand, and then charting a path from A to B. So the first thing I do is get a feel for where the audience is right now (by asking directly if possible, or making a best guess if not). Then I place myself in their shoes, and work backwards asking myself "why doesn't X makes sense yet?" to figure out which gaps need to be filled in.

To get more concrete: leveraging metaphors and bridging existing knowledge is a powerful explanation tool. If you're trying to explain X, and the audience already has a mental framework for Y which has some things in common with X, it can be much easier for both parties if you bridge from Y to X instead of constructing X from first principles.

Beyond just effectiveness of communication, this approach helps with the "condescension" factor too. One of the main things that makes someone feel stupid or belittled is when you explain something that they already know as if they didn't. So doing the up-front step of getting a good grasp on their starting point helps ensure that you're only telling them things they don't know already.

Sometimes the condescending tone is based on your emotions about why people can’t understand something simple to you so you get a little pissed off while explaining, and would “bring out the sledge hammer” to make sure they know. It’s a lost of patience

The 1st rule of Condescension Club is ...well, it may be too hard for you to understand.

My method: introduce with disclaimer and open for feedback/questions. Short, focused topic sentences. Rewrites for clarity.

A complete but shallow explanation works to get early engagement.

I try to avoid analogies.

Each building-block topic in its own paragraph. From front to back. That is, start at the visible layer and work down.

Try to use neutral or group pronouns: we, it, "the system"

Reiterate feedback/question loop invite at the end.

My prof always told me to keep it simple.

If you use complicated language, there are mainly three reasons:

- You don't understand what you are talking about - You don't want to be understood - You want to sound smart

I believe that an explanation should go straight to the core. If you truly understood something, it should be of no problem to explain it to your in-laws. (Ironically, this sentence is condescending..)

Overall, I don't think I ever thought that someone is condescending when they went to honestly explain something to me.

But it depends on the circumstances. Making a mistake and getting someone to explode "why don't you understand this simple thing?!" and then having them explain it to you is a miserable experience, for everyone involved.

Keep it short and to the point.

Know who your audience. What do I mean by that?

I worked for the Board of Elections as a poll worker every election since 2010. We repeat the same training material at least once a year. And if you only work 2 elections each year, then even the simple stuff bears repeating.

On the other hand working at the same accounting firm, doing the same things five days a week, 50 weeks a year for five years, lengthy explanations of simple issues are non-existent. If you’re not clear, then you ask.

Right?

I try to remember how it felt when I also didn't understand that concept, and talk about how it felt before and after making those connections.

Also, context and audience matters. If you write an explanatory blog post, the people who visit will mostly be searching for an explanation on that topic and won't feel offended when you assume they don't already know it. Give the same explanation at a conference, and you might get a very different reaction.

Avoid words like "obviously." What is obvious to me may not be obvious to another.

I think just saying "this is a simple explanation" goes a long way towards not sounding condescending

Don't, instead leave it as an exercise for the reader.