LAYERS OF THE SKILL

February 6th, 2021

The effort to learn some new skill often stutters at the start when we try to bite off more than we can chew. Learning any new skill is a problem to be solved, a dynamic one where the solution morphs depending on our approach. Sometimes the main problem is the approach, and a solution is simply trying a different solution. Here already the task of learning a skill is being broken down just as we do with problems, and perhaps not enough thought is given to the different ways a skill can be pieced apart and tackled in smaller bits.

Take learning a language for example. The approach is often full on: alphabet, pronunciation, vocabulary, reading, grammar, writing. We get the whole enchilada. But despite how interrelated these categories are, how fast do we progress in any one of them? Generally we progress on all of them, but slowly. What if, instead, we focused on just one at a time? What if pronunciation was simply the first step? Just figure out how to read the language immaculately? And then once that skill is fairly robust, start learning what those perfectly pronounced words mean. At the very least, even with just that first layer of skill, a person will walk away with an ability to impress their date while reading their order off the menu at that French restaurant.

Another easy example is meditation. It’s not a single skill, nor a single habit. The mental training of meditation really takes some time to come on line. In the beginning, people are mostly just figuring out how to make a habit of sitting in one spot with decent posture for a few minutes a day. But again, the way it’s generally taught, the whole enchilada is thrown at the student.

Or take coding for example. How much harder would it be to learn how to code if you didn’t know how to type? Here the situation is a bit backwards. Most everyone already knows how to type so we don’t see it as part of the skill of coding. But of course it is. It’s just a layer of the skill we already come equipped with, and because of this skill, it’s a lot easier to get started.

Every skill can be broken down into these component parts, and the ability to parse the problem of learning thoughtfully can make the learning process faster and far less painful, by virtue of the fact that we can simply pick the chunk of skill that grabs our interest most.

VEILED OPPORTUNITY

February 5th, 2021

The content of Tinkered Thinking attempts to stay away from current events at nearly all cost.  But the topic today is also a timeless one, when our history is considered.  So without further ado, let’s start off by saying that the last year was rather a vast disappointment on the subject of masks.

Here was an opportunity to effectively have Halloween every day for more than a year and it was mostly squandered with fatuous debate and lacklustre innovation.  Halloween.  Arguably the funniest holiday commonly celebrated where you can literally be anything you want to be.  And yet when it comes to masks, the best innovation we have is overlaying a bit of color and design onto an N95 mask.  This is a serious disappointment.

Where was all the Star Wars stuff and Day of the Dead, Masquerade, and Native inspired mask talents that we’ve explored in the past?  This could have been a ton of fun, but instead there were just squabbles and squawks about… freedom.

Which is rather strange.  Here was an opportunity to innovate against facial recognition software and create a cultural precedent of normalizing the ability to cover your face in public.  How exactly is this impinging upon freedom?  Isn’t covering your face in public owned upon because it makes incrimination harder?

The childish debate around masks is clearly a proxy debate for some nonsense about credibility and perhaps something do do with authority, maybe.  But honestly that’s a stretch.  The main argument against masks is that it’s some sort of muzzle, which doesn’t seem to make much sense.  We don’t exactly go around biting people with much regularity, and a mask certainly doesn’t stop anyone from expressing their opinion.

Looking to the world of fiction and fantasy, many masks had practical utility.  Take The Predator for example.  Even if you aren’t familiar with character, the name alone should hint that if a mask is involved, it certainly doesn’t get in the way of being a rather formidable entity.  But it goes beyond that.  For that character the mask is an awesome tool fit with all manner of technological gadgetry.  A more accessible example is likely Iron Man, whose mask is likewise the control centre for an entire suite of superhuman ability.  Far from a muzzle, maybe it boils down to the fact that we just need a better mask.

Our species has such a rich history when it comes to masks.  Be it the plague doctor masks or the masks of Native Americans, all our super heroes and villains, Eyes Wide Shut, and the endless sci-fi and anime..

The Mandalorian is currently on of the top shows, and simply no one can argue that the appeal of the show doesn’t have anything to do with the awesome getup the main character wears, particularly the helmet, the mask.  What well-respecting kid doesn’t want to stalk around in that helmet with the air of mystery and intimidation that it exudes?

The pandemic has been an amazing opportunity squandered.  N95 masks, the cloth masks… not to mention other safety gear like bicycle helmets… all of these things just look so lame.  It’s surprising that the cosplay community didn’t run with this chance and capitalize incredibly on a circumstance where some significant part of the population was covering their face.

This whole mask thing really highlights something that humans have gotten really bad at within the captivity of civilization.  We used to be really good at pivoting on a dime and turning a setback into an advantage, but the creativity is bred out of us by impressively boring schools and jobs that are even more tedious.  We whine for freedom but really we’re pouting because our delicate sense of comfort has been altered, slightly.

