Quote: “Focusing narrowly on many fine details specific to a problem at hand feels like the exact right thing to do, when it is often exactly wrong.”(Epstein 110)
Comment: This is very interesting because of the fact that it goes against what we, or at least I, have been taught my whole life. If you have a problem, look at all of the details in that problem and then try to figure out what is actually causing the problem. But, he is telling us to look more broadly at a problem and will turn out better in most situations. I can’t really wrap my head around this thinking.
Question: When would it be ok to look at the fine details specific to a problem?
Quote: “Faced with an unexpected finding, rather than assuming the current theory is correct and that an observation must be off, the unexpected became an opportunity to venture somewhere new and analogies serve as the wilderness guide.”(Epstein 117)
Comment: this is also very interesting because when looking back at all the science classes I have had to take in the past. We would always watch or talk about the lab procedures and see what the result was supposed to be. So, when conducting the lab, we weren’t really finding or experiencing something new, and when we did get a result different from what was expected, it was wrong.
Question: How can this thinking be put into practice in our own lives? (it is easy to talk about it in a science lab sense, but how about in our everyday life)
Quote: “Successful problem solvers are more able to determine the deep structure of a problem before they proceed to match a strategy to it. Less successful problem solvers are more like most students in the Ambiguous Sorting Task: they mentally classify problems only by superficial, overtly stated features, like the domain context. For the best performers, they wrote, “problem solving begins with the typing of the problem” (115).
Comment: This quote caught my attention because it focuses on strategies for solving problems. In this section of the chapter, the author talked about breaking down problems into more manageable sections: focusing on the root issues and then going from there. I took this quote as looking at the bigger picture and instead of focusing on all the little details. In other words, working backwards. Using all of your skills to look at an issue from all different angles and perspectives, looking deeper, and piecing them together to create a solution. I thought this idea was really insightful because it can apply to all different types of problems in life. Less successful problem solvers do not look deep enough into the root of the issue. They focus on the superficial, or things that appear on the surface, instead of practicing critical thinking to solve an issue.
Question: When people only look at things on the surface, does that make them lazy problem solvers?
————————–
Quote: “Psychologists have shown repeatedly that the more internal details an individual can be made to consider, the more extreme their judgment becomes… Focusing narrowly on many fine details specific to a problem at hand feels like the exact right thing to do, when it is often exactly wrong” (110).
Comment: I found this quote very interesting because it relates to the previous quote. It is about broadening your focus in order to see the bigger picture. What struck me with this quote, was the fact that learning more about a topic makes point of views more extreme instead of simply informing people. This can be a good or a bad thing, depending on if the information is credible or not. For instance, people must be open to different perspectives and must not become stuck in a mindset. New information can be helpful when trying to solve a problem, but extreme views can be harmful. This relates to the author’s perspective about seeing the bigger picture and trying to not focus narrowly. In other words, bringing in your outside experiences in order to help the problem at hand. The author goes as far to say that focusing on the fine details can sometimes be the exact opposite of what people should do. Taking a step back and broadening your horizons can be the key to solving problems.
Question: Why do people become so set in their views so easily and develop extreme judgements? Why do people develop biased perspectives so often?
Quote: “He eventually decided that celestial bodies pulled one another, and larger bodies had more pull. That led him to claim (correctly) that the moon influenced tides on earth. Galileo, the embodiment of bold truths, mocked him for the ridiculous idea of “the moon’s dominion over the waters.” pg 101
Comment: Kepler was a 25-year-old man from the seventeenth century vigorously trying to figure out our world and other planets around us. He didn’t have any technology to prove his analogies so many people such as Galileo had a hard time understanding where his ideas were coming from. He thought about the planets orbit, why it wasn’t circular, why the ocean had tides, why the sun didn’t affect the farthest planets the way it affected the closest. This man questioned everything life had to offer, and most of his theories were correct even though he had no way of proving them. Galileo made fun of him at the time for believing that the moon controlled the water, when in fact, hundreds of years later, it still does.
Question: How did he even begin to think to question the world and the way It worked?
Quote: “His predecessors had always managed to explain away the Mars deviations without scrapping the overall scheme. Kepler’s short assignment (he guessed it would take 8 days) turned into 5 years of calculations trying to describe where Mars appeared in the sky at any given moment.” pg 116
Comment: In school, Kepler and his peers got assigned phenomena to research over a course of time. Kepler got Mars and its perplexing orbit, a topic nobody else wanted. He got so caught up in the topic and had to figure it all out for himself which is why diving so deep into the topic took him 5 years to conclude. He figured out his model and understanding of the orbit was off by 8 minutes, so he smashed his model and tried to figure out what else came into play (light, heat, smells, boats, brooms, magnets). Some of his research techniques are still used in laboratories to this day, this man was a literal genius and did not give up on his analogies and followed through with every hypothesis.
Question: Why would no one try to understand his way of thinking and if his out-of-pocket theories were actually correct?
Quote: “Dozens of neighbors were already taking turns with buckets throwing water on the shed, but they weren’t making any progress. The neighbors were surprised when the Fire Chief yelled at them to stop, and to all go fill their buckets in the lake. When they returned, the chief arranged them in a circle around the shed, and on the count of three had them all throw their water at once. The fire was immediately dampened, and soon thereafter extinguished” (Epstein 105).
