Why is it that some people never read, but their vision, way of thinking and way of doing things are so outstanding?
Because they practice deliberately, master a variety of ways of thinking, and see problems more profoundly and comprehensively. I
recommend several ways of thinking that I have used for a long time: the first is modeling thinking, the second is three-dimensional thinking and linear thinking, the third is black box thinking, and the fourth is computer thinking.
1. Model thinking is a very important thinking tool.
Although modeling thinking will not lead us to any truth, it really helps us to grasp the strange world. The
human brain instinctively wants to think about the world in a stereotyped way, and wants to ask a reason for everything. It is very difficult for us to understand “randomness” intuitively.
First of all, what is thinking?
I have seen a very concise description that thinking is to strip the character from the object of thinking. What is stripped from it?
It’s a concept.
The brain understands the world through the combination of concepts and reasoning.
This process is thinking. The key to
this process is to separate the character from the object and abstract it into a concept.
For example, two apples.
In fact, look carefully, how can there be two identical apples in the world?
But we humans, regardless, strip out the most basic traits and abstract them into the concept of “apple,” and we think of them as the same thing in our thinking, which is modeling. Concepts that
are abstracted can be further abstracted and modeled.
For example, the equal sign. Don’t underestimate the equal sign. The invention of this symbol means a leap in human modeling thinking ability.
2 + 1 & # x3d; 1 + 2, right? What does
this equal sign mean?
Does it mean that the left and the right are equal?
No, the equal sign means that something is not important and we have to choose to ignore it.
For example, 2 + 1 & # x3D; 1 + 2 means that we only care about the result, we don’t care about the order. How can
2 + 1 equal 1 + 2?
The order is different, but with this equal sign, we ignore the order and just look at the result. This is what we mean when we use the word “equal” in
everyday speech.
For example, we often say that “excessive modesty is equal to pride.”. The real meaning of
this sentence is not that modesty is pride, but that we ignore the superficial attitude difference, you look like modesty, but the essence behind it is pride. The word
“equal” emphasizes something to be ignored.
All thinking is modeling and modeling, and all thinking must model and model the real world.
The subtext is that we must lose part of the real world. Isn’t that
against common sense? The deepening of
thinking depends on the fragmentation of the world’s understanding. What good would
that do?
In fact, the evolution of the human brain is not used to discover truth, but to gain survival advantages.
The brain is not used for seeking truth, but for survival. The advantage of
this way of thinking is that it can save the cognitive resources of the brain.
It’s not necessarily right, but it works.
I once turned to a book called “New Theory of Japan-Mohist Doctrine and Japanese Culture”.
Its core content is that Japan has learned a lot of culture from China, but what it inherits is not Confucian culture, but Mohist culture which has basically disappeared in China. When I
first read it, I thought it was a bit far-fetched.
Mohist culture is a bit like a legend in Chinese history, with only a few records.
Some people say that Japanese culture inherits Mohist culture. Is there any basis?
Are there any historical facts? Have you
researched it? When did
the Mohist culture spread?
Who passed it on? What is the origin of
inheritance? Without
these historical facts, isn’t it absurd to make such an assertion? When you finish reading
this book, you will feel that this statement is reasonable. Although
the Japanese have been learning from China on a large scale since the Tang Dynasty, we have not found that what they have learned is architecture, writing and religion. At that time, China felt that the most precious spiritual core and cultural power-Confucian culture, Japan did not learn much.
For example, Confucianism pays special attention to the reciprocity of rights and obligations. Didn’t
Confucius say that the monarch, the minister, the father, the son, the son, the monarch should have the appearance of the monarch, and the minister should have the appearance of the minister?
The monarch has no way, in the Confucian view, even can simply overthrow, the way of heaven does not favor him.
Mencius even developed this doctrine into “the people are more important than monarch,” and the common people are more important than monarch. The Japanese do not accept
this at all. How can Japanese emperor be overthrown?
From the root of Confucian culture, Japan refused to accept it.
Another example is the institutional arrangement, the Confucian imperial examination system, which the Japanese did not learn. The Japanese do not have the filial piety that
Confucianism emphasizes most.
A Japanese said, “When Chinese Confucianism arrived in Japan, it jumped into the sea and committed suicide.”.
This makes it particularly difficult for us Chinese to understand Japanese culture.
It seems that all aspects of writing and architecture are very similar, but once we go into the details of culture, we will find that there are too many differences between Chinese and Japanese.
This is because we use the model of Confucian culture to apply to Japan, but we find that we can’t.
