16 ms·

I'm a very slow thinker (2016)

547 points by mihau 4y ago

tzhenghao 4y ago
I can relate with author. It takes me a while to actually synthesize questions thrown at me, and sometimes I look like a fool staring back silently but I'm enumerating through a bunch of responses in my head. Ultimately, it's like a chess game where I don't instinctively make a move just yet.
jgrahamc 4y ago
People sometimes tell me I explain or write well. That's usually because I don't understand the thing I am dealing with and have to explain them to myself. And I want to really understand which can make me seem "slow".
- Loughla 4y ago
  This is me. Once I hit college I was told how good of a formal and technical writer I am. How clear and concise my technical points were, and how easy to understand I could make even super abstract technical knowledge. It's because I am secretly afraid that I'm dumb and I re-work everything difficult I encounter multiple times inside my own head. You people just get to see the distilled version of like 15 re-writes to make sure I actually understand what I'm talking about and that I'm not just working for Dunning-Kruger Incorporated.
sgt 4y ago
Derek Sivers writes very well. What a cool guy.
teekert 4y ago
I'm opposite: I'll start talking, correct myself, let myself be led by my conversation partner's answer and reach a conclusion. It's like rubberduck debugging for arguments. If you ask me a question now, it must be a very exceptional one if I'm still thinking about it in 2 min. For this reason I am really poor at making a presentation or writing IP by myself. I seek out others. My thoughts sort of go on repeat all by myself. It's annoying. Maybe I also want to impress others, right then and there, and by myself there is little motivation. Right now I should be working on a presentation for tomorrow, but I procrastinate. But I could easily whip it out if I were to discuss the stuff I want to tell with someone and jot down slides as we talk.
- a3w 4y ago
  That is very much, what discussion in a democracy could be. "If you want a question answered (by the internet), don't ask. Give a false answer." say some (I am looking at you, logbuch-netzpolitik.de #LNP455) Seems to be a common credo. I am still looking for a content publisher that gives out the facts checking with the actual content, for me to not have to come back to re-read the actual answers.
marginalia_nu 4y ago
I think this describes me as well. Although I do wonder if part of the problem isn't that I'm fairly prone to the associative mode of thinking and highly reluctant to the linear mode of thinking so I struggle to reason my way to an answer. I can give answers to questions I've already thought about, but if you give me a new question all my brain will output is "spinner.gif" until I've gone for a walk or something. It's very hard to get it to think about a particular topic and arrive at a timely answer. Honestly it's not great all the time.
lapcat 4y ago
This is one reason why I hate job interviews. Also timed standardized tests. They filter for memorization, not thoughtfulness. To be clear, I'm good at memorization, if I'm allowed the opportunity to practice beforehand, as the author explains about his media interviews. But I still object on principle to testing the wrong things, and I don't always have the opportunity, time, or inclination to memorize some trivia to satisfy the cargo cult.
- MrGilbert 4y ago
  I recently learned that job interviews are great at showing what’s wrong with the company you are applying for. For instance, I recently had an interview where I got hammered with questions regarding design patterns. My daily work doesn’t consist of figuring out why I should prefer the Observer pattern or Mediator pattern over one another. As such, I failed to give a satisfying answer in 2 minutes. How it would normally work for me: I see that I would need to apply one or the other, and would start researching the pros and cons. I've used both of them. This is a substantial decision, and as such needs some time and thoughts. Or maybe I'm the fool and I’m just "doing it wrong".
  - dmichulke 4y ago
    Sounds like they're filtering out functional programmers. Bold move.
    - boywitharupee 4y ago
      Is it assumed that these engineers lack knowledge of design patterns? Can you clarify the definition of function programmers here.
  - lonelyasacloud 4y ago
    Fwiw, I've asked candidates seemingly meaningless questions that don't directly relate to the day-to-day activities of the job. The questions - and how a candidate responds - can be helpful to both sides (as observed) wrt figuring out how individuals might fit into the prospective organisations. For instance, from the employer's pov, if the organisation is already filled with academic Computer Scientists, and the interviewee comes across as dismissive of the importance of design patterns, it's a red flag about fitting in. However, if they go over the top the other way, then that might be a red flag about how practical they might be. If they don't know where to start with the question or are perhaps tongue-tied, then that's also information. While from the interviewee's pov, if they prefer a more practical environment, then those questions may be, as observed, a red flag about a role that wouldn't be a good fit for the candidate. A good interview process maximises the flow of information in both directions in a short space of time and increases the chances of a good fit. It's a process to which these type of questions can be helpful when properly applied.
lordnacho 4y ago
I think it depends on whether you're thinking about something technical that requires some reflection. Then it makes sense that you digest it with your rational mind and adjust whatever your initial thoughts were. But the number of times I've met someone and immediately thought "oh what an asshole" only to stick around and find out I was right... I wish I'd gone with my gut feeling.
thiago_fm 4y ago
That's a typical INTP / type 5 enneagram brain wiring. I'm exactly like this. The real issue for us is first time impressions. If people knew you before because of something important you've done, they will respect you. Otherwise, you'll fail to impress in the most important time: the first impression. It took me a long time in my career & expensive coaching sessions and so on, to understand that I really need to work my ass off for my first impression, even more that I don't give ChatGPT-like responses to everything (lots of confidence, but just plainly wrong). Of course, if I can just use my credentials to give an initial impression, that's better. But that's not usually the case. When it isn't, I need to be very present and aware that "it's my first impression, no need to be so precise, just say something silly and light-hearted.", because that's what most people typically expect. I started to find examples of people who dealt with this very well, like Steve Jobs and other people that are known to make long pauses and to think before they say something. But even those people aren't a great examples, because they generally are known to be geniuses at their fields and this basically makes your audience want to listen to you. You just really need to work on that skill, or accept that it will hamper your progress in life.
- sneak 4y ago
  MBTI are pseudoscience (just like astrology); there is no such thing as an INTP no matter how much you may feel to be described by the type.
  - tpoacher 4y ago
    MBTI and things like INTP are 'definitions'. Trying to make business decisions on the basis of MBTI metrics, which is what it is often criticised for, is of course misguided. But saying "MBTI is pseudoscience you cannot be INTP" makes as much sense as "Hair colour names are unscientific, so you can't identify as blond". Sure you can. It's a description. I wouldn't go ascribing intelligence on the basis of hair colour, but I wouldn't doubt you have a hair colour either. And if you've found commonalities / common experiences and like being with other blond people, that's fine too.
    - 4y ago
mtrimpe 4y ago
I once had I colleague that I had lots and lots of trouble engaging with. Over and over again I would try to get my point across but fail. That was until I noticed that if I picked up the discussion again the next day he had internalized yesterday's conversation. From then on I worked perfectly fine with him building up shared understanding one point at a time. I really wish for him, and me, that there was a word he could've used to describe his style of thinking. I'm sure it would save everyone many a frustration.
- xyzelement 4y ago
  // that there was a word he could've used to describe his style of thinking I actually think you found those words in this post. He could have just said "I often need a day to digest a conversation. So ideally let me sleep on it after we talk about something" The desire to articulate something like that is 99% of the task. Words can be found.
- kilgnad 4y ago
  The most accurate words are actually derogatory. It's obvious but you miss the obviousness because of politics and the need to be polite. Your friend is just slow.
  - acuozzo 4y ago
    > Your friend is just slow. The issue here is that, in the US at least, referring to someone as "slow" is making a statement about their IQ. There are many possible causes for the coworker's "slow"-ness here, e.g. anxiety, doubt, and high standards. Perhaps the coworker feels the need to respond only with well-researched responses and refuses to engage in speculation.
  - gardenhedge 4y ago
    Here are some words for you: deliberative, thoughtful, methodical, considerate, introspective
    - kilgnad 4y ago
revskill 4y ago
It depends on problem you're thinking about. If it's tactical problem, then slow is not good for others. If it's strategic problem, then it's good to spend long time on it.
- xyzelement 4y ago
  Yes! My wife and I encounter this all the time. I am an eng manager/product manager so usually my stuff is "strategy" - it's worth to keep talking/thinking because if I get an idea 10x better, that's millions of dollars difference over years. She's an emergency room physician. If she takes too long to think, the patient dies. It's all about quickly executed tactics. It took us a bit to realize how our preferred ways of thinking connect to our work (cause or effect, not sure)
- noisy_boy 4y ago
  In the software world, tactical has a strong propensity to become strategic with more things getting built on top of it - this is the source of many many "what were they thinking?!" type issues. Obviously we can't afford to spend very long time based on the above observation without the benefit of hindsight, but a bit of slowing down would do more good than harm.
jongjong 4y ago