Comment: This quote really stuck out to me because it shows the essence of teamwork. All the neighbors were individually trying to put out the fire but were only successful when they all collaborated and threw water on the fire at once. This depicts a life lesson that sometimes it is better to work together to solve problems. This is something that some people have a hard time with because they have the mindset that they don’t need help or just don’t want to ask for help. However, sometimes it is of your best interest to ask for help and work with people to solve your problems. This allows you to have multiple minds to solve whatever you are going through. It offers more support to you and can ultimately solve your problem a lot quicker with less stress on yourself and an ongoing problem.
Question: Why are we afraid to ask for help sometimes?
Quote: “The labs in which scientists had more diverse professional backgrounds were the ones where more and more varied analogies were offered, and were breakthroughs were more reliably produced when the unexpected arose” (Epstein 118).
Comment: This quote exemplifies the standard for generalization instead of specialization. These scientists were able to provide better solutions in a lab because they relied on their diverse background knowledge and were able to draw conclusions based on what they knew. When one is able to learn about broad topics and not zero-in on one specific topic, it makes it more useful when problem solving. It is much easier to solve a problem with a lot of diverse knowledge rather than relying on specialization of one topic. In addition, when one has a general understanding of a lot of topics, they are able to draw conclusions that others might not be able to based on their knowledge. However, on the other hand, those with a specialized background are less likely to be able to draw conclusions and make analogies because they lack the general knowledge to do so.
Question: If a general knowledge rather than specialization is so beneficial to problem solving, then why are we taught to focus on one career and specialize in it?
Quote
“Nicolaus Copernicus had proposed that planets moved around the sun, but the idea was still so unorthodox that Italian Philosopher Giordano Bruno was censured for teaching it and later burned at the stake as a heretic for insisting that there were other suns surrounded by other planets.”
Comment
This quote spoke to me because it shows how ignorant the human race can be at times and how dangerous it can be. To me, it is insane that they would burn Giordano Bruno for believing in something that ended up being true. Even today we have such a small understanding of how our universe works. Many things that we believe today could be totally false and some people may have discovered something that would change our understanding of how everything works but due to ignorance that person may have been easily shrugged off and denied just like Bruno was. This quote can teach us all a lesson. It can teach you to listen to others and try to understand their thought process even if you think that everything they are saying is ridiculous. it is better to be curious about a topic rather than be completely ignorant about it.
Quote
“The international relations students who were reminded of World War II were far more likely to choose to go to war; the students reminded of Vietnam opted for nonmilitary diplomacy.”
Comment
This quote spoke to me because it can teach us about how violence is not always the answer to solving the problems in our world and in our lives. In World War II, violence was really the only option that was available to end the war. The Nazis were trying to take over the continent of Europe and more, and the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. Many lives were lost as everybody knows but going to war with the Axis was the only way to stop them from causing more horrors throughout the world. This is an example of violence working in a situation. Vietnam was an example of violence not working. In the post-World War II 20th century, communism was spreading through Asia. America felt threatened by it and ended up going to war in Vietnam to stop the North Vietnamese communists from taking over South Vietnam. The war ended in failure. South Vietnam was lost to the North Vietnamese and American troops were pulled and ultimately defeated in the war. The Vietnam War was an example of violence not being the answer to solve a problem in the world. Today this lesson is important because of the War in Ukraine. The overwhelming public opinion is that NATO going to war with Russia to stop the invasion would be a terrible idea and NATO joining the war should be the absolute last option to stop Russia. Diplomacy is the only answer in this situation.
Quote: “Deep analogical thinking is the practice of recognizing conceptual similarities in multiple domains or scenarios that may seem to have little in common on the surface. It is a powerful tool for solving wicked problems” (Epstein 102-103).
Comment: This quote brings back up “wicked problems” that were mentioned in earlier chapters. It is saying that the way to solve these wicked problems is not to focus on the precise details of the task but to instead focus on broader learning that could apply to the specific problems as well as other similar problems. Being able to think analogically is being able to apply analogies to different problems, or to see two seemingly different problems and make analogies between them.
Question: Is this way of thinking always correct or are there instances where the problem you’re solving doesn’t have any analogies to be made?
Quote: “Our natural inclination to take the inside view can be defeated by following analogies to the “outside view.” The outside view probes for deep structural similarities to the current problem in different ones. The outside view is deeply counterintuitive because it requires a decision maker to ignore unique surface features of the current project, on which they are the expert, and instead look outside for structurally similar analogies. It requires a mindset switch from narrow to broad” (Epstein 108-109).
Comment: This quote is saying that it is important to look at things in a more broad way. By only looking at something on the surface, you can miss how it connects to other things, and you might miss deeper parts of the problem that can be solved through a similar way another problem was solved. Like the quote says, looking at problems through an “outside view” is difficult because it forces you to look away from the surface and focus on the broader aspects, which is the opposite of our instincts.
Question: If you try to solve things by only looking at the surface, are you doing yourself a disservice because you aren’t looking to apply the problem solving to broader topics?
“Kepler’s intellectual wanderings traced a staggering journey, from planets imbued with souls and riding on interlocking crystalline spheres in perfect circles around the stationary Earth, to his illumination of the laws of planetary motion, which showed that the planets move in ellipses that are predictions based on their relation to the sun. “(102)
Comment: Without Kepler’s wonders and thinking that made him curious to test himself, he was able to find out for himself the planets move in ellipses. Based on predictions from prior knowledge and that enforced his idea for a new theory. Without taking these steps Kepler wouldn’t have expanded his ideas, this could have led to him not discovering it. Instead of underestimating himself or by not taking that leap, he was expecting the possibility that he could fail but he wasn’t scared of what the outcome could be.
