Is having acute eyesight equivalent to having the ability to look in the right direction?
Intelligence is a potential. The way we use that potential is "thinking skill". Believing that intelligence is enough is dangerous.
Intelligent people can process information faster but it does not mean they have better thinking skills.
Intelligent traps --
(1) defense -- Ability to defend vigorously does not imply the validity of a position
(2) attack -- using superior intelligence to attack others thinking (showing how relatively stupid others are) is an ego boosting activity, a primitive form of aggression carried out with less primitive means.
(3) intelligent people understand and they play well the game in which they are placed. They become excellent in understanding and analysis but never develop the skill to design.
(4) intelligent people likes to have everything under control. He likes to proceed step by step, in logical progression. It's difficult to be creative in this mode.
(5) intelligent people sees more risks than others and therefore less ready to go into action mode.
Intelligent tests were initially used for identifying below average students so that they get more attention. IQ test tells you how good a person is in doing the IQ test. It does not tell you how well the person can think.
Gang of Three thinking skills:
Socrates -- argument
Plato -- ultimate truth
Aristotle -- box logic (either in or out of box)
G3 thinking methods work well in many situations, like science and technology, but inadequate and dangerous in some areas, like human affairs.
Argument -- inefficient way to explore a subject. When arguing between possibility A and B, there is no effort in designing other possibilities like C, D or E. It's about attacking and defending, winning and losing an argument. It's about ego and emotion.
Godel's Theorem says that from within any system you can never logically prove the starting points, which are arbitrary perceptions and arbitrary values.
Truth -- what is truth is just a perspective shared by many. 90% of errors in thinking are errors in perception, not errors in logic. (David Perkins)
Perceptual tools:
(1) PMI -- plus, minus, interesting (pros, cons, interesting points of a suggestion)
(2) C&S -- consequence and sequel (near, medium, long term effect/impact)
(3) OPV -- other people's view
Universities should also be teaching:
-- thinking skills
-- people skills
-- management skills
Universities are all about 'what is' -- knowledge, information, descriptions of things. These are important and essential.
Equally important is dealing with 'what can be'. It's about how you can bring things about.
Creativity is a kind of thinking skill. It can be learnt. Creative ideas always look logical in hindsight.
Education has always about literacy and numeracy. We need 'operacy', which is the skills of doing.
Analysis is not enough. Analysis leads to understanding, not necessarily lead to action.
There is only one form of stupidity -- arrogance.
You can analyze the past but you have to design the future.
Pattern -- if at every moment the next step has a higher probability of being taken than any other step, then you are on a pattern.
The brain is a self organizing information system. Incoming information organizes itself into patterns. The patterns formed in our brain determine our future perceptions.
Basic processes in thinking
1. Broad/specific -- move back and forth from broad to specific and back
2. Projection -- we can't check everything out and so projection is needed. But, need to know that our projection might be wrong due to insufficient info.
3. Attention directing -- depending on what caught our attention will limit the amount of information we get. Need to direct attention to look for info. (read 6 frames).
4. Recognition and fit -- we need to be mindful of the pattern we recognize and fit what we see. Fitting a pattern does not automatically makes something 'correct'.
5. Movement -- how to move forward from this position?
CoRT program
CoRT1 -- breadth
CoRT2 -- organization
CoRT3 -- interaction
CoRT4 -- creativity
CoRT5 -- information and feeling
CoRT6 -- action
CoRT1 tools:
1. PMI -- (+, -, interesting)
2. CAF -- Consider All Factors
3. C&S -- consequences and sequels -- time scale factor
4. AGO -- Aims, Goals, Objectives
5. FIP -- First Important Priorities
6. APC -- Alternatives, Possibilities, Choices
7. OPV -- Other People's Views
The 5 stages of thinking
________
TO LO |
----- PO |_____
| SO GO
------------
TO -- aim, objective (where do I want to go TO?)
Thinking action :
Define the purpose of your thinking
Redefine the purpose
Alternative definitions
Smaller definition
Larger definition
Breaking it down to smaller purposes
Change the purpose of your thinking
What is the 'right' definition? It is often seen in hindsight
- If u are interested in new ideas, do not put constraints an qualifiers into purpose definition.
- If u are interested in new ideas but do not have the time, put a few constraints and qualifiers into the purpose definition but do not overload it.
- the constraints and qualifiers should always be available in the information stage. Even if you are going to ignore them in the next stage.
-- in the assessment stage the constraints and qualifiers must be used in order to end up with a practical usable idea. Challenge these constraints and qualifiers.
LO -- information available and needed, perceptions
What information do we need?
Search for info should be broad base.
Sometimes, need to have a hypothesis to help the search.
Perceptions and values are important in this stage
PO -- possibilities
Do not mistaken possibility for the truth.
3 levels of possibility: possibility, fantasy, provocation
This is the creative, productive and generative stage.
4 broad approaches:
* search for routine - traditional approach as we seek to identify the situation and appropriate actions
* general approach - concept fan, work backwards from desired results
* creative approach - lateral thinking techniques to generate ideas
* design and assembly - lay out needs and ingredients in parallel and design ways to move forward
SO -- narrowing down, choosing, conclusion
The sequence within the SO stage:
* Development stage -- modify, build and improve [shaping, tailoring, strengthening, practicality, acceptance, cost, simplify]
* Evaluation and assessment stage -- examine each ideas, pros and cons and difficulties, feasibility
* Choice stage -- reduce to several choices, priority,
* Decision stage -- decide whether to go ahead and which idea, risks involved
[who decides? how many stages in deciding? what is the frame for the decision?]
[who needs this decision? Do we need to decide? What if we wait?]
[is there pressure to make the decision?]
GO -- action steps
It is a mistake to think that action is someone else's business. Thinkers and doers are not to be separated. "operacy" is as important as numeracy and literacy.
Action can be divided into:
- this I can do
- this depends on an outcome (if-box)
If-box may mean:
- asking for info,
- asking someone to do something,
- a search which may or may not be successful
Action planning involves a few stages.
(see 6 action shoes)
Implementation stages and sub-objectives -- monitor and checks
routine or flexible actions, fall back positions
People factor - motivation, persuasion, acceptance, obstructions, incentives and expectations, effectiveness, task forces, experts,
Energy of action -- sources?
Design to plug into systems that can provide the energy of action.
Amplification (read Tactics) -- through outsourcing, alliances, cooperation,
The 5 stages of thinking is not a one way process. Some backward movements are allowed. However, over doing the back and forth will cause the set stages to lose effectiveness.
On history --
"if you do not learn the mistakes of history you are doomed to repeat them" -- Santayana
"if you learn the successes of history you are doomed to be trapped by them" -- De Bono
Evolution fits the needs of the past not the needs of the future.
Evolution can optimize on the present and the past but not on the future.for that you need design.
De Bono's Law
'Any system with an input of information spaced out over time, and the periodic need to make the best use of available information, will always be sub-optimal.'
(because the sequence of arrival of the information plays too large a part in it's disposition)
We need simple ways of dealing with complexity rather than complex ways of dealing with simplicity.
No comments:
Post a Comment