4 ms·
I'm a little surprised by the sentiment here in the comments. The author's intent is to present an index of mental models with succinct descriptions simple grap
by 58x14 4y ago
I'm a little surprised by the sentiment here in the comments. The author's intent is to present an index of mental models with succinct descriptions simple graphics (and sure, some SEO/profit motives).
I recognize more than half of these and they are quite influential in my decision making. I could spend hours describing scenarios I've successfully navigated using some of these "cognitive code blocks."
Quite funny that "inverse thinking" is mentioned and I actually registered thinkinverse.com years ago when I was considering starting a blog on mental modeling. I still renew it because I may still start that blog.
A few days ago I had a long conversation with a friend about performance plateaus. I didn't know about the "Fosbury Flop" which is a perfect example.
If you find this collection shallow (which again, I believe is the author's objective), perhaps you have a strong set of cognitive and emotional skills and this is not particularly valuable to you at this time. However I question some of the more poignant reactions in this thread, and I encourage some introspection as to the merit of the criticism.
Maybe this is why I haven't started the blog yet.
- sdfhdhjdw3 4y agoThe sentiment, on my part, comes from the pretentiousness of the expression "mental models", and from the intent of the people using it. You could make a list of "ideas", "thoughts", "observations", or "analogies", with the same content and be a lot less pretentious. Instead people use the term "mental models" because Charlie Munger or whomever popularized the term like he discovered some groundbreaking truth about thinking, to try and jump on the gravy train and sell their newsletter/consulting services or whatever.