Question: Without taking that step and accepting the possibility of failure, would he be able to achieve the potential discovery?
“With the difficult radiation problem, the most successful strategy employed multiple situations that were not at all alike on the surface but held deep structural similarities. Most problem solvers are not like Kepler. They will stay inside of the problem at hand, focused on the internal details, and perhaps summon other medical knowledge, since it is on the surface a medical problem. They will not intuitively turn to distant analogies to probe solutions. They should, though, and they should make sure some of those analogies are, on the surface, far removed from the current problem. In a wicked world, relying upon experience from a single domain is not only limiting, it can be disastrous.” (107)
Comment: Different problems have the same structure to how they were created. Although some problems may just be surface level, these surface level problems are causing skillful thinkers to be discouraged. People will focus on one part of the problem rather than the entire problem and how to create a solution that can benefit its entirety. Creating temporary solutions that could only become a temporary fix is creating a long line of situations that are only uncalled for. Adapting a mindset that will allow you to accept a problem once it arises and think of multiple solutions that could fix it rather than one solution that is only temporary. Being a skillful thinker and problem solver doesn’t always mean quick and easy fix, it’s important to maintain a calm mind while trying to figure out an overall fix.
Question: Although it is good to be a skillful thinker that is able to come up with solutions, if you aren’t able to learn from trial and error, would you be able to develop those strategies?
Quote ”They may then evaluate it, if they have time, but often stick with it. This Tim will probably be like the last time, so extensive narrow experience works”(112).
Comment I think that this is a good quote from this chapter because it is referring to the chess masters again and how they evaluate each more ahead of time, like how the researchers do in every lab. Instead of just starting with coming up with options, they just start to make decisions based on patterns. I think we can learn a lot about this theme. So many of things that we do are thought about to the extreme, but I think if we start just acting, we might me able to get more stuff done or just more in the right direction.
Question Why do we think of all options instead of just jumping into it? Is it caution or is it just how we were raised?
Quote “The neighbors were surprised when the Fire Chief yelled at them to stop, and to all go fill their buckets in the lake. When they returned, the chief arranged them in a circle around the shed, and on the count of three had them all throw their water at once. The fire was immediately dampened, and soon thereafter extinguished” (105).
Comment I really enjoyed this story from the chapter. I think it shows a lot of teamwork and how we can work together to solve bigger problems. I find it funny that when a huge problem happens, we don’t think twice on helping, but when its a personal problem a lot of people don’t ask for help. Overall, I think that we should all keep asking for hep instead of just trying to figure it out that we might need more than ourselves to solve.
Question Why in todays society is asking for help frowned upon.
Quote- “They would rather rush them into specialization than equip them with ideas from what Gentner referred to as a ‘variety of base domains,’ which foster analytical thinking and conceptual connections that can help students categorize the type of problem they are facing. That is precisely a skill that sets the most adept problem solvers apart.”
Comment- This quote caught my attention because of how much this idea has been stressed in this book and in this class. This quote is a more narrowed down and specific explanation of this idea and I think it is the most clear one I’ve seen and I’m definitely interested in how this concept works. The best problem solvers are the ones with the baseline skills of many broad topics and strategies and how to problem solve.
Question- What are these “Variety of base domains” and how can we use them to become successful problem solvers?
Quote- This is a widespread phenomenon.If you’re asked to predict whether a particular horse will win a race or a particular politician would win an election, the more internal details you learn about any particular scenario- physical qualities of the specific horse, the background and strategy of the particular politician – the more likely you are today that the scenario you are investigating will occur.
Comment – I think this quote is really interesting and something we can discuss. Especially the aspect of learning internal details about a scenario and how that can be helpful to a person’s problem solving skills. And also not just learning about the details, but learning how to find the details and how to work through the progression of problem solving really interests me. I’ve always been a pretty good problem solver, but going into more details would definitely help me.
Question: How can we find and use the internal details into something that can help us solve problems?
“They will not intuitively turn to distant analogies to probe solutions. They should, though, and they should make sure some of those analogies are, on the surface, far removed from the current problem. In a wicked world, relying upon experience from a single domain is not only limiting, it can be disastrous.” (pg. 107)
Comment:
This quote really captured my attention because of how it relates back to the “wicked world”. The wicked world has been previously mentioned in the novel as a world in which specialists have a hard time succeeding in, but at the same time it’s the real world we live in. I think this quote is important because of how many times problem solving will come in handy in the wicked world, and with that comes the importance of problem solving. This quote is also particularly interesting to me because I’ve never really had the best problem solving skills. However, this quote does give me some insight on the situation. Sometimes, distancing your mind from the actual problem at hand is the best way to solve a problem. This is something I would’ve never believed before reading about the clashing ideas of generalists vs specialists, and wicked world vs kind world.
Question:
What is the best way to help people better improve their problem solving skills?
Quote:
“Our natural inclination to take the inside view can be defeated by following analogies to the outside view. The outside view probes for deep structural similarities to the current problems in different ones… It requires a mindset switch from narrow to broad.” (pg. 108)
Comment:
In this quote, we are introduced to another clash of ideas, one idea adopted by generalists, the other by specialists. The “outside view” appears to be the more broad, more integrating and seemingly better view for people to follow in the real world. With the ability to extract knowledge from a different situation and apply it to the one at hand is essentially the ideal way of problem solving for a generalist and probably the best way to solve a problem in the wicked world. The clashing view, the “inside view”, differs greatly. It is described as making judgments based only on the evidence directly in front of you. With this shallow thinking and narrow approach, it can make problem solving a lot more difficult. This approach seems to be the way many specialists attack problem solving.