However, the book just mentioned suddenly reminds us that there are many cultural models in China. If this one can’t be applied, we can try another one. If Confucianism can’t be applied, we can use the Mohist cultural model to apply it. It’s amazing. One set is accurate, and it’s even seamless. Take some
random examples from the book. Confucianism in
China is actually very particular about enjoying life.
Confucius said that the food is not tired of fine, not tired of fine.
But Mohism pays special attention to frugality, and food, clothing and housing are very simple.
This idiom originated in Mohist culture. It means that one is worn from head to toe by life and spares no pains. This is an ascetic state of life.
Have you found that Japanese life has a minimalist style.
Taking eating as an example, compared with the variety of Chinese food, Japanese food is actually very monotonous.
Chinese people pay attention to inviting guests to dinner with leftovers, while Japanese people do not have this habit at all, and there is little food left after dinner. For
another example, the Confucianists advocate “respecting ghosts and keeping away from them,” and do not believe in ghosts and gods very much.
Mohism, on the other hand, advocates “respecting heaven and serving ghosts.”.
On the issue of “ghosts,” there is indeed a big gap between the views of the Japanese and those of the Chinese.
In China, the image of ghosts is usually very scary.
In the eyes of the Japanese, the word “ghost” is full of commendatory meaning, meaning “powerful and awesome.”.
For example, the word “genius” came from Japan. It is the highest level of praise in Japan. It means that the person is not only talented, but also energetic. For
another example, Confucianism pays more attention to the spirit of individual independence and does not form a strict organization.
But from the very beginning, Mohism had a tight organizational form, which was a bit like an early Jianghu gang. The leader of
the Mohist school was called “Juzi.” When a disciple of the Mohist school became an official in various countries, the salary and salary he received must also be dedicated to the group. The collectivist spirit of the
Japanese later developed into militarism. Is it a bit like the extremism of the Mohist group?
Moreover, when Mohism talked about universal love, it was to love all people equally. It
sounds like a good idea, but it was a big problem at that time.
Mencius said, how can we love all people equally? Can
loving a passer-by be the same as loving your parents?
Such a person, no monarch, no father, unfilial, can also be called a person?
Mencius said, “This is a beast.”.
The Confucianists criticized the Mohists’ ideas of equal love, not natural love, and not filial piety so severely.
At that time, the debate between Confucianism and Mohism was a core issue. When the
Japanese learned from the Chinese, in the words “loyalty, filial piety, chastity, and righteousness,” they also talked about “loyalty,” “chastity,” and “righteousness.” But they did not talk about the word “filial piety.” To say that they were descendants of the Mohist school was really not to wrong them. Isn’t
that a bit of a stretch?
Japanese culture has a lot of similarities with Mohist culture on the surface. How can we say that they are the descendants of Mohism?
There is no evidence.
I also think that this statement is a bit far-fetched.
But this is not important, we can not understand Japanese culture with the simplified model of Confucianism, but once we use the simplified model of Mohism, we can easily explain the various manifestations of Japanese culture, which is a good cognitive tool for us. The advantage of the
model is that once we know one characteristic of an object, we can infer its other characteristics from the model.
This, of course, saves cognitive resources.
This book shows that modeling is an important thinking tool for us.
Although it doesn’t bring us to the truth, it really helps us to grasp the strange world.
2. Three-dimensional thinking and linear thinking.
Three-dimensional thinking ability constitutes an important part of innovative thinking, which will become more and more important in the future. When
we talk about the topic of “why manufacturing is important,” we are all emphasizing the various benefits of manufacturing. The benefits of
manufacturing are not the key, and these benefits can also be brought by the service industry.
The key is that whether the manufacturing industry is developed or not is a barometer of the level of national governance. The level of
national governance directly determines the quality of social development.
Strengthening the manufacturing industry itself is also a way to force the level of national governance.
We need to understand a phenomenon: there are two completely different ways of thinking in this world, one is “linear thinking,” and the other is “three-dimensional thinking.”. There are many explanations
for the linear way of thinking. What we mean here is that we think that there is only a one-way, linear causal relationship between things, and we can not see the more directional, more complex and more tortuous causal relationship between things.
If you can break through the linear way of thinking and establish a three-dimensional way of thinking (or a pluralistic way of thinking), your understanding of the world will be much deeper.
We have been introducing Charlie Munger’s famous book “Poor Charlie’s Treasure Book”, which emphasizes the “pluralistic thinking mode”, which is actually the meaning.
This article uses more examples to further illustrate the three-dimensional way of thinking.
For example, some people complain that Chinese students spend so much time learning English, but they seldom use it in their future work, or even do not use it at all. Isn’t this a waste?