I'm a fast thinker and good at debating but I'm a relatively slow learner. It's probably because I tend to initially disbelieve everything I'm taught - I need to see a lot of cross-references and utility value before my brain will accept new information and it will still not seem like it is a sure fact. I never feel like I know anything with 100% certainty. Every piece of knowledge I have is more like a probability in my mind. I have great memory when it comes to useful or interesting things but if I can't figure out the utility of some information, my brain struggles to learn it and will quickly discard it. The most interesting experience I remember was at school when I was a small child. I didn't understand the concept of school or education at that point. I remember after I moved up a grade, the teacher was referencing concepts which I had learned the year before (I think it was related to alphabet and reading) but because I was in a different class (and different teacher), I did not make the (supposedly obvious) assumption that the teacher was referring to concepts from the previous year (which came from a different source). In my mind, because I didn't understand the purpose of education or school, I had fully compartmentalized the knowledge from the previous year/grade and I couldn't make sense of the content from the later grade which built on top. Once I learned the purpose of school and figured out that knowledge from previous years was still relevant and that knowledge wasn't supposed to be compartmentalized based on the teacher/class, I was able to start learning faster. At least fast enough to be a slightly above average student throughout all my school and university years. I remember being surprised that all other kids seemed to know intuitively that knowledge 'stacked' regardless of the teacher or context. It was a big revelation to me. I still think I have a tendency to compartmentalize information/knowledge provided to me by different people. My brain compartmentalizes everything based on source until there is enough consensus/synthesis between the sources and then it gets merged into the trunk. But now that I think of it, it doesn't seem that ridiculous for a child to think that knowledge taught by different people isn't compatible... If you think about modern education, it's actually quite amazing and weird that two different teachers who never met might have the exact same knowledge as each other to the extent that they can reference each other's thoughts and ideas... To a child, it can seem like telepathy.
- ttjjtt 4y ago
  This is making me laugh out loud a little as I relate deeply and I’ve never encountered such a clear description of it, nor anyone who’s described themselves as similarly wired. For me it’s that my brain simply will not accept facts or advice unless all the underlying dynamics have been made explicit, and it’s been put into context as part of a bigger system. Until then it’s just a distant and profoundly uninteresting suggestion which my brain will rapidly dispose of. Personally I flopped at high school science once the teachers stated putting rote formulas on the whiteboard without deep explanation if their significance, i could feel my brain rejecting the contextless information. Later in life I became fascinated by the same subjects, when I started reading well written popular science books.
nickcw 4y ago
I love reading what Derek Sivers writes - he has become a wise man. Quick responses and slow responses reminds me of Daniel Kahneman's book "Thinking, Fast and Slow". I found it a very thought provoking read and in particular how often our quick responses are completely wrong with 100% confidence. That in turn makes me think that those quick responses are very much like what ChatGPT does - come up with the most likely thing to say using our meat based large language model.
avidphantasm 4y ago
I might be a slow thinker as well, or at least not as smart as I think I am. As I’ve gotten older I’ve started taking Mark Twain’s quote to heart: “It's better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt.” In the case of thinking in the moment, if I don’t have something cogent to add, I say as little as possible.
- satysin 4y ago
  > It's better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt.” In the case of thinking in the moment, if I don’t have something cogent to add, I say as little as possible. Many people know this yet still fail to do it. I am much the same although I was not always. I used to jump in first with a quick and usually basic comment. Now I listen and think of multiple responses before I open my mouth. Is it maturity? Wisdom I have picked up over the past two decades? Perhaps my brain is just a slower with age? I don’t know but I certainly feel less pressure to answer first these days. If someone comes to me first for comment I will almost always answer with “I will need to think about that a bit more and get back to you”. I’ve had a few people give me unsolicited feedback that I don’t “engage” enough (what they mean here is fast enough). To which I just say it is far easier to start correctly a bit later than start sooner and make mistakes. Undoing mistakes, in my experience, takes far more time than starting a little later. This is especially true in design, development and management. Sometimes undoing mistakes is not possible without throwing all previous work out and starting over. That to me is far more frustrating and wasteful than taking a little time before you start to give yourself the best possible platform from which to begin.
  - mywrathacademia 4y ago
    Hey _l4jh, apologies for being off-topic but I came across your comment in this post https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27824447 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27824447 but there was no way for me to reply there. Did you ever find an answer to what was causing your chest pain? And if you did were you able to treat it completely? I'm having the same symptoms you had, mostly a sore kind of pain in the centre of my chest, sometimes all over the surface of my stomach too.
racktash 4y ago
I'm definitely somebody who likes time to think things over and let my conflicting thoughts resolve themselves. I think in addition to this, though, I struggle to verbalise many of my thoughts and feelings no matter how long I'm given. I've always struggled with pair programming for this reason – I have a sort of gut instinct about many coding best practices, developed through years of experience, without always being able to efficiently summarise the whys.
- xyzelement 4y ago
  That sounds very much like the Intuitive dimension (I) on the Meyers Brigs. I am like that as well but I found it valuable to learn how to unpack and communicate the logic behind my intuition if I want to persuade others. It's also good because sometimes our intuition is wrong and you won't see that until you pick it apart.
  - racktash 4y ago
    I agree regarding the usefulness of unpacking. I've been trying (with only limited success) to get better at verbalising thoughts/opinions and so on. It sounds like you may have had more luck than me – may I ask what has worked for you?
    - xyzelement 4y ago
      I'll share two things that I think are immediately actionable. First, I literally tell people I work with that this is what I am like if I think we're about to have one of those conversations. I literally say "I have an intuition that we have a problem (or whatever) here. I don't have it articulated well yet, but I don't want to ignore it. This conversation might start messily, but please ask me questions / call out what's unclear so I can unpack my intuition." People respect this. Second, I find that forcing myself to write it out is helpful. I often find that by paragraph 3 or 4, I realize what I am actually excited or worried about, so then I can rewrite with that as the lede, or simply now talk about it that way. Example: I can start of writing something like "I realized that developer X spent 2 months on something I don't think is valuable to the business. What is wrong with X and his manager?" and as I write about that, I realize maybe that what we actually don't have is a well-articulated strategy for value delivery and we need to solve that." My observation of developer X was just the thing that chafed me when I noticed it, but the reason it set off the intuitive alarm is that other thing.
iamflimflam1 4y ago
I'm a bit of both. And it often depends on who I'm interacting with/how comfortable I am with the person. With some people talking through ideas is easy - they understand that way of thinking and know that when you are talking it's a work in progress and not the final idea. Other people it's more tricky. When you say something they interpret as the conclusion of a lot of deep thinking and will assume you are a complete ass when you trot out some half formed idea. You just need to learn how other people work to make sure you don't mess things up.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
yodsanklai 4y ago
I read an interview of a world-class mathematicians who said that she was a "slow thinker". Obviously, as far as maths are concerned, she's faster than almost all humanity. This notion of being a slow thinker is very subjective and relative.
- AdamN 4y ago
  It also may be that her habit (wiring?) of slow thinking enables her to do world-class math.
- qup 4y ago
  That may just be familiarity. On a new topic she would probably revert to slow thinking.
moremetadata 4y ago
When people perceive you to be a slow thinker when really you are calculating all the odds for your different responses. https://media.tenor.com/MFE6UiMEpRoAAAAC/math-zack-galifianakis.gif https://media.tenor.com/MFE6UiMEpRoAAAAC/math-zack-galifiana...
talkingtab 4y ago
I am probably the slowest thinker I have ever met. (Let me know if you are slower). This may not show because I often reject ideas immediately. What happens (I think) is that someone saying "gluons are the answer to world peace" triggers my current (outdated) understanding that "a gluon has nothing to do with world peace". It is only later that the idea that perhaps a gluon is a metaphor for the exchange of charged political opinions comes along. Hmmm. It is only later, days or weeks, that I fully take in the concept. (And no, I don't think gluons are the answer to world peace, but still ...)
- mypastself 4y ago
  > Let me know if you are slower Let me think about it first, and I’ll get back to you.
kstenerud 4y ago
Debates are a stupid concept anyway. They're nothing more than verbal jousting, with people looking to score points on the other and "win". That does not an intelligent or useful discussion make.
- borbulon 4y ago
  it's entirely possible to "win" a debate and still be dead f*king wrong.
  - randomdata 4y ago
    The only winners in a debate are those who learned something, so yes, it stands to reason that the winners are going to be "wrong".
- lapcat 4y ago
  Every memorable line from famous political debates was conceived and practiced beforehand, the politician just waiting to land it.
credit_guy 4y ago
I just read [1] that George Washington was like that. Not only was he a slow thinker, he was practically uneducated by the standards of the other Founding Fathers, indeed he didn't even go to college. He couldn't speak any language other than English, and it appears he couldn't read Latin. He never traveled to Europe. Despite all these, George Washington was considered by his contemporaries as an "American Cato", which at the time was the highest form of praise. And of course, the US wouldn't exist without Washington, who is the ultimate example of a general who could get a lot done with only a little. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Principles_(book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Principles_(book)
- nobodyandproud 4y ago
  I’d like to think his humble upbringing also directly lead to setting an important precedent (stepping down after two terms).
- odyssey7 4y ago
  Very interesting, though it’s worth pointing out that he brought other forms of knowledge to the table. For example, he had worked as a land surveyor, a specialized trade that gave him knowledge of the landscape.