Question:
Which approach do you often find yourself taking during problem solving?
“Kepler’s intellectual wanderings traced a staggering journey, from planets imbued with souls and riding on interlocking crystalline spheres in perfect circles around the stationary Earth, to his illumination of the laws of planetary motion, which showed that the planets move in ellipses that are predictions based on their relation to the sun. “(102)
Comment: Without Kepler’s wonders and thinking that made him curious to test himself, he was able to find out for himself the planets move in ellipses. Based on predictions from prior knowledge and that enforced his idea for a new theory. Without taking these steps Kepler wouldn’t have expanded his ideas, this could have led to him not discovering it. Instead of underestimating himself or by not taking that leap, he was expecting the possibility that he could fail but he wasn’t scared of what the outcome could be.
Question: Without taking that step and accepting the possibility of failure, would he be able to achieve the potential discovery?
“With the difficult radiation problem, the most successful strategy employed multiple situations that were not at all alike on the surface but held deep structural similarities. Most problem solvers are not like Kepler. They will stay inside of the problem at hand, focused on the internal details, and perhaps summon other medical knowledge, since it is on the surface a medical problem. They will not intuitively turn to distant analogies to probe solutions. They should, though, and they should make sure some of those analogies are, on the surface, far removed from the current problem. In a wicked world, relying upon experience from a single domain is not only limiting, it can be disastrous.”
Comment: Different problems have the same structure to how they were created. Although some problems may just be surface level, these surface level problems are causing skillful thinkers to be discouraged. People will focus on one part of the problem rather than the entire problem and how to create a solution that can benefit its entirety. Creating temporary solutions that could only become a temporary fix is creating a long line of situations that are only uncalled for. Adapting a mindset that will allow you to accept a problem once it arises and think of multiple solutions that could fix it rather than one solution that is only temporary. Being a skillful thinker and problem solver doesn’t always mean quick and easy fix, it’s important to maintain a calm mind while trying to figure out an overall fix.
Question: Although it is good to be a skillful thinker that is able to come up with solutions, if you aren’t able to learn from trial and error, would you be able to develop those strategies?
QUOTE 1
“Human intuition, it appears, is not very well engineered to make use of the best tools when faced with what the researchers called ‘ill-defined problems’. Our experience-based instincts are set up well for Tiger-domains, the kind world Gentner described, where problems and solutions repeat.” –Page 106
COMMENT
This quote stood out to me because I feel like we are structurally designed to only face problems we know how to solve. Anything new or different presents itself as a challenge, and most of us like to take the easy route out. In order to make something of ourselves, we have to rewire our brains to not perceive these new situations as a bad thing. Instead, maybe we can look at them as opportunities to grow and learn more about ourselves.
QUESTION
Why is the school system structured to program students with this sort of restricted mindset? What would happen if they promoted kids stepping out of their comfort zones?
QUOTE 2
“They will not intuitively turn to distant analogies to probe solutions. They should, though, and they should make sure some of those analogies are, on the surface, far removed from the current problem. In a wicked world, relying upon experience from a single domain is not only limiting, it can be disastrous.” –Page 107.
COMMENT
I liked this quote, because it demonstrates that having this restricted, one-track-mindset can in fact be dangerous. It’s always a good idea, when working to tackle new challenges, to pull information from people and resources that you might not interact with on a day-to-day basis. You truly never know what to expect until you try it. This reminded me a lot of a project I was given in my biology class in high school, where we were given a lab to work on as a small group, but weren’t provided with any sort of help from the teacher. We had to work with other groups and use our collective knowledge to finish our assignment.
QUESTION
How might someone know when it’s a good idea to reach out to new resources? If all you’ve ever known is right at your finger-tips, how can someone tell whether they should dive deeper into what they’re working on?
Journal 11 (pp 99-121)
Quote: “Dozens of neighbors were already taking turns with buckets throwing water on the shed, but they weren’t making any progress. The neighbors were surprised when the Fire Chief yelled at them to stop, and to all go fill their buckets in the lake. When they returned, the chief arranged them in a circle around the shed, and on the count of three had them all throw their water at once. The fire was immediately dampened, and soon thereafter extinguished” (Epstein 105).
Comment (150-200 words): This quote stood out to me personally because when you read how many people were all trying to attack the problem or fire in one spot at a time one bucket at a time and it didn’t work, it gets you thinking that when they all tackled the problem as a whole there finally became a solution. I think this happens a lot in real life or other issues. Many people work on one spot of the problem and tend not to focus on how other areas of the problem can grow or become worse if they don’t work together or on the problem as a whole.
Question: If we stopped to look at the bigger picture in the middle of a problem, will we fail to work quickly enough to stop it, or could we fix it in a more efficient way?
Quote: “Focusing narrowly on many fine details specific to a problem at hand feels like the exact right thing to do, when it is often exactly wrong”(Epstein 110).
Comment (150-200 words): Personally I took away this quote from the chapter because it made me realize that this is something that I commonly do to myself. I focus so hard on all of the small things that they all pile up to seem way worse than things are, it is a huge downfall that I think many people deal with, and this quote shows that. At the moment it can feel easier to break up the specifics and the details in the problem instead of tackling the problem at hand as a whole, ultimately this can lead to the wrong path and sometimes taking a step back to see the bigger picture can be beneficial even if at the time it can seem scary or like the wrong choice.
Questions: Why do we find it scary to take a step back to look at the bigger picture and tackle problems as a whole?
