Thinking about how to think

[Speakpigeon]

One of the gifts I've taken away from software development is the realization that when you're writing code, there is an almost infinite number of ways to do the same task. And generally, the more thought and time you put into a solution, the better your solution is. Read a book about using a language effectively, read a book on effective design patterns, principles that are consistent across all technologies, commit time to thoroughly understanding a problem, and your solution will look much different had you not done all that. Even just stand back and look at the big picture and you'll have a better understanding of what you're up against.

I call it thinking expansively. In other words, stepping outside the box of the problem at hand and viewing it from new perspectives and angles. A way of trying to define more properties of the problem so you can attack it, or at least see it better.

Without that type of thinking we run the risk of believing that the perspective we're holding on a given thing is the correct one, the most effective one, the one that we want to accept as our own. We fail to look for new and better ways of seeing things and consequently finding new approaches.

On top of all that, one could use their own values to better guide the way. If your value is [x], and [x] is opposite to [y], your action is going to be much different than if your value was [y]. And so one of the key factors in problem solving and decision making is knowing and defining our own values.

Me I just let my evolved brain do all the thinking on my behalf.
EB

 

[fromderinside]

Me I just let my evolved brain do all the thinking on my behalf.
EB

Problem is that social beings without enough social support often devolve. (Tasmanians are an example)

 

[Speakpigeon]

Me I just let my evolved brain do all the thinking on my behalf.
EB

Problem is that social beings without enough social support often devolve. (Tasmanians are an example)

Strictly speaking, there's only evolution. You are talking as if you thought of evolution as progress. No. Evolution is just a blind result. There's survival or not along the road but the roads to survival may not look anything like "progress". Individuals of a social species will probably suffer without social support, and maybe there will be evolution into some non-social species but qualifying this as some sort of regress would be unscientific.
EB

 

[fromderinside]

Problem is that social beings without enough social support often devolve. (Tasmanians are an example)

Strictly speaking, there's only evolution. You are talking as if you thought of evolution as progress. No. Evolution is just a blind result. There's survival or not along the road but the roads to survival may not look anything like "progress". Individuals of a social species will probably suffer without social support, and maybe there will be evolution into some non-social species but qualifying this as some sort of regress would be unscientific.
EB

I agree. Losing held social capacity that would be of benefit in current circumstances is social regression. I'm really not a purpose guy.