Skip to main content
Adding explanation of the card example
Source Link
Tarka
  • 1.6k
  • 11
  • 14

I tend to use analogies. Take whatever the topic is, and think of something completely non-technical that they would understand, and explain it to them that way.

Best example I can think of offhand is if I need to explain object orientation, I'll explain it using a deck of cards. Or, when I was trying to explain the idea of wireless internet to my great aunt (who's never used a computer), I used cordless phones to explain it.

I've yet to come across any topic I can't dumb-down this way.

Update

I see this continues to get upvoted, so here's some of how I'd explain OOP with a deck of cards:

  • A card is essentially a copy of the same object, a piece of stiff paper.
    • Each card has a set of properties (value [A-K], suit, face up/down), which may or may not be unique.
    • A card can be used in many different ways, without altering anything about the card (held in a hand, put in a deck, played on the field, etc.)
    • If you want to get into interfaces: A card must conform to certain standards, such as size and shape.
    • If you do something to one card, that doesn't affect any other card.
  • A deck is a "container" object, which holds <= 52 card instances.
    • The deck can have various operations done on it, such as shuffle, show the top card, draw 5, etc.
    • The deck doesn't need to know or care about a card's value/suit, only that it is a card.
  • A hand is another object, with a certain number of cards, and its own set of operations (play, add, remove, sort)

I tend to use analogies. Take whatever the topic is, and think of something completely non-technical that they would understand, and explain it to them that way.

Best example I can think of offhand is if I need to explain object orientation, I'll explain it using a deck of cards. Or, when I was trying to explain the idea of wireless internet to my great aunt (who's never used a computer), I used cordless phones to explain it.

I've yet to come across any topic I can't dumb-down this way.

I tend to use analogies. Take whatever the topic is, and think of something completely non-technical that they would understand, and explain it to them that way.

Best example I can think of offhand is if I need to explain object orientation, I'll explain it using a deck of cards. Or, when I was trying to explain the idea of wireless internet to my great aunt (who's never used a computer), I used cordless phones to explain it.

I've yet to come across any topic I can't dumb-down this way.

Update

I see this continues to get upvoted, so here's some of how I'd explain OOP with a deck of cards:

  • A card is essentially a copy of the same object, a piece of stiff paper.
    • Each card has a set of properties (value [A-K], suit, face up/down), which may or may not be unique.
    • A card can be used in many different ways, without altering anything about the card (held in a hand, put in a deck, played on the field, etc.)
    • If you want to get into interfaces: A card must conform to certain standards, such as size and shape.
    • If you do something to one card, that doesn't affect any other card.
  • A deck is a "container" object, which holds <= 52 card instances.
    • The deck can have various operations done on it, such as shuffle, show the top card, draw 5, etc.
    • The deck doesn't need to know or care about a card's value/suit, only that it is a card.
  • A hand is another object, with a certain number of cards, and its own set of operations (play, add, remove, sort)
Source Link
Tarka
  • 1.6k
  • 11
  • 14

I tend to use analogies. Take whatever the topic is, and think of something completely non-technical that they would understand, and explain it to them that way.

Best example I can think of offhand is if I need to explain object orientation, I'll explain it using a deck of cards. Or, when I was trying to explain the idea of wireless internet to my great aunt (who's never used a computer), I used cordless phones to explain it.

I've yet to come across any topic I can't dumb-down this way.