13 thoughts on “JOURNAL # 11”
Quote: “Focusing narrowly on many fine details specific to a problem at hand feels like the exact right thing to do, when it is often exactly wrong.”(Epstein 110)
Comment: This is very interesting because of the fact that it goes against what we, or at least I, have been taught my whole life. If you have a problem, look at all of the details in that problem and then try to figure out what is actually causing the problem. But, he is telling us to look more broadly at a problem and will turn out better in most situations. I can’t really wrap my head around this thinking.
Question: When would it be ok to look at the fine details specific to a problem?
Quote: “Faced with an unexpected finding, rather than assuming the current theory is correct and that an observation must be off, the unexpected became an opportunity to venture somewhere new and analogies serve as the wilderness guide.”(Epstein 117)
Comment: this is also very interesting because when looking back at all the science classes I have had to take in the past. We would always watch or talk about the lab procedures and see what the result was supposed to be. So, when conducting the lab, we weren’t really finding or experiencing something new, and when we did get a result different from what was expected, it was wrong.
Question: How can this thinking be put into practice in our own lives? (it is easy to talk about it in a science lab sense, but how about in our everyday life)
Quote: “Successful problem solvers are more able to determine the deep structure of a problem before they proceed to match a strategy to it. Less successful problem solvers are more like most students in the Ambiguous Sorting Task: they mentally classify problems only by superficial, overtly stated features, like the domain context. For the best performers, they wrote, “problem solving begins with the typing of the problem” (115).
Comment: This quote caught my attention because it focuses on strategies for solving problems. In this section of the chapter, the author talked about breaking down problems into more manageable sections: focusing on the root issues and then going from there. I took this quote as looking at the bigger picture and instead of focusing on all the little details. In other words, working backwards. Using all of your skills to look at an issue from all different angles and perspectives, looking deeper, and piecing them together to create a solution. I thought this idea was really insightful because it can apply to all different types of problems in life. Less successful problem solvers do not look deep enough into the root of the issue. They focus on the superficial, or things that appear on the surface, instead of practicing critical thinking to solve an issue.
Question: When people only look at things on the surface, does that make them lazy problem solvers?
————————–
Quote: “Psychologists have shown repeatedly that the more internal details an individual can be made to consider, the more extreme their judgment becomes… Focusing narrowly on many fine details specific to a problem at hand feels like the exact right thing to do, when it is often exactly wrong” (110).
Comment: I found this quote very interesting because it relates to the previous quote. It is about broadening your focus in order to see the bigger picture. What struck me with this quote, was the fact that learning more about a topic makes point of views more extreme instead of simply informing people. This can be a good or a bad thing, depending on if the information is credible or not. For instance, people must be open to different perspectives and must not become stuck in a mindset. New information can be helpful when trying to solve a problem, but extreme views can be harmful. This relates to the author’s perspective about seeing the bigger picture and trying to not focus narrowly. In other words, bringing in your outside experiences in order to help the problem at hand. The author goes as far to say that focusing on the fine details can sometimes be the exact opposite of what people should do. Taking a step back and broadening your horizons can be the key to solving problems.
Question: Why do people become so set in their views so easily and develop extreme judgements? Why do people develop biased perspectives so often?
Quote: “He eventually decided that celestial bodies pulled one another, and larger bodies had more pull. That led him to claim (correctly) that the moon influenced tides on earth. Galileo, the embodiment of bold truths, mocked him for the ridiculous idea of “the moon’s dominion over the waters.” pg 101
Comment: Kepler was a 25-year-old man from the seventeenth century vigorously trying to figure out our world and other planets around us. He didn’t have any technology to prove his analogies so many people such as Galileo had a hard time understanding where his ideas were coming from. He thought about the planets orbit, why it wasn’t circular, why the ocean had tides, why the sun didn’t affect the farthest planets the way it affected the closest. This man questioned everything life had to offer, and most of his theories were correct even though he had no way of proving them. Galileo made fun of him at the time for believing that the moon controlled the water, when in fact, hundreds of years later, it still does.
Question: How did he even begin to think to question the world and the way It worked?
Quote: “His predecessors had always managed to explain away the Mars deviations without scrapping the overall scheme. Kepler’s short assignment (he guessed it would take 8 days) turned into 5 years of calculations trying to describe where Mars appeared in the sky at any given moment.” pg 116
Comment: In school, Kepler and his peers got assigned phenomena to research over a course of time. Kepler got Mars and its perplexing orbit, a topic nobody else wanted. He got so caught up in the topic and had to figure it all out for himself which is why diving so deep into the topic took him 5 years to conclude. He figured out his model and understanding of the orbit was off by 8 minutes, so he smashed his model and tried to figure out what else came into play (light, heat, smells, boats, brooms, magnets). Some of his research techniques are still used in laboratories to this day, this man was a literal genius and did not give up on his analogies and followed through with every hypothesis.
Question: Why would no one try to understand his way of thinking and if his out-of-pocket theories were actually correct?
Quote: “Dozens of neighbors were already taking turns with buckets throwing water on the shed, but they weren’t making any progress. The neighbors were surprised when the Fire Chief yelled at them to stop, and to all go fill their buckets in the lake. When they returned, the chief arranged them in a circle around the shed, and on the count of three had them all throw their water at once. The fire was immediately dampened, and soon thereafter extinguished” (Epstein 105).