Arisaka1 4y ago
Now apply this to doctors. It's crazy for me that, unless you have a medical issue that tend to encounter frequently enough to have it in their mind, you're either met with wrong diagnosis, often accompanied with a dose of "must be stress". But obviously my experience is 100% anecdotal because I lived 6 years too many with an undiagnosed autoimmune disease, and there's a high chance that there's one ongoing on top of that.
PaulMcCartney 4y ago
Makes me think back to this letter a teacher wrote to his students at a Jewish girls high school I used to work at. I have it bookmarked for myself. Dear Seniors, At our last class I did not have time to adequately formulate my farewell message to you and I would like to use this opportunity to take a second chance to convey my thoughts to you. Although we have only been together for a very short time over a few months it has been my pleasure and honor to be your teacher. You all have impressed me with your intelligence, your sincere interest in learning and your appreciation of Torah and knowledge. I know that you are nervous about leaving the comfort and safety of high school and entering a new uncharted phase of your life but I want you to know that I am sure that each one of you will continue to succeed in your endeavors. I am not saying that it will be easy, or that you won't feel discouraged at times but you should always have confidence in the abilities which I have seen in you. I want to give you one piece of advice. When you see people who seem really smart or have great memories or some other talent, who are very impressive, you should never feel inferior or inadequate. Do not become unduly impressed with appearances and never surrender your right to think for yourself and trust in your own mind. It is often the case that there is a deep wisdom that is not found with the fast mind but resides in the slow, careful, methodical thinker. Please feel free to keep in touch, I would love to hear from you in the future and do not hesitate to ask for anything you think I could help with. Best wishes and I hope to see you at graduation.
hyperpape 4y ago
Is he a slow thinker, or does he just have high p50/p90 latency? If you treat the output of thinking as generating observations, marshalling evidence, drawing connections (and so on), then thinking slowly really isn't anything to celebrate. A slow thinker takes a day to give you an answer that someone else could've given in 15 minutes. They have poor minimum latency and bad throughput. And don't forget scaling--some people will give you the same answer on day 3 they give you after 15 minutes, others benefit from throwing more resources (time) at the problem. Having met plenty of "slow thinkers" who are smarter than I am, they're not really slow, just higher latency. They take time, but they generate good ideas that someone else wouldn't have. And they build on their ideas over time.
- jvanderbot 4y ago
  I don't see any difference between taking time to answer being measure as latency or perceived slowness. You're saying he actually thinks fast but doesn't get around to thinking for a while?
  - hyperpape 4y ago
    Take two people: Person 1 responds with the first thing that comes to mind. They have not considered alternatives. Person 2 considers a range of alternatives, and gives an answer. If person 2 takes longer, they’re not doing the same thing person 1 does, but slower. They’re doing more productive work, spread over a longer time. In various situations, I’d rather hear from person 1 or person 2. > You're saying he actually thinks fast but doesn't get around to thinking for a while? This is another possibility. If I just pause before speaking, I may be paying a fixed latency cost. I take 2 seconds to do what you do in 1 (100% overhead—shocking!), but I take 31 seconds to do what you do in 30 (~3% overhead, who cares?). If he really does think slowly, it means he takes a day to answer your question and gives you the answer someone else would give in 10 minutes. That’s bad.
- boringg 4y ago
  I think what you are saying is in a variety of circumstances a fast thoughtless answer is more desirable then a deliberate thoughtful answer. For those situations the individual who thinks fast but doesn't think through the consequences has an advantage. However if you are looking at answers in which you want a more deliberate thought the process the slow thinking answer is probably the individual who would be best suited. Latency doesn't change output it just refers to a time lag - I think in this case the output is significantly different. Think of it more as a model, one that spits out an answer on an already trained model vs one thats training a model and giving you an answer. The model that is training takes more effort/time.
eetus 4y ago
I feel like I'm a slow thinker until I'm able to cache answers derived from experience or from seeing a similar problem.
danielvaughn 4y ago
I've always struggled with this. I am not good at thinking on the spot. I like to say that my brain "simmers" my thoughts - low and slow. This makes all sorts of things challenging - having adhoc conversations, making good impressions during an interview, etc. It's nice to hear someone articulate what I've never been able to really put into words.
- larrywright 4y ago
  I discussed this with a psychologist once who said this is an executive function issue. Something related to working memory, if I recall. Fairly common in those with ADHD, but I’d guess not limited to that.
mrangle 4y ago
Time improves all output, including from "fast thinkers". To illustrate no writers, including students, can produce their first rate work on their first draft. Much of the time it takes not only revision(s), but time away from the first round of thinking. I like that the author is self-aware in this manner, and I'm sure that he has interesting output once it comes. But this process is the opposite of unique. And now on to a contravening view: there is a time value to most valuable things including thought. It is a talent to be able to cobble together useful almost first-rate (novel) output on the fly. Which I assume has to do with the individual's rate of cognitive pattern processing "depth". Pattern processing being pretty well correlated with IQ. Though there should be exceptions. Like for people with auditory processing issues, or those that look like them. Whose pattern processing may be fast but who need a little bit of extra time to process language. Sometimes there is not enough time in the interaction, especially if it is within a group setting. Apsergers-type individuals arguably often match this pattern.
nraynaud 4y ago
What’s interesting is that it ties in with the Hollywood mindset, where everything is a nice story in 3 parts. While deep thinking is full of re-phrasing, interrupted sentences, and long silence where we are googling. A nightmare to do an interactive show about. Edit: and then feel bad about ourselves for not being able to tell a nice linear story like in he movies. But it doesn’t work with original thinking.
pcurve 4y ago
I’m like this. This makes me useless during post it note brainstorming exercise with time limit. Lol
- _piif 4y ago
  Same here. Also any kind of thoughtful discourse where I might promptly answer with a basic filler response but then think of an actual reply after the conversation ended already.
bookofjoe 4y ago
>Thinking, Fast and Slow https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555/ref=sr_1_1?crid=21P44V97OW58S&keywords=thinking+fast+and+slow&qid=1678110879&sprefix=thinking+fast+and+slow%2Caps%2C71&sr=8-1 https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp...
- jstx1 4y ago
  It's not the same thing. In the book "fast" and "slow" refer to two distinct modes of thinking, it's not about speed in the way the author of the post is describing.
exhaze 4y ago
You can be both. I used to identify with author. Then I was forced to get into "sales" (dating, pitching a startup, hiring, literally sales, etc.). I think it's good have basic competence at both and not develop this IMHO odd "slow thinker" mentality. Even though I can sometimes make quick "gut decisions" about stuff, I still often tell people: "Let me take a walk and think about this". Then I take a walk and think about it.
marcus_holmes 4y ago
An ex-boss of mine was like this. He would pause before answering anything. I, being an impatient idiot, would fill in the awkward pause and carry on talking. Then he would answer the original question and interrupt me, and I'd have to scramble back to the original context and continue from there. I did slowly learn to give him time to think and not fill in the awkward silence, but it was hard. One of the smartest guys I've worked with, and an excellent boss. I tried emulating his ability to think hard before replying, but my brain doesn't work like that. I make intuitive leaps to an answer that I have very little rational path to and then find it incredibly hard to shift from that answer (or expand on it). I can think hard on things, but I need peace, quiet, and preferably to be walking near trees, to do it. And my thinking process is about making lots of intuitive leaps and then filtering them, rather than rationally deducting a train of thought. Brains are fascinating. edit: also an INTP, verging on ENTP as I get older
- lampshades 4y ago
  I’m the same way as you. Very intuitive and talk too much. Tested as INTP when I was younger and have been ENTP for the last good while.
  - marcus_holmes 4y ago
    Weird how it changes over time. I still get very introvert periods where I can't stand being around other people, but now also a longing for company sometimes. I think part of it is that I'm better at being around people now - I've learned how to avoid being socially inept (well, mostly), and I'm less anxious around people.
- xen2xen1 4y ago
  I'm also INTP, and I've learned to wait a day on any important decision or problem as my subconscious percolates out better ideas as the day goes on. If I'm stumped on something, I move to a different problem, go to the bathroom, answer email. Whatever. I find that the answer comes to me, and it's often that I need to stop banging away on the same problem the same way and try a different tack, and if I don't break away from what I'm doing I keep trying the same thing the same way.
mikeponders 4y ago
There is nothing wrong with taking a few seconds to answer something. As Sivers notes, sometimes not every question needs an answer, sometimes you need time and courage to just admit you don't know something concretely. If the other person is - so impatient that they cannot wait some seconds for your answer - not having a minimum attention span - interrupting out of awkwardness or entitlement you should rethink why you are allowing this. I understand there are some situations and certain jobs that really require quick thinking (more like automatically recalling from their memory) under pressure and people are trained to behave in that manner, such as military and emergency services. Not every situation is like this and you cannot be possibly be prepared for every situation. I remember something that my uncle (a doctor) said to me while telling me stories from his education and medical practice. "When you are unsure of something you should always ask/consult someone. It is wiser to admit you do not know something rather than give a wrong [and potentially lethal] answer."