It seems that this complaint is very reasonable.
It is true that many people do not use English in their work; for the few who do, translation software is sufficient. When
most companies recruit, it seems that there is no need to test the English level of candidates. Isn’t it better for
students to save time and learn other more useful knowledge?
It’s not. It is necessary for
enterprises to examine their English scores when recruiting college students.
This is not because English itself is important, or because English will be used in future work, but because passing CET-4 or CET-6 shows that the student did not neglect his studies when he went to college, and in probability, he is a qualified university graduate.
You know, from the beginning of middle school, there is a rule that if a student has no intention of learning, he will soon be unable to keep up with two subjects-English and mathematics. The characteristic of
these two subjects is that after a period of class, the following classes can not be understood. If you
don’t understand, you will have no interest in learning, and you will fall further, and eventually you will give up completely.
Compared with mathematics and English, Chinese, politics, geography, history and other subjects, the situation is different.
Even if you miss a paragraph, you can still understand the following lessons and cope with the exam at the last minute. Liberal arts departments at
universities are in a similar situation. It is difficult to judge the level of
liberal arts by examination results, which makes it easy for some people to make up the number.
If there is no English examination, in fact, students often do not use the spare time to learn other more useful knowledge, but do not learn anything, dawdling until graduation. When
companies recruit, they require students to pass CET-4 or CET-6, not for English, but to ensure that the applicant is a qualified university graduate. Qualified
English proves that he has studied hard in the university. Such a person also has the ability to continue learning in his work.
If there is no other more convenient and reliable selection method, it is necessary for enterprises to adhere to this requirement, which is a wise move.
For example, some people have tracked and compared people who drink red wine with those who do not drink red wine for a long time, and found that there is a significant difference in their health level, and people who drink red wine are healthier.
So some people come to the conclusion that red wine is good for health.
This is also a mistake of linear thinking.
Of course, there are some healthy ingredients in red wine, but these ingredients are not many, and they are not unique to red wine.
Maybe you can eat a bunch of grapes and get almost all the benefits of red wine-grapes are much cheaper than red wine. The real reason why
red wine is good for health is that people who have the conditions to drink red wine tend to be richer and have a higher social level. With more money,
people can have more comfortable living conditions, better medical care conditions, more physical exercise conditions, more health awareness, and so on. It is these conditions, not red wine, that
make them healthier.
To give another example, spend a lot of money to buy school district housing, so that children can enter a good school, is this the reason why children learn well in the future? The real reason why
children learn well may be that parents who are willing to spend a lot of money to buy school district houses are people who attach great importance to their children’s education.
They are often excellent themselves, and this kind of parents will urge and help their children to learn in all aspects.
School district housing is just an appearance, so that their children’s academic performance is better is the efforts and concern of these parents over the years.
American elites, including executives of large enterprises, politicians and military officials, are often the main players or even captains of college sports teams when they go to college. Does
this mean that the level of sports is very important for the management of enterprises, the government and the army?
For example, is it true that the higher the percentage of basketball shots, the more accurate the business decisions?
Of course not.
What these people get in college physical exercise is not only strong body, but also team spirit, hard-working quality, courage to face competition and other psychological characteristics. It is these psychological traits, not sports, that
help them become elite later in life.
Black box thinking modern society is developing so fast that it is far faster than evolution of our instincts, and in many cases, our intuition is not very reliable.
Without a frame of reference, we cannot make any progress without trial and error. It is the best gift that reason gives to human beings to
review their mistakes and reflect on themselves.
We should cherish every mistake and take the initiative to build a stadium of light and constantly correct our behavior. In March
2005, Elaine, 37, went to the hospital for sinus surgery.
This is a minor operation, the surgeon has more than 30 years of experience, the anesthesiologist has 16 years of experience, and no one thought it would go wrong in advance.
But there was a problem. During the anesthesia, Elaine suddenly stopped breathing. The chief surgeon quickly put a so-called “laryngeal mask” on Elaine and inserted an oxygen tube through her throat, but she couldn’t get it in. After several
attempts, Elaine’s condition became more and more critical.
At this time, the trachea can be cut open and the oxygen tube can be connected from the neck.
The nurse told the chief surgeon that the equipment for cutting the trachea was ready.
The chief surgeon was not reconciled and said, “Let me try again.”.
He tried several more times, but failed.
Then I looked up and saw that it was broken, and the time had passed 20 minutes. It was too late to
cut Elaine’s trachea again. The lack of oxygen was too long. Elaine’s brain was destroyed and she became a vegetable.
Facing the family members, the chief surgeon said very apologetically, “I’m sorry, we tried our best, but medicine is not omnipotent.”. What else can
family say?