Comment: This quote really stuck out to me because it shows the essence of teamwork. All the neighbors were individually trying to put out the fire but were only successful when they all collaborated and threw water on the fire at once. This depicts a life lesson that sometimes it is better to work together to solve problems. This is something that some people have a hard time with because they have the mindset that they don’t need help or just don’t want to ask for help. However, sometimes it is of your best interest to ask for help and work with people to solve your problems. This allows you to have multiple minds to solve whatever you are going through. It offers more support to you and can ultimately solve your problem a lot quicker with less stress on yourself and an ongoing problem.
Question: Why are we afraid to ask for help sometimes?
Quote: “The labs in which scientists had more diverse professional backgrounds were the ones where more and more varied analogies were offered, and were breakthroughs were more reliably produced when the unexpected arose” (Epstein 118).
Comment: This quote exemplifies the standard for generalization instead of specialization. These scientists were able to provide better solutions in a lab because they relied on their diverse background knowledge and were able to draw conclusions based on what they knew. When one is able to learn about broad topics and not zero-in on one specific topic, it makes it more useful when problem solving. It is much easier to solve a problem with a lot of diverse knowledge rather than relying on specialization of one topic. In addition, when one has a general understanding of a lot of topics, they are able to draw conclusions that others might not be able to based on their knowledge. However, on the other hand, those with a specialized background are less likely to be able to draw conclusions and make analogies because they lack the general knowledge to do so.
Question: If a general knowledge rather than specialization is so beneficial to problem solving, then why are we taught to focus on one career and specialize in it?
Quote
“Nicolaus Copernicus had proposed that planets moved around the sun, but the idea was still so unorthodox that Italian Philosopher Giordano Bruno was censured for teaching it and later burned at the stake as a heretic for insisting that there were other suns surrounded by other planets.”
Comment
This quote spoke to me because it shows how ignorant the human race can be at times and how dangerous it can be. To me, it is insane that they would burn Giordano Bruno for believing in something that ended up being true. Even today we have such a small understanding of how our universe works. Many things that we believe today could be totally false and some people may have discovered something that would change our understanding of how everything works but due to ignorance that person may have been easily shrugged off and denied just like Bruno was. This quote can teach us all a lesson. It can teach you to listen to others and try to understand their thought process even if you think that everything they are saying is ridiculous. it is better to be curious about a topic rather than be completely ignorant about it.
Quote
“The international relations students who were reminded of World War II were far more likely to choose to go to war; the students reminded of Vietnam opted for nonmilitary diplomacy.”
Comment
This quote spoke to me because it can teach us about how violence is not always the answer to solving the problems in our world and in our lives. In World War II, violence was really the only option that was available to end the war. The Nazis were trying to take over the continent of Europe and more, and the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. Many lives were lost as everybody knows but going to war with the Axis was the only way to stop them from causing more horrors throughout the world. This is an example of violence working in a situation. Vietnam was an example of violence not working. In the post-World War II 20th century, communism was spreading through Asia. America felt threatened by it and ended up going to war in Vietnam to stop the North Vietnamese communists from taking over South Vietnam. The war ended in failure. South Vietnam was lost to the North Vietnamese and American troops were pulled and ultimately defeated in the war. The Vietnam War was an example of violence not being the answer to solve a problem in the world. Today this lesson is important because of the War in Ukraine. The overwhelming public opinion is that NATO going to war with Russia to stop the invasion would be a terrible idea and NATO joining the war should be the absolute last option to stop Russia. Diplomacy is the only answer in this situation.
Quote: “Deep analogical thinking is the practice of recognizing conceptual similarities in multiple domains or scenarios that may seem to have little in common on the surface. It is a powerful tool for solving wicked problems” (Epstein 102-103).
Comment: This quote brings back up “wicked problems” that were mentioned in earlier chapters. It is saying that the way to solve these wicked problems is not to focus on the precise details of the task but to instead focus on broader learning that could apply to the specific problems as well as other similar problems. Being able to think analogically is being able to apply analogies to different problems, or to see two seemingly different problems and make analogies between them.
Question: Is this way of thinking always correct or are there instances where the problem you’re solving doesn’t have any analogies to be made?
Quote: “Our natural inclination to take the inside view can be defeated by following analogies to the “outside view.” The outside view probes for deep structural similarities to the current problem in different ones. The outside view is deeply counterintuitive because it requires a decision maker to ignore unique surface features of the current project, on which they are the expert, and instead look outside for structurally similar analogies. It requires a mindset switch from narrow to broad” (Epstein 108-109).
Comment: This quote is saying that it is important to look at things in a more broad way. By only looking at something on the surface, you can miss how it connects to other things, and you might miss deeper parts of the problem that can be solved through a similar way another problem was solved. Like the quote says, looking at problems through an “outside view” is difficult because it forces you to look away from the surface and focus on the broader aspects, which is the opposite of our instincts.
Question: If you try to solve things by only looking at the surface, are you doing yourself a disservice because you aren’t looking to apply the problem solving to broader topics?
“Kepler’s intellectual wanderings traced a staggering journey, from planets imbued with souls and riding on interlocking crystalline spheres in perfect circles around the stationary Earth, to his illumination of the laws of planetary motion, which showed that the planets move in ellipses that are predictions based on their relation to the sun. “(102)
Comment: Without Kepler’s wonders and thinking that made him curious to test himself, he was able to find out for himself the planets move in ellipses. Based on predictions from prior knowledge and that enforced his idea for a new theory. Without taking these steps Kepler wouldn’t have expanded his ideas, this could have led to him not discovering it. Instead of underestimating himself or by not taking that leap, he was expecting the possibility that he could fail but he wasn’t scared of what the outcome could be.
