6 ms·

This is something that's easy to have an opinion on so you're going to get buried. I'll do my best to make a high-signal comment here, but it will be drowned b

by dijit 3y ago

This is something that's easy to have an opinion on so you're going to get buried. I'll do my best to make a high-signal comment here, but it will be drowned by all the other replies, which also likely touch on these points. First, "slow-thinking" is really just a different way of expressing your thinking and you should begin by leaning into it rather than leaning away. Take time, allow yourself to pause to collect your thoughts. People often interpret quietness (not filler) as intelligence and maturity (because usually it is). Alternatively not answering is also valid. Second, as a person who is generally regarded as quick-witted and sharp, most of that sharpness comes from either having a few pre-known responses to ideas or anxiously revising situations in my head ahead of time. This is, generally, a bad thing because it means I have made decisions on how I will respond to things without all of the information (as some will come over during conversation). Methodically thinking things through, fresh, is probably the only realistic way to be open minded. Finally, do your best to avoid situations where a "quick decision" is needed; this is good advice even for "quick thinkers". Fast decisions are often poor ones - the counterpoint to that is dragging something out over many weeks or across many meetings - but putting yourself in a situation where the unknowns become knowns or the scope of the landscape and weight of the decision can be properly assessed is important. What's better is that you will likely be able to have a better paper trail for this. One absolutely final piece of advice: Avoid using the word "slow", use "deliberate" instead.