Can only accept the results, after all, he did not participate in the rescue, the process, he does not know.
Even if he knows, he doesn’t know medicine. If he asks the doctor why he didn’t cut the trachea earlier, the doctor can immediately reply that cutting the trachea is risky. What if the patient dies during this period? Who bears the
responsibility?
Most people, like Elaine’s family, go to the hospital and do everything the doctor wants.
This is a story, and we will tell another story. In December
1978, United Airlines Flight 173 took off from New York and landed in Portland. Before
landing, when the landing gear was lowered, there was a sudden loud noise and violent vibration, and the indicator light showed that the nose landing gear was not lowered.
The captain reacted quickly and immediately pulled the plane up and circled over the airport while trying to find a way.
The mechanic reminded him that the plane had only 5% oil left.
The captain was very experienced and said that he could fly for at least 15 minutes with 5% fuel, and the most urgent thing was to find out whether the landing gear was down or not.
For an old hand like the captain, he could still land safely without the landing gear down, but he didn’t want to take any chances.
The plane kept circling, and the captain kept trying to find a way. Just as he was thinking about it, he looked at his watch and said, “It’s broken. 15 minutes are up.”.
As a result, the plane crashed. Fortunately, the captain was so skilled that he made a forced landing. Only 10 people were killed, but it was also a major air crash.
These two accidents happened in different fields, but they have a lot in common. For example, they are both veteran rollovers and are low probability events. From a professional point of view, it is hard to say that the choice of the chief surgeon and the captain is wrong. One of the biggest differences between the
two incidents is that the aviation industry has a mandatory requirement that all aircraft must carry two black boxes, which will record the whole operation process, while the operating room does not have this requirement.
Through the analysis of the black box of Flight 173, experts found a major problem: people in an emergency will feel that time slows down, operators feel that time is enough, but in fact time has run out.
This is not the operator’s problem, this is the defect of human nature, I am afraid training can not solve.
Airlines have specially designed a “four-step reminder system” for this purpose.
If applied to the case of the first operating room, the first step is to remind the nurse to say to the surgeon, “Is there any other solution?”?
The second step is to raise the alarm that “the patient’s condition is deteriorating, perhaps a tracheotomy should be performed.”.
The third step is the challenge, “If you don’t cut the trachea, the patient will die.”.
The fourth step is a serious warning, “I’m going to call the emergency team to cut the trachea.”.
In the operating room, the chief surgeon is the authority, in the cockpit, the captain is the authority, subordinates only dare to make euphemistic suggestions, but the chief surgeon and the captain are human beings, both have human defects, so it is necessary to design a system to prevent accidents.
If there were no black box, would this “four-step reminder system” be put forward?
I’m afraid it’s not easy.
Modern society is developing far faster than our instincts, which are designed to adapt to jungle life, and we are likely to lose our insight in the face of high-tech environment.
In many cases, our intuition is not very reliable.
Since intuition is unreliable, we can only rely on tools. Why is the
black box so important?
Because it protects us from the dark pitch effect.
Everyone may have played basketball, and at first they can’t shoot accurately, but they will slowly adjust the angle and strength of shooting. After some training, you may become a master.
But if we think about it, if we shoot in a dark court, we can’t see anything, and we don’t know how far we are from the basket, even if you practice for ten years, how bad the ball is.
Facts have proved that without a frame of reference, without trial and error, we can not make any progress.
Reviewing mistakes and reflecting on ourselves is the best gift that reason gives to human beings. As human beings, we should cherish every mistake and take the initiative to build a bright stadium to constantly correct our behavior through a clear frame of reference.
4. Computer thinking In the algorithmic thinking of computers, all principles must be sorted, coded, ordered in high and low orders, and must be able to deal with all actual situations.
This is a real combination of principle and flexibility.
Recently, the word “algorithm” has been mentioned more and more frequently. What
does that mean?
It shows that the whole society is more and more aware that human civilization has reached an important juncture.
In the past, human beings created computer algorithms, but in the future, human beings will learn algorithmic thinking from computers in turn. What is the difference between
“algorithmic thinking” and everyday thinking?
In this article, let’s talk about it briefly.
The most important difference is that algorithmic thinking is principled, while human thinking is difficult to have firm principles. Clausewitz, the author of On
War, once said, “It is not difficult to formulate principles, but it is difficult to adhere to them all the time.”.
This sentence sounds like a simple sentence, but it points to a fundamental problem of human thinking.
In our daily life, we often say to others, “This is all right in principle.” What does it actually mean?
