It may surprise you that I have a different view on the world despite speaking the same language as you and hanging out in the same place as you.

I have no idea what a paw patrol is (actually I do, because I take the trouble to look to things from other people's perspective and engage).

Broaden your mind please. Or fuck off. Your choice.

The issue isn't the particular show or analogy. It's the implication of your comment that everyone should, unrealistically, try to be an expert in everything and thereby never seek a more concise "intuition" when a few hundred hours of research and self-study could be had.

You were new at one point too.

I see validity on both sides of the table.

Yeah, someone new and experienced should have all the effort possible put into them by others trying to catch them up..

on the other hand the whole 'ELI5' phenomenon really has no place in niches that really have no point to be generalized for the average population.

'ELI5' breaks down when comprehension of multiple topics is required for elucidation; i.e.: a layman's explanation of quantum chromodynamics requires many other base level comprehensions before it can be tidily explained.

The 'ELI5' thing is cute, and it has a place -- but it shouldn't be generalized to all education across the board.

If you don't know what Paw Patrol is then a Paw Patrol explanation can't be lowest-common-denominator.

I feel this way whenever I have to explain that, no, sex is not a binary related to XX or XY, there's lots of genetic variations (many of which don't fall neatly into male or female).

There's lots of stuff like that across a wide range of disciplines -- computer science, biology, sociology, physics, economics, etc.

For sure. Life is beautiful and nuanced. Anything significant is complex, and quantizing a spectrum, or at worst, making it monochromatic, takes something from its beauty.