ImageXav 3y ago
This is all great advice. One thing I would add to this is to deliberately steer your team to avoid making big decisions on calls or in meetings. Instead, make it so that your team prioritises asynchronous communication methods to discuss the lay of the land, and only make decisions after everyone has had time to contribute to the discussion. I've found that creating a shared document or flowchart can work wonders if key team members engage and build upon it. And once everyone has said their share you can then have a meeting to discuss how to progress. I've found this method to work well as you can take your time to reply to suggestions and comments and research them better. It also removes and element of emotionality from the decision making: everyone can see the suggestions and counter points, but the conversation is often less defensive and more considered as people have time to second guess themselves. So by the time you hold the meeting the benefits and drawbacks of the contending options in meeting your goals are clearer.
- creer 3y ago
  If you have a say in it, get the meetings and calls to be about providing input, bouncing ideas around, discussing the background, building a paper trail. NOT about making the decision. Certainly not in the first meeting about it. Then accept still more input over email. Then let the (ideally one) decision maker make the decision. Sometimes the meeting or call is about an emerging urgent situation. Even then, the decision is probably not needed this minute. Not before there is what input there is to find. That first meeting might then be more about figuring out what input or data might be available.
reddiky 3y ago
> Finally, do your best to avoid situations where a "quick decision" is needed; this is good advice even for "quick thinkers". Fast decisions are often poor ones - the counterpoint to that is dragging something out over many weeks or across many meetings - but putting yourself in a situation where the unknowns become knowns or the scope of the landscape and weight of the decision can be properly assessed is important. What's better is that you will likely be able to have a better paper trail for this. If you have to make a 'quick decision', one of the pieces of advice I've heard is to try to make the smallest possible good decision that will move the ball forward. Often getting started is enough to provide more information needed to make a better long term decision, but making the best possible, smallest decision will rarely get you into trouble.
- gopher2000 3y ago
  It's a fair point but I'd caution that making the "smallest possible good decision" really needs emphasis on good and not smallest or this results in just delaying. And there's a ton of people that cause delays. Especially in the corporate world.
  - vineyardmike 3y ago
    I think delaying is the point. You delay the “immediateness” so you can form a nuanced opinion without urgency. I know we can’t always change the world we live in, but we can at least acknowledge it. In the corporate world people really like to pretend there is a fire, when few things are truly urgent. If you can keep the sky from falling down with a quick and small scoped decision, you free up time to make big and long term decisions slowly.
- saltcured 3y ago
  This seems like it is tapping into the same risk management strategy as in Agile methods? Essentially allowing for more frequent course correction. I assume "small" here blurs together cost and latency . The tradeoff of this kind of incremental planning and execution is that it becomes more reactive and myopic. You can end up stuck at a local maxima or worse, just executing a random walk. I think a large part of becoming "quick" in an effective way is to improve your triage skills. This is a meta-decision process where you quickly estimate the time-dependent risks and priorities.
alentred 3y ago
All great advice. Avoiding the situations that require the "quick thinking" is not always possible, but this advice holds in a general case as well. More that anything else I agree with a) taking the time, and b) keeping an option to avoid the answer altogether. I don't know if I qualify as a "slow" or "fast" thinker - I actually think that no one qualifies as either and it all depends on your experience in the topic at hand - but I have my share of situations where I cannot get my thoughts together. With --age-- experience I taught myself to feel comfortable with taking my time (reasonable amount, though) or just saying "let me think of it and come back to you later" (if I feel the pause can become unreasonably long). Most people I am surrounded with understand and accept it well.
takinola 3y ago
As someone that falls on the "deliberate" thinking side of the spectrum, I found that it helps to ask questions in the moment rather than proffer ideas. When presented new information, I try to understand the following: 1. How can I tell if this information is true ie what else would need to be true if this is correct? 2. If this is true, what are the implications of this new data ie what has changed in our plans? 3. Given these implications, what do I need to do different? I find that questions around these help me (and the rest of the audience) better understand the issue very quickly and help me get up to speed quickly.
nprateem 3y ago
> most of that sharpness comes from either having a few pre-known responses to ideas or anxiously revising situations in my head ahead of time That's not that cause for me. I just grasp things quickly. > Avoid using the word "slow", use "deliberate" instead. That sounds inclusive but isn't what Kahneman meant. Slow thinking is when you leave it to your subconscious, so the only deliberate thing would be to give it time and put your conscious mind elsewhere. So in that way the two terms wouldn't be interchangeable in a 'Thinking fast and slow' sense.
jebarker 3y ago
> Finally, do your best to avoid situations where a "quick decision" is needed I find this easier said than done. I dislike most meetings because I don't think quickly enough to keep up and contribute to the discussion. That often means that others will make decisions that I could have contributed usefully to before I've had the chance to think deliberately about the question.
- replwoacause 3y ago
  Same here (Took me 1 day to think of this reply)
- tinfoil3843 3y ago
  Can you request the slides be sent ahead of time so you can think of ideas?
jonshariat 3y ago
To add to this, in a work setting, you can request that the deck being presenting is sent in advance to give time for people who think like this time to think and make the real time meeting much more productive.
Shugarl 3y ago
> First, "slow-thinking" is really just a different way of expressing your thinking and you should begin by leaning into it rather than leaning away. Take time, allow yourself to pause to collect your thoughts. People often interpret quietness (not filler) as intelligence and maturity (because usually it is). Alternatively not answering is also valid. From experience, it doesn't work, especially in a group setting. People usually end up trying to guess what you want to say, or add on to what they said, or move on, or something. But they very rarely just wait patiently for me to think things through.