Question: Without taking that step and accepting the possibility of failure, would he be able to achieve the potential discovery?
“With the difficult radiation problem, the most successful strategy employed multiple situations that were not at all alike on the surface but held deep structural similarities. Most problem solvers are not like Kepler. They will stay inside of the problem at hand, focused on the internal details, and perhaps summon other medical knowledge, since it is on the surface a medical problem. They will not intuitively turn to distant analogies to probe solutions. They should, though, and they should make sure some of those analogies are, on the surface, far removed from the current problem. In a wicked world, relying upon experience from a single domain is not only limiting, it can be disastrous.” (107)
Comment: Different problems have the same structure to how they were created. Although some problems may just be surface level, these surface level problems are causing skillful thinkers to be discouraged. People will focus on one part of the problem rather than the entire problem and how to create a solution that can benefit its entirety. Creating temporary solutions that could only become a temporary fix is creating a long line of situations that are only uncalled for. Adapting a mindset that will allow you to accept a problem once it arises and think of multiple solutions that could fix it rather than one solution that is only temporary. Being a skillful thinker and problem solver doesn’t always mean quick and easy fix, it’s important to maintain a calm mind while trying to figure out an overall fix.
Question: Although it is good to be a skillful thinker that is able to come up with solutions, if you aren’t able to learn from trial and error, would you be able to develop those strategies?
Quote ”They may then evaluate it, if they have time, but often stick with it. This Tim will probably be like the last time, so extensive narrow experience works”(112).
Comment I think that this is a good quote from this chapter because it is referring to the chess masters again and how they evaluate each more ahead of time, like how the researchers do in every lab. Instead of just starting with coming up with options, they just start to make decisions based on patterns. I think we can learn a lot about this theme. So many of things that we do are thought about to the extreme, but I think if we start just acting, we might me able to get more stuff done or just more in the right direction.
Question Why do we think of all options instead of just jumping into it? Is it caution or is it just how we were raised?
Quote “The neighbors were surprised when the Fire Chief yelled at them to stop, and to all go fill their buckets in the lake. When they returned, the chief arranged them in a circle around the shed, and on the count of three had them all throw their water at once. The fire was immediately dampened, and soon thereafter extinguished” (105).
Comment I really enjoyed this story from the chapter. I think it shows a lot of teamwork and how we can work together to solve bigger problems. I find it funny that when a huge problem happens, we don’t think twice on helping, but when its a personal problem a lot of people don’t ask for help. Overall, I think that we should all keep asking for hep instead of just trying to figure it out that we might need more than ourselves to solve.
Question Why in todays society is asking for help frowned upon.
Quote- “They would rather rush them into specialization than equip them with ideas from what Gentner referred to as a ‘variety of base domains,’ which foster analytical thinking and conceptual connections that can help students categorize the type of problem they are facing. That is precisely a skill that sets the most adept problem solvers apart.”
Comment- This quote caught my attention because of how much this idea has been stressed in this book and in this class. This quote is a more narrowed down and specific explanation of this idea and I think it is the most clear one I’ve seen and I’m definitely interested in how this concept works. The best problem solvers are the ones with the baseline skills of many broad topics and strategies and how to problem solve.
Question- What are these “Variety of base domains” and how can we use them to become successful problem solvers?
Quote- This is a widespread phenomenon.If you’re asked to predict whether a particular horse will win a race or a particular politician would win an election, the more internal details you learn about any particular scenario- physical qualities of the specific horse, the background and strategy of the particular politician – the more likely you are today that the scenario you are investigating will occur.
Comment – I think this quote is really interesting and something we can discuss. Especially the aspect of learning internal details about a scenario and how that can be helpful to a person’s problem solving skills. And also not just learning about the details, but learning how to find the details and how to work through the progression of problem solving really interests me. I’ve always been a pretty good problem solver, but going into more details would definitely help me.
Question: How can we find and use the internal details into something that can help us solve problems?
Quote:
“They will not intuitively turn to distant analogies to probe solutions. They should, though, and they should make sure some of those analogies are, on the surface, far removed from the current problem. In a wicked world, relying upon experience from a single domain is not only limiting, it can be disastrous.” (pg. 107)
Comment:
This quote really captured my attention because of how it relates back to the “wicked world”. The wicked world has been previously mentioned in the novel as a world in which specialists have a hard time succeeding in, but at the same time it’s the real world we live in. I think this quote is important because of how many times problem solving will come in handy in the wicked world, and with that comes the importance of problem solving. This quote is also particularly interesting to me because I’ve never really had the best problem solving skills. However, this quote does give me some insight on the situation. Sometimes, distancing your mind from the actual problem at hand is the best way to solve a problem. This is something I would’ve never believed before reading about the clashing ideas of generalists vs specialists, and wicked world vs kind world.
Question:
What is the best way to help people better improve their problem solving skills?
Quote:
“Our natural inclination to take the inside view can be defeated by following analogies to the outside view. The outside view probes for deep structural similarities to the current problems in different ones… It requires a mindset switch from narrow to broad.” (pg. 108)
Comment:
In this quote, we are introduced to another clash of ideas, one idea adopted by generalists, the other by specialists. The “outside view” appears to be the more broad, more integrating and seemingly better view for people to follow in the real world. With the ability to extract knowledge from a different situation and apply it to the one at hand is essentially the ideal way of problem solving for a generalist and probably the best way to solve a problem in the wicked world. The clashing view, the “inside view”, differs greatly. It is described as making judgments based only on the evidence directly in front of you. With this shallow thinking and narrow approach, it can make problem solving a lot more difficult. This approach seems to be the way many specialists attack problem solving.