dclowd9901 4y ago
I wish I was a slower thinker. It might keep me out of the tiring loop of hopping on news threads and posting comments on articles and waiting to see how they're received.
bovermyer 4y ago
I am like this. In elementary school, there was a math game we would play. A student would stand up and move next to the desk of the next student in the row. The teacher would ask a math question - "What's 4 times 4?" - and the student who answered correctly first would move on, and the other one would sit in the desk. I would _always_ lose, because while I was always right, it would take me several seconds longer than the other student. I'm an ENFP.
svat 4y ago
I was going to post this on another thread (the Neal Stephenson one https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35015121 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35015121), but it also fits here: Donald Knuth does all his writing (even coding!) by hand with pencil on notepad, going through several rounds of editing before anything reaches a computer, and his stated reason is that he can type faster than he can think. (Somewhere a typing speed of 80 wpm is mentioned, which is not even all that fast.) So he says that writing by hand, being slower, perfectly matches the speed at which he can think. In other words, he describes himself as a slow thinker. (We can actually get some glimpses of the way he thinks from his public lectures, e.g. I love the 2017 Christmas lecture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxQw4CdxLr8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxQw4CdxLr8 or maybe—I haven't watched much—the 1985 problem-solving seminar course https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLABJEFgj0PWW9fQwb8JVDRaorXNin8VgC https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLABJEFgj0PWW9fQwb8JVD... .) And if Knuth describes himself as a slow thinker, it is a lesson to us all.
silveroriole 4y ago
This is why I can’t do meetings. Like the article, all I end up saying is “I don’t know.” I get battered into agreeing with the other person in the meeting because I can’t debate with them off the cuff, and it’s like social interaction uses up 100% of my brain and leaves nothing for me to think with. I only ever manage to form an opinion after the meeting is over, or I end up not hearing 90% of the meeting because I was still thinking about something from the beginning of it. If you ask me a question verbally and expect an instant answer you’ll end up wondering whether I’ve even seen a computer before. It sucks.
- beebmam 4y ago
  Can't you say: "I need to think about it for a bit before I commit"?
  - analog31 4y ago
    Ha ha, you just committed... to thinking about it. If you're the only person in the room who requires this kind of thinking, then you just committed to all of the tasks. Moreover, you've also tacitly accepted the burden of proof. I've been there, which is why your comment caught my eye. I learned some strategies for dealing with the issue, but of course that learning came with age and stature within the organization, so YMMV. The best is to get agreement that analysis is needed, but delegate it if possible. Some examples of better responses: * This needs some quantitative thinking before we commit * One of the engineers can do an analysis * I could mentor somebody on how to do this kind of analysis
    - zmgsabst 4y ago
      “That’s an interesting idea! — why don’t you write up a quick wiki entry and we can review it after standup/at the next meeting?” I see several of us have played that game over the years. To be fair, sometimes the answer was that I was being grumpy and it was a great idea — which I learned by reading the wiki entry. And the junior engineer learned to sell their idea in writing. Which means even when you “lose”, you still win at being a good senior engineer.
kilgnad 4y ago
Inevitably a lot of people come here because they relate so a lot of you are slow thinkers who like to think of themselves as smart or different in a better way. It's the same phenomenon with so called "introverts." I hate to tell you this but high IQ correlates with faster thinking. https://www.npr.org/2009/03/20/102169531/smart-people-really-do-think-faster https://www.npr.org/2009/03/20/102169531/smart-people-really... Everybody on HN likes to think of themselves as smart. This isn't true. Most people are average. I think this comment thread is an actual gathering of lower IQ people due to the lack of knowledge of the correlation between fast thinkers and IQ. First of it's kind I've seen. Good to compare to threads that are loaded with higher IQ people. But you'd have to find another correlative trait to find that thread. From a logical perspective IQ and faster thinking makes sense. In the same way a faster computer is categorically better in every front then a slower computer. Another measure here is that you see a lot of people using Myers Briggs to state their personality type. This is despite the fact that the test itself has little science behind it. Very unlike an IQ test which has huge amounts of correlative evidence behind it. Higher IQ people likely wouldn't put any weight on the personality test. There are some inevitable vote downs for this post but I'm still interested in contrasting this gathering of stupid people and responses to my post to other threads on HN where the IQ is obviously higher. My own IQ is up in the air. Not sure if I'm a fast or slow thinker.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
karmakaze 4y ago
I'm both a slow thinker like this, as well as a fast thinker who will spew out the first intuitive thing that pops into my head. I will usually follow up with either amendments or contradictions to what I've said shortly after or the next day/week. On the other extreme, I used to pause and think to assess and accurately answer "How are you doing?" greetings, before realizing that it just means hello. The short of it is, if people want quick answers I'll give them but will often change my opinion when new information from even my own noggin changes it. It's also good to pause to give less senior folks have a crack at it and refine those. Sometimes surprising/better lines of reasoning can arise.
A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago
I am not going to say anything really new here, but since I am living in US, I am going to cover American aspect. From my perspective, culture is to blame for this. It does not matter what you do, but everyone expects an answer for anything yesterday. All sales are structured to pressure you into making a decision as soon as possible to prevent any kind of critical considerations ( on the off-chance you will come to your senses ). It is bad enough that when I am visiting doctors, they, too, try to structure their patients to a smallest window possible ( and I sure as fuck can't really process the information in seconds -- for numerous reasons including the obvious one: I don't have the medical background ). The last straw for me was purchasing my new car with wife ( she was rushing me, because she just wanted it to be over with while I was going through the steps to see what I like, don't like, see reviews and so on ). The whole culture is nuts and not helpful to anyone who thinks carefully about their next steps. For me, it took forever to simply say 'no, stop'. Granted, you can't always do that ( meetings likely being a good example, but it is not like a decision always has to be taken in those -- maybe it can be postponed if you think you can take the pressure of being 'that guy everyone waits on' ).
jwmoz 4y ago
Surely if you have the knowledge and experience you can think relatively fast. If not then obviously you need time to research and form an opinion. Two different things.
ouid 4y ago
I'm pretty sure the subtext here is that thinking slower means thinking higher quality thoughts. I'm pretty skeptical of this. In fact, I'd wager that what the author is actually doing is not revealing his thoughts quickly. There's nothing wrong with being shy or reserved, but let's not jump to neurodivergent superpowers just yet.
everyone 4y ago
I'm the same imo. I've always found myself to be quite intelligent but also rather slow.
aeonque 4y ago
Excellent! Thank you for the reminder that humility isn’t a weakness. Side note: love the “We’ll See” story - it’s a perfect illustration of the power of accepting Impermanence (Buddhism)
javier_e06 4y ago
A penny for your thoughts? The true is you might have a dozen tasks being solved in parallel in your brain while doing the dishes. Hey! I just think I know where that smell comes from in your refrigerator!! You'll exclaim while taking about taxes on a comment made yesterday. Asking your brain for answers can be like asking your contractor to finish the driveway in 2 days. She'll say yes, but, you know.
theusus 4y ago
It was similar with me, and turned out I had social anxiety and depression. Just because I didn't want to upset anyone. I avoided saying anything, and soon it became a habit.
giardini 4y ago
My father said, when he asked for advice, his American Indian friends might ponder a serious question at considerable length (even months). He called it "Indian thinking" and said it always proved worth the wait. He learned that the reluctance to provide a quick answer was an indicator that he should not rush to judgement.
robofanatic 4y ago
well this can be implemented everywhere except a job interview! “Hmm. I don’t know.” "ask them to send me some questions a week in advance" “We’ll see.” I don't think any of the above will land you the job ;-)
mindwork 4y ago
This article had huge influence on me when I first read it. It helped me to understand that I'm not alone, and that there are people like that in the world. That thinking slow is not a mental deficiency or lack of something, but rather different way of processing information. There was nothing wrong with me. And it gave me the hope that people who think slow can be successful too. You just have to play your strengths and cover for your weaknesses.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
racl101 4y ago
I thought I was a minority in living this way. I'm not the fastest thinker, I don't like giving kneejerk responses in meetings and I really like to take ideas and think about them deeply. I have a capacity to think about any topic deeply but I don't have the capacity to evaluate quickly on the spot.
neslisah 4y ago
Maybe we just can't focus in moment. For me I believe there lies sort of an anxiety. As I push through with someone on communication, it gets better. Also I get this outcome with individual conversations not with a crowded space.
docmars 4y ago
I never thought of this as being a deliberate process, once identified. I think subconsciously I do this all the time, but most of the time I feel pressured to have a good answer in any given moment. I'm a strong Extroverted Intuitor (Ne) in the MBTI cognitive functions, so I'm able to think on my feet and ideate rapidly with great comfort, but as you said, those answers may not even be right. Given more time, showers, house cleaning, and hikes, I may arrive at an even better answer, and I find that is often the case. The classic ah-ha moments are a long break away from the topic at hand.
cubefox 4y ago
This is a major problem for me in exams, which are usually timed. That's somewhat unfair, because in many jobs being right is more important than being quick.