- theCodeStig 3y ago
  This is definitely true in Asia
- pas 3y ago
  Can you give an example of this? Even if you say something indicating that you need a moment, they will just ignore you?
nostrademons 3y ago
> Second, as a person who is generally regarded as quick-witted and sharp, most of that sharpness comes from either having a few pre-known responses to ideas or anxiously revising situations in my head ahead of time. This is, generally, a bad thing because it means I have made decisions on how I will respond to things without all of the information (as some will come over during conversation). I'd challenge that. I think that being both quick and sharp comes from having an accurate mental model of what kind of information is important for the decision. When new information comes in, you don't discount it, but you have an intuitive feel for how much it should affect your priors. For example, say that your team works on a minor page of a major tech product, say something that only gets 0.1% of traffic. Your TL reports back that a change they made to an ads widget on the page drops conversions by 20%. The change was done in service of a visual design consistency effort across the company. Normally a drop in conversions by 20% would be an immediate no-go, but knowing that the page only gets 0.1% of traffic, you can run the math and figure this is a 0.02% decrease in revenue, almost imperceptible. Now imagine that the news was that 3 other key products in the company are dropping the visual consistency effort. The right move here is probably to cancel the project, because if you go ahead with it but others don't, you actually make the consistency worse. You can't know that without knowing the context and reasoning behind the initial decision. Normally, when an unrelated product cancels a project, it doesn't matter to you.
j45 3y ago
Deliberate is a much better word. There are problems that legitimately must be sat with for months if not years. Furiously responding to potential ways to solve a problem might just use a lot of energy.
paulsutter 3y ago
"I’m a disappointing person to try to debate or attack. I just have nothing to say in the moment, except maybe, 'Good point.' Then a few days later, after thinking about it a lot, I have a response" - Derek Sivers (https://sive.rs/slow https://sive.rs/slow) This sounds very admirable to me
- danielvaughn 3y ago
  I’ve always been this way. It turns out that it makes for incredibly boring conversation, because all I can say is “oh wow that’s cool” but have nothing else to offer lol. It’s also terrible in interviews. If it were intentional, I could see it being admirable. But I do wish I could think a bit more on the spot in some situations.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- 10729287 3y ago
  Phenomenon also known as Esprit de l'escalier : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27esprit_de_l%27escalier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27esprit_de_l%27escalier I suffer from it myself and i'm definitely better at answering by email than in an oral discussion when i'm overwhelmed by thoughts and can't focus on one.
  - eastbound 3y ago
    Finally enough, the French expression is “présence d’esprit”. Only few people in France know about this sequence involving Diderot and the king, and I only know about it because I’ve lived in… California.
    - dheavy 3y ago
      Actually, "esprit d'escalier" is indeed used in French, though less commonly, especially outside of literary contexts. It refers specifically to the inability to come up with a timely response or comeback (and the frustration of finding the "perfect" reply when the conversation is already over). On the other hand, "présence d'esprit" has a broader usage in everyday language. It can mean having a quick and witty response (the opposite of "esprit d'escalier"), or more broadly, the sudden ability to judge and react appropriately in a situation. edit: typo
cyanydeez 3y ago
Note: Some of us spend way to much time "playing chess" with problems, particularly people, and many times, the quick responses I have are because of that. It doesn't mean I'm set in my ways or making irrational choices, but like someone studying a chess position, sometimes all you're waiting for is the next move. But, externally, no one's gonna see this shit so it's just something one has to get comfortable knowing about themselves but not other people. We often advise people a "lowest common denominator" type of logic because philosophically, it's impossible to know what the actual fuck.
- gryn 3y ago
  yes, I think you both agree with each other. good thinking is an inherently slow process. the way to get fast is to do some caching, if you already explored the domain and stored the answers for it you can just remember the information. the problem is when the caching is done wrong. you explored only a subset but thought you explored everything. the other kind of fast thinking is when you go bullshiter route and act like an LLM you fast interpolate between known data-points without system2 validation and give plausible looking answers with full confidence, you'd be amazed by how many people get fooled by this.
buggythebug 3y ago
"Avoid 'quick decision' situations" That's a great way to hear god laugh. Jokes aside - if the quick decision can be "walked back" or is not detrimental if you decide wrong then it doesn't matter and you should probably decide quickly to get through the "maze of life"
BLKNSLVR 3y ago
"deliberate" is an excellent point. I often have gaps in my conversation trying to think of just the right word(s) to describe "thing". I dislike filler umms and aahs so I just wait until the right word comes - deliberately. Thoughtfully. And when it's come out how I want it to, it's understandable to the third parties. Deliberate equates to clear and intelligible.
boxed 3y ago
[flagged]
globalnode 3y ago
quite helpful advice, i like the term "deliberate". i am actually starting to see my relative slow thinking as a sort of super power. i can chew things over and think hard about something before coming to an opinion. its not always the best opinion but at least i know ive given it a good shot
- neuralRiot 3y ago
  People usually think we’re slow, but I believe is exactly the opposite, when in a meeting or in a group discussion I almost always know what others will say, and how everything will go on including outcomes and failures, but since it’s obvious for me, I think it is for everyone so never say anything unless directly asked. In response to OP, to me the exercise that helped me the most is to put myself into situations where a quick decision is needed but in case of a mistake the consequences are not that bad, just like in drama theatre you get better at improvisation by not having a script to follow.