Question:
Which approach do you often find yourself taking during problem solving?
“Kepler’s intellectual wanderings traced a staggering journey, from planets imbued with souls and riding on interlocking crystalline spheres in perfect circles around the stationary Earth, to his illumination of the laws of planetary motion, which showed that the planets move in ellipses that are predictions based on their relation to the sun. “(102)
Comment: Without Kepler’s wonders and thinking that made him curious to test himself, he was able to find out for himself the planets move in ellipses. Based on predictions from prior knowledge and that enforced his idea for a new theory. Without taking these steps Kepler wouldn’t have expanded his ideas, this could have led to him not discovering it. Instead of underestimating himself or by not taking that leap, he was expecting the possibility that he could fail but he wasn’t scared of what the outcome could be.
Question: Without taking that step and accepting the possibility of failure, would he be able to achieve the potential discovery?
“With the difficult radiation problem, the most successful strategy employed multiple situations that were not at all alike on the surface but held deep structural similarities. Most problem solvers are not like Kepler. They will stay inside of the problem at hand, focused on the internal details, and perhaps summon other medical knowledge, since it is on the surface a medical problem. They will not intuitively turn to distant analogies to probe solutions. They should, though, and they should make sure some of those analogies are, on the surface, far removed from the current problem. In a wicked world, relying upon experience from a single domain is not only limiting, it can be disastrous.”
Comment: Different problems have the same structure to how they were created. Although some problems may just be surface level, these surface level problems are causing skillful thinkers to be discouraged. People will focus on one part of the problem rather than the entire problem and how to create a solution that can benefit its entirety. Creating temporary solutions that could only become a temporary fix is creating a long line of situations that are only uncalled for. Adapting a mindset that will allow you to accept a problem once it arises and think of multiple solutions that could fix it rather than one solution that is only temporary. Being a skillful thinker and problem solver doesn’t always mean quick and easy fix, it’s important to maintain a calm mind while trying to figure out an overall fix.
Question: Although it is good to be a skillful thinker that is able to come up with solutions, if you aren’t able to learn from trial and error, would you be able to develop those strategies?
QUOTE 1
“Human intuition, it appears, is not very well engineered to make use of the best tools when faced with what the researchers called ‘ill-defined problems’. Our experience-based instincts are set up well for Tiger-domains, the kind world Gentner described, where problems and solutions repeat.” –Page 106
COMMENT
This quote stood out to me because I feel like we are structurally designed to only face problems we know how to solve. Anything new or different presents itself as a challenge, and most of us like to take the easy route out. In order to make something of ourselves, we have to rewire our brains to not perceive these new situations as a bad thing. Instead, maybe we can look at them as opportunities to grow and learn more about ourselves.
QUESTION
Why is the school system structured to program students with this sort of restricted mindset? What would happen if they promoted kids stepping out of their comfort zones?
QUOTE 2
“They will not intuitively turn to distant analogies to probe solutions. They should, though, and they should make sure some of those analogies are, on the surface, far removed from the current problem. In a wicked world, relying upon experience from a single domain is not only limiting, it can be disastrous.” –Page 107.
COMMENT
I liked this quote, because it demonstrates that having this restricted, one-track-mindset can in fact be dangerous. It’s always a good idea, when working to tackle new challenges, to pull information from people and resources that you might not interact with on a day-to-day basis. You truly never know what to expect until you try it. This reminded me a lot of a project I was given in my biology class in high school, where we were given a lab to work on as a small group, but weren’t provided with any sort of help from the teacher. We had to work with other groups and use our collective knowledge to finish our assignment.
QUESTION
How might someone know when it’s a good idea to reach out to new resources? If all you’ve ever known is right at your finger-tips, how can someone tell whether they should dive deeper into what they’re working on?
Journal 11 (pp 99-121)
Quote: “Dozens of neighbors were already taking turns with buckets throwing water on the shed, but they weren’t making any progress. The neighbors were surprised when the Fire Chief yelled at them to stop, and to all go fill their buckets in the lake. When they returned, the chief arranged them in a circle around the shed, and on the count of three had them all throw their water at once. The fire was immediately dampened, and soon thereafter extinguished” (Epstein 105).
Comment (150-200 words): This quote stood out to me personally because when you read how many people were all trying to attack the problem or fire in one spot at a time one bucket at a time and it didn’t work, it gets you thinking that when they all tackled the problem as a whole there finally became a solution. I think this happens a lot in real life or other issues. Many people work on one spot of the problem and tend not to focus on how other areas of the problem can grow or become worse if they don’t work together or on the problem as a whole.
Question: If we stopped to look at the bigger picture in the middle of a problem, will we fail to work quickly enough to stop it, or could we fix it in a more efficient way?
Quote: “Focusing narrowly on many fine details specific to a problem at hand feels like the exact right thing to do, when it is often exactly wrong”(Epstein 110).
Comment (150-200 words): Personally I took away this quote from the chapter because it made me realize that this is something that I commonly do to myself. I focus so hard on all of the small things that they all pile up to seem way worse than things are, it is a huge downfall that I think many people deal with, and this quote shows that. At the moment it can feel easier to break up the specifics and the details in the problem instead of tackling the problem at hand as a whole, ultimately this can lead to the wrong path and sometimes taking a step back to see the bigger picture can be beneficial even if at the time it can seem scary or like the wrong choice.
Questions: Why do we find it scary to take a step back to look at the bigger picture and tackle problems as a whole?