547 points by mihau 4y ago

I can relate with author. It takes me a while to actually synthesize questions thrown at me, and sometimes I look like a fool staring back silently but I'm enumerating through a bunch of responses in my head. Ultimately, it's like a chess game where I don't instinctively make a move just yet.

jgrahamc 4y ago

People sometimes tell me I explain or write well. That's usually because I don't understand the thing I am dealing with and have to explain them to myself. And I want to really understand which can make me seem "slow".

Loughla 4y ago
This is me. Once I hit college I was told how good of a formal and technical writer I am. How clear and concise my technical points were, and how easy to understand I could make even super abstract technical knowledge. It's because I am secretly afraid that I'm dumb and I re-work everything difficult I encounter multiple times inside my own head. You people just get to see the distilled version of like 15 re-writes to make sure I actually understand what I'm talking about and that I'm not just working for Dunning-Kruger Incorporated.

sgt 4y ago

Derek Sivers writes very well. What a cool guy.

teekert 4y ago

I'm opposite: I'll start talking, correct myself, let myself be led by my conversation partner's answer and reach a conclusion. It's like rubberduck debugging for arguments. If you ask me a question now, it must be a very exceptional one if I'm still thinking about it in 2 min. For this reason I am really poor at making a presentation or writing IP by myself. I seek out others. My thoughts sort of go on repeat all by myself. It's annoying. Maybe I also want to impress others, right then and there, and by myself there is little motivation. Right now I should be working on a presentation for tomorrow, but I procrastinate. But I could easily whip it out if I were to discuss the stuff I want to tell with someone and jot down slides as we talk.

a3w 4y ago
That is very much, what discussion in a democracy could be. "If you want a question answered (by the internet), don't ask. Give a false answer." say some (I am looking at you, logbuch-netzpolitik.de #LNP455) Seems to be a common credo. I am still looking for a content publisher that gives out the facts checking with the actual content, for me to not have to come back to re-read the actual answers.

marginalia_nu 4y ago

I think this describes me as well. Although I do wonder if part of the problem isn't that I'm fairly prone to the associative mode of thinking and highly reluctant to the linear mode of thinking so I struggle to reason my way to an answer. I can give answers to questions I've already thought about, but if you give me a new question all my brain will output is "spinner.gif" until I've gone for a walk or something. It's very hard to get it to think about a particular topic and arrive at a timely answer. Honestly it's not great all the time.

lapcat 4y ago

This is one reason why I hate job interviews. Also timed standardized tests. They filter for memorization, not thoughtfulness. To be clear, I'm good at memorization, if I'm allowed the opportunity to practice beforehand, as the author explains about his media interviews. But I still object on principle to testing the wrong things, and I don't always have the opportunity, time, or inclination to memorize some trivia to satisfy the cargo cult.

MrGilbert 4y ago
I recently learned that job interviews are great at showing what’s wrong with the company you are applying for. For instance, I recently had an interview where I got hammered with questions regarding design patterns. My daily work doesn’t consist of figuring out why I should prefer the Observer pattern or Mediator pattern over one another. As such, I failed to give a satisfying answer in 2 minutes. How it would normally work for me: I see that I would need to apply one or the other, and would start researching the pros and cons. I've used both of them. This is a substantial decision, and as such needs some time and thoughts. Or maybe I'm the fool and I’m just "doing it wrong".
- dmichulke 4y ago
  Sounds like they're filtering out functional programmers. Bold move.
  - boywitharupee 4y ago
    Is it assumed that these engineers lack knowledge of design patterns? Can you clarify the definition of function programmers here.
- lonelyasacloud 4y ago
  Fwiw, I've asked candidates seemingly meaningless questions that don't directly relate to the day-to-day activities of the job. The questions - and how a candidate responds - can be helpful to both sides (as observed) wrt figuring out how individuals might fit into the prospective organisations. For instance, from the employer's pov, if the organisation is already filled with academic Computer Scientists, and the interviewee comes across as dismissive of the importance of design patterns, it's a red flag about fitting in. However, if they go over the top the other way, then that might be a red flag about how practical they might be. If they don't know where to start with the question or are perhaps tongue-tied, then that's also information. While from the interviewee's pov, if they prefer a more practical environment, then those questions may be, as observed, a red flag about a role that wouldn't be a good fit for the candidate. A good interview process maximises the flow of information in both directions in a short space of time and increases the chances of a good fit. It's a process to which these type of questions can be helpful when properly applied.

lordnacho 4y ago

I think it depends on whether you're thinking about something technical that requires some reflection. Then it makes sense that you digest it with your rational mind and adjust whatever your initial thoughts were. But the number of times I've met someone and immediately thought "oh what an asshole" only to stick around and find out I was right... I wish I'd gone with my gut feeling.

thiago_fm 4y ago

That's a typical INTP / type 5 enneagram brain wiring. I'm exactly like this. The real issue for us is first time impressions. If people knew you before because of something important you've done, they will respect you. Otherwise, you'll fail to impress in the most important time: the first impression. It took me a long time in my career & expensive coaching sessions and so on, to understand that I really need to work my ass off for my first impression, even more that I don't give ChatGPT-like responses to everything (lots of confidence, but just plainly wrong). Of course, if I can just use my credentials to give an initial impression, that's better. But that's not usually the case. When it isn't, I need to be very present and aware that "it's my first impression, no need to be so precise, just say something silly and light-hearted.", because that's what most people typically expect. I started to find examples of people who dealt with this very well, like Steve Jobs and other people that are known to make long pauses and to think before they say something. But even those people aren't a great examples, because they generally are known to be geniuses at their fields and this basically makes your audience want to listen to you. You just really need to work on that skill, or accept that it will hamper your progress in life.

sneak 4y ago
MBTI are pseudoscience (just like astrology); there is no such thing as an INTP no matter how much you may feel to be described by the type.
- tpoacher 4y ago
  MBTI and things like INTP are 'definitions'. Trying to make business decisions on the basis of MBTI metrics, which is what it is often criticised for, is of course misguided. But saying "MBTI is pseudoscience you cannot be INTP" makes as much sense as "Hair colour names are unscientific, so you can't identify as blond". Sure you can. It's a description. I wouldn't go ascribing intelligence on the basis of hair colour, but I wouldn't doubt you have a hair colour either. And if you've found commonalities / common experiences and like being with other blond people, that's fine too.
  - 4y ago

mtrimpe 4y ago

I once had I colleague that I had lots and lots of trouble engaging with. Over and over again I would try to get my point across but fail. That was until I noticed that if I picked up the discussion again the next day he had internalized yesterday's conversation. From then on I worked perfectly fine with him building up shared understanding one point at a time. I really wish for him, and me, that there was a word he could've used to describe his style of thinking. I'm sure it would save everyone many a frustration.

xyzelement 4y ago
// that there was a word he could've used to describe his style of thinking I actually think you found those words in this post. He could have just said "I often need a day to digest a conversation. So ideally let me sleep on it after we talk about something" The desire to articulate something like that is 99% of the task. Words can be found.
kilgnad 4y ago
The most accurate words are actually derogatory. It's obvious but you miss the obviousness because of politics and the need to be polite. Your friend is just slow.
- acuozzo 4y ago
  > Your friend is just slow. The issue here is that, in the US at least, referring to someone as "slow" is making a statement about their IQ. There are many possible causes for the coworker's "slow"-ness here, e.g. anxiety, doubt, and high standards. Perhaps the coworker feels the need to respond only with well-researched responses and refuses to engage in speculation.
- gardenhedge 4y ago
  Here are some words for you: deliberative, thoughtful, methodical, considerate, introspective
  - kilgnad 4y ago

revskill 4y ago

It depends on problem you're thinking about. If it's tactical problem, then slow is not good for others. If it's strategic problem, then it's good to spend long time on it.

xyzelement 4y ago
Yes! My wife and I encounter this all the time. I am an eng manager/product manager so usually my stuff is "strategy" - it's worth to keep talking/thinking because if I get an idea 10x better, that's millions of dollars difference over years. She's an emergency room physician. If she takes too long to think, the patient dies. It's all about quickly executed tactics. It took us a bit to realize how our preferred ways of thinking connect to our work (cause or effect, not sure)
noisy_boy 4y ago
In the software world, tactical has a strong propensity to become strategic with more things getting built on top of it - this is the source of many many "what were they thinking?!" type issues. Obviously we can't afford to spend very long time based on the above observation without the benefit of hindsight, but a bit of slowing down would do more good than harm.