by dijit 3y ago

ImageXav 3y ago

This is all great advice. One thing I would add to this is to deliberately steer your team to avoid making big decisions on calls or in meetings. Instead, make it so that your team prioritises asynchronous communication methods to discuss the lay of the land, and only make decisions after everyone has had time to contribute to the discussion. I've found that creating a shared document or flowchart can work wonders if key team members engage and build upon it. And once everyone has said their share you can then have a meeting to discuss how to progress. I've found this method to work well as you can take your time to reply to suggestions and comments and research them better. It also removes and element of emotionality from the decision making: everyone can see the suggestions and counter points, but the conversation is often less defensive and more considered as people have time to second guess themselves. So by the time you hold the meeting the benefits and drawbacks of the contending options in meeting your goals are clearer.

creer 3y ago
If you have a say in it, get the meetings and calls to be about providing input, bouncing ideas around, discussing the background, building a paper trail. NOT about making the decision. Certainly not in the first meeting about it. Then accept still more input over email. Then let the (ideally one) decision maker make the decision. Sometimes the meeting or call is about an emerging urgent situation. Even then, the decision is probably not needed this minute. Not before there is what input there is to find. That first meeting might then be more about figuring out what input or data might be available.

reddiky 3y ago

> Finally, do your best to avoid situations where a "quick decision" is needed; this is good advice even for "quick thinkers". Fast decisions are often poor ones - the counterpoint to that is dragging something out over many weeks or across many meetings - but putting yourself in a situation where the unknowns become knowns or the scope of the landscape and weight of the decision can be properly assessed is important. What's better is that you will likely be able to have a better paper trail for this. If you have to make a 'quick decision', one of the pieces of advice I've heard is to try to make the smallest possible good decision that will move the ball forward. Often getting started is enough to provide more information needed to make a better long term decision, but making the best possible, smallest decision will rarely get you into trouble.

gopher2000 3y ago
It's a fair point but I'd caution that making the "smallest possible good decision" really needs emphasis on good and not smallest or this results in just delaying. And there's a ton of people that cause delays. Especially in the corporate world.
- vineyardmike 3y ago
  I think delaying is the point. You delay the “immediateness” so you can form a nuanced opinion without urgency. I know we can’t always change the world we live in, but we can at least acknowledge it. In the corporate world people really like to pretend there is a fire, when few things are truly urgent. If you can keep the sky from falling down with a quick and small scoped decision, you free up time to make big and long term decisions slowly.
saltcured 3y ago
This seems like it is tapping into the same risk management strategy as in Agile methods? Essentially allowing for more frequent course correction. I assume "small" here blurs together cost and latency . The tradeoff of this kind of incremental planning and execution is that it becomes more reactive and myopic. You can end up stuck at a local maxima or worse, just executing a random walk. I think a large part of becoming "quick" in an effective way is to improve your triage skills. This is a meta-decision process where you quickly estimate the time-dependent risks and priorities.

