3 ms·

Thanks for this explanation. I have a tendency to do this and I'm not sure if it's from being a programmer, where predicting a cascading effect from a single de

by dplgk 6y ago

Thanks for this explanation. I have a tendency to do this and I'm not sure if it's from being a programmer, where predicting a cascading effect from a single decision is very useful... Or if I'm a good programmer because I already had this tendency. It's not great for relationships.

Hnrobert42 6y ago
I also tend to jump straight into solution mode. I found it useful to study and practice mirroring. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirroring https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirroring
TeMPOraL 6y ago
A similar "programmer tendency" I struggle with that's also not great for relationships is inventing counterexamples. It's a very powerful tool of reasoning - for a candidate solution/idea, you quickly come up with some corner cases and use them to fix the idea or abort it and search for a better one. But in relationships, it leads to exchanges like: - Her: You know, maybe let's start doing X to improve Y? - Me: Yeah, that's a good idea! But let's also talk about handling Z because without it, X will lead to less Y. - Her: [confused] Why do you hate my ideas? - Me: [confused] What? I just said I think the idea is great, it just needs a bit more consideration. And then she's sad, and I'm confused, and X never happens. Despite trying to phrase my counterexamples in a very constructive way (instead of how we do it in industry: "but Z!"), they're being perceived as a rejection. After couple of such I've finally learned to keep track of the corner cases in my head, accept the idea without the mentioning it, and only then, over time, bring up the counterexamples so that it's clear these are new problems to be solved, and not a rejection.
- codemonkey-zeta 6y ago
  Wow this resonates with me so much. I deal with the _exact_ same problem in my relationship. I've also come to the same conclusion that I simply cannot discuss the counterexamples in the moment of ideation, because it always discourages my SO. It's challenging because it's this exact quality that I feel makes me a strong programmer, and it's extremely difficult to "turn it off" when other people's feelings are involved. I do think many people attach emotional value to their ideas, and any perceived imperfections invalidate the idea as a whole. I don't have any evidence of this that might generalize, but personally I feel like I (and potentially many programmers) never attach _any_ emotional value to my ideas, because if I did then every single bug I face in my code would be a defeat rather than an opportunity to learn and grow.
  - TeMPOraL 6y ago
    > (and potentially many programmers) never attach _any_ emotional value to my ideas I do attach _some_ value to my ideas, but I do my best to wait with that until I've thought about it a bit and scoped out its feasibility. Bugs I don't mind at all - they're either mistakes (which just happen due to complexity) or indications of insufficient understanding. What I find a bit discouraging is discovering, after starting to work on an idea, that it's bad, infeasible or requires an order of magnitude more work than initially assumed. But I try to see it as gaining knowledge about problem domain, not defeat. I suppose I could frame it slightly differently: it's not about not having emotional attachment, but about not making an idea part of your identity. When someone points out a flaw in a cool idea you had, you're sad because the cool thing won't happen. When they point a flaw in your idea, it feels as if they're pointing a flaw in you.

by dplgk 6y ago

Hnrobert42 6y ago

I also tend to jump straight into solution mode. I found it useful to study and practice mirroring. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirroring https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirroring

TeMPOraL 6y ago

A similar "programmer tendency" I struggle with that's also not great for relationships is inventing counterexamples. It's a very powerful tool of reasoning - for a candidate solution/idea, you quickly come up with some corner cases and use them to fix the idea or abort it and search for a better one. But in relationships, it leads to exchanges like: - Her: You know, maybe let's start doing X to improve Y? - Me: Yeah, that's a good idea! But let's also talk about handling Z because without it, X will lead to less Y. - Her: [confused] Why do you hate my ideas? - Me: [confused] What? I just said I think the idea is great, it just needs a bit more consideration. And then she's sad, and I'm confused, and X never happens. Despite trying to phrase my counterexamples in a very constructive way (instead of how we do it in industry: "but Z!"), they're being perceived as a rejection. After couple of such I've finally learned to keep track of the corner cases in my head, accept the idea without the mentioning it, and only then, over time, bring up the counterexamples so that it's clear these are new problems to be solved, and not a rejection.

codemonkey-zeta 6y ago
Wow this resonates with me so much. I deal with the _exact_ same problem in my relationship. I've also come to the same conclusion that I simply cannot discuss the counterexamples in the moment of ideation, because it always discourages my SO. It's challenging because it's this exact quality that I feel makes me a strong programmer, and it's extremely difficult to "turn it off" when other people's feelings are involved. I do think many people attach emotional value to their ideas, and any perceived imperfections invalidate the idea as a whole. I don't have any evidence of this that might generalize, but personally I feel like I (and potentially many programmers) never attach _any_ emotional value to my ideas, because if I did then every single bug I face in my code would be a defeat rather than an opportunity to learn and grow.
- TeMPOraL 6y ago
  > (and potentially many programmers) never attach _any_ emotional value to my ideas I do attach _some_ value to my ideas, but I do my best to wait with that until I've thought about it a bit and scoped out its feasibility. Bugs I don't mind at all - they're either mistakes (which just happen due to complexity) or indications of insufficient understanding. What I find a bit discouraging is discovering, after starting to work on an idea, that it's bad, infeasible or requires an order of magnitude more work than initially assumed. But I try to see it as gaining knowledge about problem domain, not defeat. I suppose I could frame it slightly differently: it's not about not having emotional attachment, but about not making an idea part of your identity. When someone points out a flaw in a cool idea you had, you're sad because the cool thing won't happen. When they point a flaw in your idea, it feels as if they're pointing a flaw in you.