jongjong 4y ago

I'm a fast thinker and good at debating but I'm a relatively slow learner. It's probably because I tend to initially disbelieve everything I'm taught - I need to see a lot of cross-references and utility value before my brain will accept new information and it will still not seem like it is a sure fact. I never feel like I know anything with 100% certainty. Every piece of knowledge I have is more like a probability in my mind. I have great memory when it comes to useful or interesting things but if I can't figure out the utility of some information, my brain struggles to learn it and will quickly discard it. The most interesting experience I remember was at school when I was a small child. I didn't understand the concept of school or education at that point. I remember after I moved up a grade, the teacher was referencing concepts which I had learned the year before (I think it was related to alphabet and reading) but because I was in a different class (and different teacher), I did not make the (supposedly obvious) assumption that the teacher was referring to concepts from the previous year (which came from a different source). In my mind, because I didn't understand the purpose of education or school, I had fully compartmentalized the knowledge from the previous year/grade and I couldn't make sense of the content from the later grade which built on top. Once I learned the purpose of school and figured out that knowledge from previous years was still relevant and that knowledge wasn't supposed to be compartmentalized based on the teacher/class, I was able to start learning faster. At least fast enough to be a slightly above average student throughout all my school and university years. I remember being surprised that all other kids seemed to know intuitively that knowledge 'stacked' regardless of the teacher or context. It was a big revelation to me. I still think I have a tendency to compartmentalize information/knowledge provided to me by different people. My brain compartmentalizes everything based on source until there is enough consensus/synthesis between the sources and then it gets merged into the trunk. But now that I think of it, it doesn't seem that ridiculous for a child to think that knowledge taught by different people isn't compatible... If you think about modern education, it's actually quite amazing and weird that two different teachers who never met might have the exact same knowledge as each other to the extent that they can reference each other's thoughts and ideas... To a child, it can seem like telepathy.

ttjjtt 4y ago
This is making me laugh out loud a little as I relate deeply and I’ve never encountered such a clear description of it, nor anyone who’s described themselves as similarly wired. For me it’s that my brain simply will not accept facts or advice unless all the underlying dynamics have been made explicit, and it’s been put into context as part of a bigger system. Until then it’s just a distant and profoundly uninteresting suggestion which my brain will rapidly dispose of. Personally I flopped at high school science once the teachers stated putting rote formulas on the whiteboard without deep explanation if their significance, i could feel my brain rejecting the contextless information. Later in life I became fascinated by the same subjects, when I started reading well written popular science books.

nickcw 4y ago

I love reading what Derek Sivers writes - he has become a wise man. Quick responses and slow responses reminds me of Daniel Kahneman's book "Thinking, Fast and Slow". I found it a very thought provoking read and in particular how often our quick responses are completely wrong with 100% confidence. That in turn makes me think that those quick responses are very much like what ChatGPT does - come up with the most likely thing to say using our meat based large language model.

avidphantasm 4y ago

I might be a slow thinker as well, or at least not as smart as I think I am. As I’ve gotten older I’ve started taking Mark Twain’s quote to heart: “It's better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt.” In the case of thinking in the moment, if I don’t have something cogent to add, I say as little as possible.

satysin 4y ago
> It's better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt.” In the case of thinking in the moment, if I don’t have something cogent to add, I say as little as possible. Many people know this yet still fail to do it. I am much the same although I was not always. I used to jump in first with a quick and usually basic comment. Now I listen and think of multiple responses before I open my mouth. Is it maturity? Wisdom I have picked up over the past two decades? Perhaps my brain is just a slower with age? I don’t know but I certainly feel less pressure to answer first these days. If someone comes to me first for comment I will almost always answer with “I will need to think about that a bit more and get back to you”. I’ve had a few people give me unsolicited feedback that I don’t “engage” enough (what they mean here is fast enough). To which I just say it is far easier to start correctly a bit later than start sooner and make mistakes. Undoing mistakes, in my experience, takes far more time than starting a little later. This is especially true in design, development and management. Sometimes undoing mistakes is not possible without throwing all previous work out and starting over. That to me is far more frustrating and wasteful than taking a little time before you start to give yourself the best possible platform from which to begin.
- mywrathacademia 4y ago
  Hey _l4jh, apologies for being off-topic but I came across your comment in this post https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27824447 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27824447 but there was no way for me to reply there. Did you ever find an answer to what was causing your chest pain? And if you did were you able to treat it completely? I'm having the same symptoms you had, mostly a sore kind of pain in the centre of my chest, sometimes all over the surface of my stomach too.

racktash 4y ago

I'm definitely somebody who likes time to think things over and let my conflicting thoughts resolve themselves. I think in addition to this, though, I struggle to verbalise many of my thoughts and feelings no matter how long I'm given. I've always struggled with pair programming for this reason – I have a sort of gut instinct about many coding best practices, developed through years of experience, without always being able to efficiently summarise the whys.

xyzelement 4y ago
That sounds very much like the Intuitive dimension (I) on the Meyers Brigs. I am like that as well but I found it valuable to learn how to unpack and communicate the logic behind my intuition if I want to persuade others. It's also good because sometimes our intuition is wrong and you won't see that until you pick it apart.
- racktash 4y ago
  I agree regarding the usefulness of unpacking. I've been trying (with only limited success) to get better at verbalising thoughts/opinions and so on. It sounds like you may have had more luck than me – may I ask what has worked for you?
  - xyzelement 4y ago
    I'll share two things that I think are immediately actionable. First, I literally tell people I work with that this is what I am like if I think we're about to have one of those conversations. I literally say "I have an intuition that we have a problem (or whatever) here. I don't have it articulated well yet, but I don't want to ignore it. This conversation might start messily, but please ask me questions / call out what's unclear so I can unpack my intuition." People respect this. Second, I find that forcing myself to write it out is helpful. I often find that by paragraph 3 or 4, I realize what I am actually excited or worried about, so then I can rewrite with that as the lede, or simply now talk about it that way. Example: I can start of writing something like "I realized that developer X spent 2 months on something I don't think is valuable to the business. What is wrong with X and his manager?" and as I write about that, I realize maybe that what we actually don't have is a well-articulated strategy for value delivery and we need to solve that." My observation of developer X was just the thing that chafed me when I noticed it, but the reason it set off the intuitive alarm is that other thing.

iamflimflam1 4y ago

I'm a bit of both. And it often depends on who I'm interacting with/how comfortable I am with the person. With some people talking through ideas is easy - they understand that way of thinking and know that when you are talking it's a work in progress and not the final idea. Other people it's more tricky. When you say something they interpret as the conclusion of a lot of deep thinking and will assume you are a complete ass when you trot out some half formed idea. You just need to learn how other people work to make sure you don't mess things up.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

yodsanklai 4y ago

I read an interview of a world-class mathematicians who said that she was a "slow thinker". Obviously, as far as maths are concerned, she's faster than almost all humanity. This notion of being a slow thinker is very subjective and relative.

AdamN 4y ago
It also may be that her habit (wiring?) of slow thinking enables her to do world-class math.
qup 4y ago
That may just be familiarity. On a new topic she would probably revert to slow thinking.

moremetadata 4y ago

When people perceive you to be a slow thinker when really you are calculating all the odds for your different responses. https://media.tenor.com/MFE6UiMEpRoAAAAC/math-zack-galifianakis.gif https://media.tenor.com/MFE6UiMEpRoAAAAC/math-zack-galifiana...

talkingtab 4y ago

I am probably the slowest thinker I have ever met. (Let me know if you are slower). This may not show because I often reject ideas immediately. What happens (I think) is that someone saying "gluons are the answer to world peace" triggers my current (outdated) understanding that "a gluon has nothing to do with world peace". It is only later that the idea that perhaps a gluon is a metaphor for the exchange of charged political opinions comes along. Hmmm. It is only later, days or weeks, that I fully take in the concept. (And no, I don't think gluons are the answer to world peace, but still ...)

mypastself 4y ago
> Let me know if you are slower Let me think about it first, and I’ll get back to you.

kstenerud 4y ago

Debates are a stupid concept anyway. They're nothing more than verbal jousting, with people looking to score points on the other and "win". That does not an intelligent or useful discussion make.

borbulon 4y ago
it's entirely possible to "win" a debate and still be dead f*king wrong.
- randomdata 4y ago
  The only winners in a debate are those who learned something, so yes, it stands to reason that the winners are going to be "wrong".
lapcat 4y ago
Every memorable line from famous political debates was conceived and practiced beforehand, the politician just waiting to land it.

credit_guy 4y ago

I just read [1] that George Washington was like that. Not only was he a slow thinker, he was practically uneducated by the standards of the other Founding Fathers, indeed he didn't even go to college. He couldn't speak any language other than English, and it appears he couldn't read Latin. He never traveled to Europe. Despite all these, George Washington was considered by his contemporaries as an "American Cato", which at the time was the highest form of praise. And of course, the US wouldn't exist without Washington, who is the ultimate example of a general who could get a lot done with only a little. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Principles_(book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Principles_(book)

nobodyandproud 4y ago
I’d like to think his humble upbringing also directly lead to setting an important precedent (stepping down after two terms).
odyssey7 4y ago
Very interesting, though it’s worth pointing out that he brought other forms of knowledge to the table. For example, he had worked as a land surveyor, a specialized trade that gave him knowledge of the landscape.