Or, conversely, “this matter is not allowed in principle,” which actually means that it is also allowed under special circumstances.
Subconsciously, we just think that principles can be broken.
But the reason why there should be principles is that there can be no exceptions. Isn’t this a problem?
In the past, we thought computers were stupid because they only adhered to principles and executed instructions mechanically.
People are much more flexible. Yes, that’s a great advantage of people.
But now the situation has changed, if we focus on the future, the computer will become the object of learning.
Why?
Because people have to deal with more and more complex situations, the advantages of flexibility are getting smaller and smaller.
On the contrary, the disadvantage of not having principles is getting bigger and bigger.
For example, amateur investors are vaguely aware of a principle: never use leverage to borrow money to invest.
The reason is very simple, once the investment fails, not only lose everything, but also heavily in debt, people can not play games they can not afford.
Are there any exceptions?
A lot of people will think there is.
For example, this investment opportunity was told to me by my best friend, a big institution guaranteed this investment opportunity, and many rich and smart people joined this investment opportunity, so should I borrow money to gamble with leverage?
In a small human community, such as a village, it is not a big problem to think so.
Because of the limited complexity, we can use people’s flexibility to judge opportunities, human nature and whether specific opportunities are reliable.
However, the current investment market and money game are already a global complex network. It is so
complicated that no one can tell the whole picture clearly.
Under such circumstances, if a person has a sense of luck, even if he succeeds safely this time, sooner or later he will step on the mine.
Smart investors should not rely on their own cleverness, but stick to a stupid principle: never use leverage to invest.
Take another example.
Simply put, when we are faced with a lot of choices and have no chance to choose again, we need to examine the percentage of the total number before making a judgment. The answer given by the
computer algorithm is 37%. When we have examined 37% of the total, we should not continue to examine the remaining 63%, but should make decisions quickly instead of waiting for all of them to be examined.
For example, buying a house, there are 100 sets of houses in the market within the scope of investigation, then we have to see all 100 sets before we can make up our minds?
Algorithmic thinking tells us that we can choose.
This is determined by the algorithm, and it is the cost-benefit optimal strategy to stop investigating and make decisions in this place.
You may think that the principle of 37% provided by the algorithm seems cold and impersonal.
However, whether it is mathematical deduction or objective statistics, this figure is valid.
Not really suggesting that you accept this number, but through this example, to show the huge gap between the two ways of thinking.
However, at this point, you may have a misunderstanding that algorithmic thinking will only adhere to principles and have no flexibility. In fact,
on the contrary, algorithmic thinking not only has principles, but also can take into account more principles, which is precisely what human beings can not do. What principles do you usually need to follow when queuing for business in
bank stores?
First come, first served.
Whoever gets the waiting number first will do the business first.
This is a single principle.
If one person’s business is particularly complicated and takes a long time, the people behind him will wait for a long time; if one person’s business is particularly important, not only to himself, but also to the bank, but he has to queue up step by step.
From a global perspective, this is not the most efficient strategy.
But the bank has no choice but to face the public, and in complex situations it can only adopt a single, seemingly fair strategy: first come, first served.
The computer also faces the same problem, to complete so many tasks, it has only one CPU, which to calculate first and which to calculate later? The
algorithm will have many principles to deal with this matter.
For example, the judge principle: who queues up first, who handles first; customer service principle: who is the most important, who handles first; first bitter and then sweet principle: which customer consumes the longest time, which customer handles first. How are
these principles unified in the process of computer processing? The designer of a
computer operating system usually mixes several schemes.
For example, at the same time, the more important the customer is, the higher the priority is, and the longer the waiting time is, the higher the priority is. Even if
such a customer is not very important, but the waiting time has been very long, he also has the opportunity to handle business first.
Therefore, algorithmic thinking is not a single principle, it is more flexible and more able to consider the overall situation.
Its only starting point is which way consumes the shortest time, consumes the least resources and is the most efficient.
On one occasion, Tuo Buhua told me to examine whether a company has real values. A very effective question is to ask their boss, “What is the second most important value of your company?”?
This question usually confuses people. The purpose of asking the second and not the first is to see if their values are ranked. Values without ranking are equal to no values.
Yes, the mission, vision and values that many companies put on the wall are big words, such as efficiency, honesty, integrity and so on.
These big words are right in themselves, but the question is, when these big words conflict, for example, when efficiency and honesty conflict, which principle takes precedence?
If there is no clear ranking, how can we say that there are values?
Still can’t handle the situation. Compared with computers,
our human thinking ability is not only poor in computing speed, but also in thinking structure.
. Focus on not getting lost ~