alentred 3y ago

All great advice. Avoiding the situations that require the "quick thinking" is not always possible, but this advice holds in a general case as well. More that anything else I agree with a) taking the time, and b) keeping an option to avoid the answer altogether. I don't know if I qualify as a "slow" or "fast" thinker - I actually think that no one qualifies as either and it all depends on your experience in the topic at hand - but I have my share of situations where I cannot get my thoughts together. With --age-- experience I taught myself to feel comfortable with taking my time (reasonable amount, though) or just saying "let me think of it and come back to you later" (if I feel the pause can become unreasonably long). Most people I am surrounded with understand and accept it well.

takinola 3y ago

As someone that falls on the "deliberate" thinking side of the spectrum, I found that it helps to ask questions in the moment rather than proffer ideas. When presented new information, I try to understand the following: 1. How can I tell if this information is true ie what else would need to be true if this is correct? 2. If this is true, what are the implications of this new data ie what has changed in our plans? 3. Given these implications, what do I need to do different? I find that questions around these help me (and the rest of the audience) better understand the issue very quickly and help me get up to speed quickly.

nprateem 3y ago

> most of that sharpness comes from either having a few pre-known responses to ideas or anxiously revising situations in my head ahead of time That's not that cause for me. I just grasp things quickly. > Avoid using the word "slow", use "deliberate" instead. That sounds inclusive but isn't what Kahneman meant. Slow thinking is when you leave it to your subconscious, so the only deliberate thing would be to give it time and put your conscious mind elsewhere. So in that way the two terms wouldn't be interchangeable in a 'Thinking fast and slow' sense.

jebarker 3y ago

> Finally, do your best to avoid situations where a "quick decision" is needed I find this easier said than done. I dislike most meetings because I don't think quickly enough to keep up and contribute to the discussion. That often means that others will make decisions that I could have contributed usefully to before I've had the chance to think deliberately about the question.

replwoacause 3y ago
Same here (Took me 1 day to think of this reply)
tinfoil3843 3y ago
Can you request the slides be sent ahead of time so you can think of ideas?

jonshariat 3y ago

To add to this, in a work setting, you can request that the deck being presenting is sent in advance to give time for people who think like this time to think and make the real time meeting much more productive.

Shugarl 3y ago

> First, "slow-thinking" is really just a different way of expressing your thinking and you should begin by leaning into it rather than leaning away. Take time, allow yourself to pause to collect your thoughts. People often interpret quietness (not filler) as intelligence and maturity (because usually it is). Alternatively not answering is also valid. From experience, it doesn't work, especially in a group setting. People usually end up trying to guess what you want to say, or add on to what they said, or move on, or something. But they very rarely just wait patiently for me to think things through.

theCodeStig 3y ago
This is definitely true in Asia
pas 3y ago
Can you give an example of this? Even if you say something indicating that you need a moment, they will just ignore you?

nostrademons 3y ago

> Second, as a person who is generally regarded as quick-witted and sharp, most of that sharpness comes from either having a few pre-known responses to ideas or anxiously revising situations in my head ahead of time. This is, generally, a bad thing because it means I have made decisions on how I will respond to things without all of the information (as some will come over during conversation). I'd challenge that. I think that being both quick and sharp comes from having an accurate mental model of what kind of information is important for the decision. When new information comes in, you don't discount it, but you have an intuitive feel for how much it should affect your priors. For example, say that your team works on a minor page of a major tech product, say something that only gets 0.1% of traffic. Your TL reports back that a change they made to an ads widget on the page drops conversions by 20%. The change was done in service of a visual design consistency effort across the company. Normally a drop in conversions by 20% would be an immediate no-go, but knowing that the page only gets 0.1% of traffic, you can run the math and figure this is a 0.02% decrease in revenue, almost imperceptible. Now imagine that the news was that 3 other key products in the company are dropping the visual consistency effort. The right move here is probably to cancel the project, because if you go ahead with it but others don't, you actually make the consistency worse. You can't know that without knowing the context and reasoning behind the initial decision. Normally, when an unrelated product cancels a project, it doesn't matter to you.