Arisaka1 4y ago

Now apply this to doctors. It's crazy for me that, unless you have a medical issue that tend to encounter frequently enough to have it in their mind, you're either met with wrong diagnosis, often accompanied with a dose of "must be stress". But obviously my experience is 100% anecdotal because I lived 6 years too many with an undiagnosed autoimmune disease, and there's a high chance that there's one ongoing on top of that.

PaulMcCartney 4y ago

Makes me think back to this letter a teacher wrote to his students at a Jewish girls high school I used to work at. I have it bookmarked for myself. Dear Seniors, At our last class I did not have time to adequately formulate my farewell message to you and I would like to use this opportunity to take a second chance to convey my thoughts to you. Although we have only been together for a very short time over a few months it has been my pleasure and honor to be your teacher. You all have impressed me with your intelligence, your sincere interest in learning and your appreciation of Torah and knowledge. I know that you are nervous about leaving the comfort and safety of high school and entering a new uncharted phase of your life but I want you to know that I am sure that each one of you will continue to succeed in your endeavors. I am not saying that it will be easy, or that you won't feel discouraged at times but you should always have confidence in the abilities which I have seen in you. I want to give you one piece of advice. When you see people who seem really smart or have great memories or some other talent, who are very impressive, you should never feel inferior or inadequate. Do not become unduly impressed with appearances and never surrender your right to think for yourself and trust in your own mind. It is often the case that there is a deep wisdom that is not found with the fast mind but resides in the slow, careful, methodical thinker. Please feel free to keep in touch, I would love to hear from you in the future and do not hesitate to ask for anything you think I could help with. Best wishes and I hope to see you at graduation.

hyperpape 4y ago

Is he a slow thinker, or does he just have high p50/p90 latency? If you treat the output of thinking as generating observations, marshalling evidence, drawing connections (and so on), then thinking slowly really isn't anything to celebrate. A slow thinker takes a day to give you an answer that someone else could've given in 15 minutes. They have poor minimum latency and bad throughput. And don't forget scaling--some people will give you the same answer on day 3 they give you after 15 minutes, others benefit from throwing more resources (time) at the problem. Having met plenty of "slow thinkers" who are smarter than I am, they're not really slow, just higher latency. They take time, but they generate good ideas that someone else wouldn't have. And they build on their ideas over time.

jvanderbot 4y ago
I don't see any difference between taking time to answer being measure as latency or perceived slowness. You're saying he actually thinks fast but doesn't get around to thinking for a while?
- hyperpape 4y ago
  Take two people: Person 1 responds with the first thing that comes to mind. They have not considered alternatives. Person 2 considers a range of alternatives, and gives an answer. If person 2 takes longer, they’re not doing the same thing person 1 does, but slower. They’re doing more productive work, spread over a longer time. In various situations, I’d rather hear from person 1 or person 2. > You're saying he actually thinks fast but doesn't get around to thinking for a while? This is another possibility. If I just pause before speaking, I may be paying a fixed latency cost. I take 2 seconds to do what you do in 1 (100% overhead—shocking!), but I take 31 seconds to do what you do in 30 (~3% overhead, who cares?). If he really does think slowly, it means he takes a day to answer your question and gives you the answer someone else would give in 10 minutes. That’s bad.
boringg 4y ago
I think what you are saying is in a variety of circumstances a fast thoughtless answer is more desirable then a deliberate thoughtful answer. For those situations the individual who thinks fast but doesn't think through the consequences has an advantage. However if you are looking at answers in which you want a more deliberate thought the process the slow thinking answer is probably the individual who would be best suited. Latency doesn't change output it just refers to a time lag - I think in this case the output is significantly different. Think of it more as a model, one that spits out an answer on an already trained model vs one thats training a model and giving you an answer. The model that is training takes more effort/time.

eetus 4y ago

I feel like I'm a slow thinker until I'm able to cache answers derived from experience or from seeing a similar problem.

danielvaughn 4y ago

I've always struggled with this. I am not good at thinking on the spot. I like to say that my brain "simmers" my thoughts - low and slow. This makes all sorts of things challenging - having adhoc conversations, making good impressions during an interview, etc. It's nice to hear someone articulate what I've never been able to really put into words.

larrywright 4y ago
I discussed this with a psychologist once who said this is an executive function issue. Something related to working memory, if I recall. Fairly common in those with ADHD, but I’d guess not limited to that.

mrangle 4y ago

Time improves all output, including from "fast thinkers". To illustrate no writers, including students, can produce their first rate work on their first draft. Much of the time it takes not only revision(s), but time away from the first round of thinking. I like that the author is self-aware in this manner, and I'm sure that he has interesting output once it comes. But this process is the opposite of unique. And now on to a contravening view: there is a time value to most valuable things including thought. It is a talent to be able to cobble together useful almost first-rate (novel) output on the fly. Which I assume has to do with the individual's rate of cognitive pattern processing "depth". Pattern processing being pretty well correlated with IQ. Though there should be exceptions. Like for people with auditory processing issues, or those that look like them. Whose pattern processing may be fast but who need a little bit of extra time to process language. Sometimes there is not enough time in the interaction, especially if it is within a group setting. Apsergers-type individuals arguably often match this pattern.

nraynaud 4y ago

What’s interesting is that it ties in with the Hollywood mindset, where everything is a nice story in 3 parts. While deep thinking is full of re-phrasing, interrupted sentences, and long silence where we are googling. A nightmare to do an interactive show about. Edit: and then feel bad about ourselves for not being able to tell a nice linear story like in he movies. But it doesn’t work with original thinking.

pcurve 4y ago

I’m like this. This makes me useless during post it note brainstorming exercise with time limit. Lol

_piif 4y ago
Same here. Also any kind of thoughtful discourse where I might promptly answer with a basic filler response but then think of an actual reply after the conversation ended already.

bookofjoe 4y ago

>Thinking, Fast and Slow https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp/0374533555/ref=sr_1_1?crid=21P44V97OW58S&keywords=thinking+fast+and+slow&qid=1678110879&sprefix=thinking+fast+and+slow%2Caps%2C71&sr=8-1 https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast-Slow-Daniel-Kahneman/dp...

jstx1 4y ago
It's not the same thing. In the book "fast" and "slow" refer to two distinct modes of thinking, it's not about speed in the way the author of the post is describing.

exhaze 4y ago

You can be both. I used to identify with author. Then I was forced to get into "sales" (dating, pitching a startup, hiring, literally sales, etc.). I think it's good have basic competence at both and not develop this IMHO odd "slow thinker" mentality. Even though I can sometimes make quick "gut decisions" about stuff, I still often tell people: "Let me take a walk and think about this". Then I take a walk and think about it.

marcus_holmes 4y ago

An ex-boss of mine was like this. He would pause before answering anything. I, being an impatient idiot, would fill in the awkward pause and carry on talking. Then he would answer the original question and interrupt me, and I'd have to scramble back to the original context and continue from there. I did slowly learn to give him time to think and not fill in the awkward silence, but it was hard. One of the smartest guys I've worked with, and an excellent boss. I tried emulating his ability to think hard before replying, but my brain doesn't work like that. I make intuitive leaps to an answer that I have very little rational path to and then find it incredibly hard to shift from that answer (or expand on it). I can think hard on things, but I need peace, quiet, and preferably to be walking near trees, to do it. And my thinking process is about making lots of intuitive leaps and then filtering them, rather than rationally deducting a train of thought. Brains are fascinating. edit: also an INTP, verging on ENTP as I get older

lampshades 4y ago
I’m the same way as you. Very intuitive and talk too much. Tested as INTP when I was younger and have been ENTP for the last good while.
- marcus_holmes 4y ago
  Weird how it changes over time. I still get very introvert periods where I can't stand being around other people, but now also a longing for company sometimes. I think part of it is that I'm better at being around people now - I've learned how to avoid being socially inept (well, mostly), and I'm less anxious around people.
xen2xen1 4y ago
I'm also INTP, and I've learned to wait a day on any important decision or problem as my subconscious percolates out better ideas as the day goes on. If I'm stumped on something, I move to a different problem, go to the bathroom, answer email. Whatever. I find that the answer comes to me, and it's often that I need to stop banging away on the same problem the same way and try a different tack, and if I don't break away from what I'm doing I keep trying the same thing the same way.

mikeponders 4y ago

There is nothing wrong with taking a few seconds to answer something. As Sivers notes, sometimes not every question needs an answer, sometimes you need time and courage to just admit you don't know something concretely. If the other person is - so impatient that they cannot wait some seconds for your answer - not having a minimum attention span - interrupting out of awkwardness or entitlement you should rethink why you are allowing this. I understand there are some situations and certain jobs that really require quick thinking (more like automatically recalling from their memory) under pressure and people are trained to behave in that manner, such as military and emergency services. Not every situation is like this and you cannot be possibly be prepared for every situation. I remember something that my uncle (a doctor) said to me while telling me stories from his education and medical practice. "When you are unsure of something you should always ask/consult someone. It is wiser to admit you do not know something rather than give a wrong [and potentially lethal] answer."

