6 ms·

I spotted the following in my usual reading this morning: >"Until this point, I have been describing the stereotyping process as a negative force for individua

by jcr 12y ago

I spotted the following in my usual reading this morning: >"Until this point, I have been describing the stereotyping process as a negative force for individual and team functioning. However, this process actually stems from an adaptive, often functional psychological process. Mental heuristics and cognitive shortcuts enable us to process information without conscious deliberation: they fill in the informational gaps we often experience when making decisions. In other words, habits of mind help us to save brain power for more difficult tasks. Joseph Pieper's classic "Leisure, the Basis of Culture" sets out this theory well. In the 1980s, people thought we could create expert systems by interviewing experts like brain surgeons or oil exploration specialists, and creating a rule chaining prolog environment that would recreate their decision-making ability. The problem was the experts did not know how they knew what they knew. That is, experts are creating associations between disparate experiences and pieces of knowledge, using the subconscious brain." [1] The quote above reminded me a bit of the previous "How You Know" essay by Paul Graham [2,3]. At times it's disheartening to realize the discrepancy between how much I read, and how much of it I can actually remember, but it's nice to know at least some of it manages to stay with me somehow. In this new essay, pg says: >"When experts are wrong, it's often because they're experts on an earlier version of the world." Stereotyping and similar classification are essentially heuristic modeling based on past experience. Some substantial part of our mental models are based on "Unknown Knows," or better said, our mental models are based on experiences we cannot consciously recall but still somehow know unconsciously. Even if we keep the models updated to have a "current version of the world" through seeking new experiences, we are still often incapable of either anticipating or handling new surprises. Maybe people who regularly succeed as startup investors (i.e. anticipating and handling surprising exceptions) have learned to retain some degree or form of suspended disbelief when applying their models to the world? It's trivially easy to suspend disbelief for the sake of entertainment like enjoying a fictional story. Intentionally escaping reality for a while is an established habit for most people. On the other hand, intentionally suspending a bias, belief or model in the real world seems to take more effort, but that's possibly due to my own lack of practice. [1] http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2014/11/179827-the-data-on-diversity/fulltext/ http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2014/11/179827-the-data-on-div... [2] http://paulgraham.com/know.html http://paulgraham.com/know.html [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8753526 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8753526

AndyNemmity 12y ago
"... intentionally suspending a bias, belief or model in the real world seems to take more effort, ..." For most people this seems to be the case, but I have found a way to do it regularly. I evoke empathy before logic. By being empathetic and transporting yourself into another person's values, you then use your logic to deduce the answers and details from their point of view. This allows you to escape your own details. I use this often. But I can never start with logic, I have to start with empathy. From there, I can then calculate. You can do this as a thought experiment, and you'll find it becomes trivially easy. I work with customers often, and when I work with them I just pretend I work for them. My desires and goals change dramatically from what I would suggest for them if I didn't pretend in my head that they hired me. I also tend to distance myself from... caring?.. about outcomes. The less I care about what the result is, the better I am at changing my perspective. This suspension of disbelief, and the practice of it allows you to quickly shift your entire world view. The shifting isn't really the hard part, the allowing yourself to shift is. I hope this is clear, I feel like this is difficult for me to communicate well. I think a back and forth conversation would make more sense for this topic.

by jcr 12y ago

AndyNemmity 12y ago

"... intentionally suspending a bias, belief or model in the real world seems to take more effort, ..." For most people this seems to be the case, but I have found a way to do it regularly. I evoke empathy before logic. By being empathetic and transporting yourself into another person's values, you then use your logic to deduce the answers and details from their point of view. This allows you to escape your own details. I use this often. But I can never start with logic, I have to start with empathy. From there, I can then calculate. You can do this as a thought experiment, and you'll find it becomes trivially easy. I work with customers often, and when I work with them I just pretend I work for them. My desires and goals change dramatically from what I would suggest for them if I didn't pretend in my head that they hired me. I also tend to distance myself from... caring?.. about outcomes. The less I care about what the result is, the better I am at changing my perspective. This suspension of disbelief, and the practice of it allows you to quickly shift your entire world view. The shifting isn't really the hard part, the allowing yourself to shift is. I hope this is clear, I feel like this is difficult for me to communicate well. I think a back and forth conversation would make more sense for this topic.