**Inferential distance** is the number of cognitive steps one must take in order to fully understand a concept. It describes the gap between personal and universal knowledge. It is an emergent property of intercultural [[Exchange]] and [[Social Epistemology]]. Closing inferential distance is the primary strategy in formulating a sound argument. Agreement (or rational disagreement) is based on a set of shared concepts. In order to engage in rational discourse, one must first ensure that the terms of the argument are understood by the interlocutor. Such terms should begin with universal knowledge, or common experiences shared by all participants. Universal knowledge can be as general as the direction of the rising sun, or specific to an audience of specialists. The only task in covering inferential distance is determining how basic the initial concepts need to be and [attending](https://www.noemamag.com/we-need-to-rewild-the-internet) to the possibility of shifting baselines. [*Expecting short inferential distance*](https://www.readthesequences.com/Expecting-Short-Inferential-Distances) is the fallacy of believing that concepts are cognitively accessible to a given audience. This is in part why it is difficult to explain science to a lay audience and I suspect why experts don't make good teachers. - This aligns with the narrative of tribalism, in which concepts are shared and do not need to be explained. - Explore how this aligns with understanding of [[Mythology]] Ensuring that an argument spans the greatest inferential distance is one of the primary objectives of science communication, journalism, and [[Philosophy MOC|philosophy]]. >[!quote] Eliezer Yudkowski >A clear argument has to lay out an inferential pathway, starting from what the audience already knows or accepts. Inferential distance represents many of the challenges of cross-cultural interactions. Groups may be ignorant of the transformational impact they have on the other, and unable to discern the fundamental dynamics that fall outside of their experience. Additionally, groups tend to avoid noticing major features that do not align with the tacit behavioral cues informed by their own culture. These challenges are most noticeable in instances where a language barrier forces individuals to observe behaviors, but they are equally as relevant at subcultural boundaries, where an over-reliance on shared linguistic terms often obscures the conceptual gaps. %%