dclowd9901 4y ago

I wish I was a slower thinker. It might keep me out of the tiring loop of hopping on news threads and posting comments on articles and waiting to see how they're received.

bovermyer 4y ago

I am like this. In elementary school, there was a math game we would play. A student would stand up and move next to the desk of the next student in the row. The teacher would ask a math question - "What's 4 times 4?" - and the student who answered correctly first would move on, and the other one would sit in the desk. I would _always_ lose, because while I was always right, it would take me several seconds longer than the other student. I'm an ENFP.

svat 4y ago

I was going to post this on another thread (the Neal Stephenson one https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35015121 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35015121), but it also fits here: Donald Knuth does all his writing (even coding!) by hand with pencil on notepad, going through several rounds of editing before anything reaches a computer, and his stated reason is that he can type faster than he can think. (Somewhere a typing speed of 80 wpm is mentioned, which is not even all that fast.) So he says that writing by hand, being slower, perfectly matches the speed at which he can think. In other words, he describes himself as a slow thinker. (We can actually get some glimpses of the way he thinks from his public lectures, e.g. I love the 2017 Christmas lecture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxQw4CdxLr8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxQw4CdxLr8 or maybe—I haven't watched much—the 1985 problem-solving seminar course https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLABJEFgj0PWW9fQwb8JVDRaorXNin8VgC https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLABJEFgj0PWW9fQwb8JVD... .) And if Knuth describes himself as a slow thinker, it is a lesson to us all.

silveroriole 4y ago

This is why I can’t do meetings. Like the article, all I end up saying is “I don’t know.” I get battered into agreeing with the other person in the meeting because I can’t debate with them off the cuff, and it’s like social interaction uses up 100% of my brain and leaves nothing for me to think with. I only ever manage to form an opinion after the meeting is over, or I end up not hearing 90% of the meeting because I was still thinking about something from the beginning of it. If you ask me a question verbally and expect an instant answer you’ll end up wondering whether I’ve even seen a computer before. It sucks.

beebmam 4y ago
Can't you say: "I need to think about it for a bit before I commit"?
- analog31 4y ago
  Ha ha, you just committed... to thinking about it. If you're the only person in the room who requires this kind of thinking, then you just committed to all of the tasks. Moreover, you've also tacitly accepted the burden of proof. I've been there, which is why your comment caught my eye. I learned some strategies for dealing with the issue, but of course that learning came with age and stature within the organization, so YMMV. The best is to get agreement that analysis is needed, but delegate it if possible. Some examples of better responses: * This needs some quantitative thinking before we commit * One of the engineers can do an analysis * I could mentor somebody on how to do this kind of analysis
  - zmgsabst 4y ago
    “That’s an interesting idea! — why don’t you write up a quick wiki entry and we can review it after standup/at the next meeting?” I see several of us have played that game over the years. To be fair, sometimes the answer was that I was being grumpy and it was a great idea — which I learned by reading the wiki entry. And the junior engineer learned to sell their idea in writing. Which means even when you “lose”, you still win at being a good senior engineer.

kilgnad 4y ago

Inevitably a lot of people come here because they relate so a lot of you are slow thinkers who like to think of themselves as smart or different in a better way. It's the same phenomenon with so called "introverts." I hate to tell you this but high IQ correlates with faster thinking. https://www.npr.org/2009/03/20/102169531/smart-people-really-do-think-faster https://www.npr.org/2009/03/20/102169531/smart-people-really... Everybody on HN likes to think of themselves as smart. This isn't true. Most people are average. I think this comment thread is an actual gathering of lower IQ people due to the lack of knowledge of the correlation between fast thinkers and IQ. First of it's kind I've seen. Good to compare to threads that are loaded with higher IQ people. But you'd have to find another correlative trait to find that thread. From a logical perspective IQ and faster thinking makes sense. In the same way a faster computer is categorically better in every front then a slower computer. Another measure here is that you see a lot of people using Myers Briggs to state their personality type. This is despite the fact that the test itself has little science behind it. Very unlike an IQ test which has huge amounts of correlative evidence behind it. Higher IQ people likely wouldn't put any weight on the personality test. There are some inevitable vote downs for this post but I'm still interested in contrasting this gathering of stupid people and responses to my post to other threads on HN where the IQ is obviously higher. My own IQ is up in the air. Not sure if I'm a fast or slow thinker.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

karmakaze 4y ago

I'm both a slow thinker like this, as well as a fast thinker who will spew out the first intuitive thing that pops into my head. I will usually follow up with either amendments or contradictions to what I've said shortly after or the next day/week. On the other extreme, I used to pause and think to assess and accurately answer "How are you doing?" greetings, before realizing that it just means hello. The short of it is, if people want quick answers I'll give them but will often change my opinion when new information from even my own noggin changes it. It's also good to pause to give less senior folks have a crack at it and refine those. Sometimes surprising/better lines of reasoning can arise.

A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago

I am not going to say anything really new here, but since I am living in US, I am going to cover American aspect. From my perspective, culture is to blame for this. It does not matter what you do, but everyone expects an answer for anything yesterday. All sales are structured to pressure you into making a decision as soon as possible to prevent any kind of critical considerations ( on the off-chance you will come to your senses ). It is bad enough that when I am visiting doctors, they, too, try to structure their patients to a smallest window possible ( and I sure as fuck can't really process the information in seconds -- for numerous reasons including the obvious one: I don't have the medical background ). The last straw for me was purchasing my new car with wife ( she was rushing me, because she just wanted it to be over with while I was going through the steps to see what I like, don't like, see reviews and so on ). The whole culture is nuts and not helpful to anyone who thinks carefully about their next steps. For me, it took forever to simply say 'no, stop'. Granted, you can't always do that ( meetings likely being a good example, but it is not like a decision always has to be taken in those -- maybe it can be postponed if you think you can take the pressure of being 'that guy everyone waits on' ).

jwmoz 4y ago

Surely if you have the knowledge and experience you can think relatively fast. If not then obviously you need time to research and form an opinion. Two different things.

ouid 4y ago

I'm pretty sure the subtext here is that thinking slower means thinking higher quality thoughts. I'm pretty skeptical of this. In fact, I'd wager that what the author is actually doing is not revealing his thoughts quickly. There's nothing wrong with being shy or reserved, but let's not jump to neurodivergent superpowers just yet.

everyone 4y ago

I'm the same imo. I've always found myself to be quite intelligent but also rather slow.

aeonque 4y ago

Excellent! Thank you for the reminder that humility isn’t a weakness. Side note: love the “We’ll See” story - it’s a perfect illustration of the power of accepting Impermanence (Buddhism)

javier_e06 4y ago

A penny for your thoughts? The true is you might have a dozen tasks being solved in parallel in your brain while doing the dishes. Hey! I just think I know where that smell comes from in your refrigerator!! You'll exclaim while taking about taxes on a comment made yesterday. Asking your brain for answers can be like asking your contractor to finish the driveway in 2 days. She'll say yes, but, you know.

theusus 4y ago

It was similar with me, and turned out I had social anxiety and depression. Just because I didn't want to upset anyone. I avoided saying anything, and soon it became a habit.

giardini 4y ago

My father said, when he asked for advice, his American Indian friends might ponder a serious question at considerable length (even months). He called it "Indian thinking" and said it always proved worth the wait. He learned that the reluctance to provide a quick answer was an indicator that he should not rush to judgement.

robofanatic 4y ago

well this can be implemented everywhere except a job interview! “Hmm. I don’t know.” "ask them to send me some questions a week in advance" “We’ll see.” I don't think any of the above will land you the job ;-)

mindwork 4y ago

This article had huge influence on me when I first read it. It helped me to understand that I'm not alone, and that there are people like that in the world. That thinking slow is not a mental deficiency or lack of something, but rather different way of processing information. There was nothing wrong with me. And it gave me the hope that people who think slow can be successful too. You just have to play your strengths and cover for your weaknesses.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

racl101 4y ago

I thought I was a minority in living this way. I'm not the fastest thinker, I don't like giving kneejerk responses in meetings and I really like to take ideas and think about them deeply. I have a capacity to think about any topic deeply but I don't have the capacity to evaluate quickly on the spot.

neslisah 4y ago

Maybe we just can't focus in moment. For me I believe there lies sort of an anxiety. As I push through with someone on communication, it gets better. Also I get this outcome with individual conversations not with a crowded space.

docmars 4y ago

I never thought of this as being a deliberate process, once identified. I think subconsciously I do this all the time, but most of the time I feel pressured to have a good answer in any given moment. I'm a strong Extroverted Intuitor (Ne) in the MBTI cognitive functions, so I'm able to think on my feet and ideate rapidly with great comfort, but as you said, those answers may not even be right. Given more time, showers, house cleaning, and hikes, I may arrive at an even better answer, and I find that is often the case. The classic ah-ha moments are a long break away from the topic at hand.

cubefox 4y ago

This is a major problem for me in exams, which are usually timed. That's somewhat unfair, because in many jobs being right is more important than being quick.