j45 3y ago

Deliberate is a much better word. There are problems that legitimately must be sat with for months if not years. Furiously responding to potential ways to solve a problem might just use a lot of energy.

paulsutter 3y ago

"I’m a disappointing person to try to debate or attack. I just have nothing to say in the moment, except maybe, 'Good point.' Then a few days later, after thinking about it a lot, I have a response" - Derek Sivers (https://sive.rs/slow https://sive.rs/slow) This sounds very admirable to me

danielvaughn 3y ago
I’ve always been this way. It turns out that it makes for incredibly boring conversation, because all I can say is “oh wow that’s cool” but have nothing else to offer lol. It’s also terrible in interviews. If it were intentional, I could see it being admirable. But I do wish I could think a bit more on the spot in some situations.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
10729287 3y ago
Phenomenon also known as Esprit de l'escalier : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27esprit_de_l%27escalier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27esprit_de_l%27escalier I suffer from it myself and i'm definitely better at answering by email than in an oral discussion when i'm overwhelmed by thoughts and can't focus on one.
- eastbound 3y ago
  Finally enough, the French expression is “présence d’esprit”. Only few people in France know about this sequence involving Diderot and the king, and I only know about it because I’ve lived in… California.
  - dheavy 3y ago
    Actually, "esprit d'escalier" is indeed used in French, though less commonly, especially outside of literary contexts. It refers specifically to the inability to come up with a timely response or comeback (and the frustration of finding the "perfect" reply when the conversation is already over). On the other hand, "présence d'esprit" has a broader usage in everyday language. It can mean having a quick and witty response (the opposite of "esprit d'escalier"), or more broadly, the sudden ability to judge and react appropriately in a situation. edit: typo

cyanydeez 3y ago

Note: Some of us spend way to much time "playing chess" with problems, particularly people, and many times, the quick responses I have are because of that. It doesn't mean I'm set in my ways or making irrational choices, but like someone studying a chess position, sometimes all you're waiting for is the next move. But, externally, no one's gonna see this shit so it's just something one has to get comfortable knowing about themselves but not other people. We often advise people a "lowest common denominator" type of logic because philosophically, it's impossible to know what the actual fuck.

gryn 3y ago
yes, I think you both agree with each other. good thinking is an inherently slow process. the way to get fast is to do some caching, if you already explored the domain and stored the answers for it you can just remember the information. the problem is when the caching is done wrong. you explored only a subset but thought you explored everything. the other kind of fast thinking is when you go bullshiter route and act like an LLM you fast interpolate between known data-points without system2 validation and give plausible looking answers with full confidence, you'd be amazed by how many people get fooled by this.

buggythebug 3y ago

"Avoid 'quick decision' situations" That's a great way to hear god laugh. Jokes aside - if the quick decision can be "walked back" or is not detrimental if you decide wrong then it doesn't matter and you should probably decide quickly to get through the "maze of life"

BLKNSLVR 3y ago

"deliberate" is an excellent point. I often have gaps in my conversation trying to think of just the right word(s) to describe "thing". I dislike filler umms and aahs so I just wait until the right word comes - deliberately. Thoughtfully. And when it's come out how I want it to, it's understandable to the third parties. Deliberate equates to clear and intelligible.

boxed 3y ago

[flagged]

globalnode 3y ago

quite helpful advice, i like the term "deliberate". i am actually starting to see my relative slow thinking as a sort of super power. i can chew things over and think hard about something before coming to an opinion. its not always the best opinion but at least i know ive given it a good shot

neuralRiot 3y ago
People usually think we’re slow, but I believe is exactly the opposite, when in a meeting or in a group discussion I almost always know what others will say, and how everything will go on including outcomes and failures, but since it’s obvious for me, I think it is for everyone so never say anything unless directly asked. In response to OP, to me the exercise that helped me the most is to put myself into situations where a quick decision is needed but in case of a mistake the consequences are not that bad, just like in drama theatre you get better at improvisation by not having a script to follow.