There’s still time though.  The virus is still out and about, and it’s still not fun to be sick in any degree.  So many people are complaining about boredom just because they can’t down out their lack of creativity with the loud and mind-muddling atmosphere of a bar or restaurant or some dumb beer-loaded sport.  

Carve it out of wood, or start with cardboard, who cares, just make something.  Try to make it cool, but no matter how it turns out, just have fun, and perhaps integrate a medical grade filter.

SUBTLE TRENDS

February 4th, 2021

When the variables are many, the cause can be hard to identify, but when the variables are variable, the task is virtually impossible.  Because of this, consistency is vital.  We are pattern recognition machines.  All intelligence, meaning and progress depends on the identification and manipulation of patterns.  These words are part of a complex pattern language that I am manipulating to create new meaning.  Our own personal biology, our technological progress as a species, everything is a result or a manipulated extrapolation of a pattern.

Diet is an excellent one to take as an example.  What we eat has an immense effect on the way we look, the way we feel, the way we sleep and the way we think.  Anyone who wants to improve all of these things does well by examining diet.  Without any examination or care nor thought, a diet is a vast smorgasbord of food groups, chemicals, and for the most part, a mindless satisfaction of hardwired desires that don’t have our modern interests at heart.  Our taste for flavour is still stuck in the Palaeolithic era, and because of this few of us are ever happy with how the photo turns out.  On top of this we are omnivores, and there’s little that isn’t available to snack on.  Diet for most people is a huge spread of variables, and often the only thing that’s easy to point out is how bad it generally is.

Consistency can make subtle trends apparent. Without consistency, such subtle trends are invisible since variables that change simultaneously or irregularly create a dynamic set of changes. There’s no way to know if changes in certain variables are contributing to the change of other variables.  Internal relationships become nearly impossible to spot. This is why scientific studies have a control group, to establish a semblance of consistency.

For the diet it might seem effective to cut just one thing out and wait for a change.  But of course this doesn’t necessarily simplify the rest of the diet enough to notice anything.  Pulling one variable out at a time isn’t likely to yield any insight, especially if other variables have some kind equivalent effect.  It’s rather pointless to cut out bread if beer is always served with dinner anyway.

The point is to find some sort of pattern - a signal in the noise of variables, and one way to boost a signal (if there is one) is to simplify the noise.  Cut out as many variables as possible and see how one or two effect the system.  With the example of diet, this might look like: eat chicken breast and dry salad everyday for 3 months.  The variables are practically nil, and because of this the cause and effect correlation between input and result is very robust.  Notice though, the signal is just as strong if someone eats only ice cream and potato chips for 3 months.  Strangely, it may be that many unhealthy people do have a fairly strong signal between cause and effect due to such consistently bad choices.  In a system as dynamic as the body, the occasional bad input doesn’t have much of an effect.  The odd circumstance of eating a tub of ice cream after a breakup, or smoking a cigarette.  These things will have no effect.  It’s the consistent choice that has the noticeable and meaningful effect.

The subtle trend we might benefit most from is often buried in a chaos of noise or beneath much  heavier trends.  Consistent simplification leads to a cleaner patterns, patterns which we can understand, and rearrange for our benefit.

CONFIDENT PROBLEM

February 3rd, 2021

The Dunning Kruger Effect is fairly well known, and notorious.  In simple terms it’s the phenomenon that when we lack competence we’re most likely to be overconfident.  Interestingly, it doesn’t apply to total novices.  Someone who has just learned the rules of football does not instantly transform into an armchair quarterback.  People need a little experience in a field before overconfidence starts to set traps of humility.

This Dunning Kruger effect is mostly lambasted as a bad aspect of our species.  The prescription is to be humble, to tread mindfully that there is still much to learn.  And while this is very good advice, it doesn’t do anything to explain why the Dunning Kruger effect occurs in the first place.  If overconfidence were so dangerous and inimical to our well being, wouldn’t this castigated trait been weened out of our psychology millennia ago?  

The answer perhaps lies in another one of our unfortunate traits: the fact that we learn best, and perhaps only through mistakes.  Errors in outcome help us falsify our model of reality.  And unlike the reasons for success, errors can be pinpointed with precision.  Because of this errors form concrete and very practical lessons for how to improve.  Cocktails of success, on the other hand do not reveal their traits.  Parsing the reasons for success is a bit like trying to unscramble an egg, or unshake a cocktail into it’s component spirits. The lessons of success just aren’t as accessible as the lessons of failure.

Now certainly, a humble forward tread will surely be ripe with missteps and mistakes to learn from.  But, overconfidence feeds this progress with rocket fuel.  With overconfidence we run toward our mistakes instead of tip toe toward them.  Certainly a slower tread could perhaps avoid some of these mistakes, but if any real learning is to take place than mistakes are going to happen either way.  A certain book title comes to mind: Move Fast and Break Things.  Unsurprisingly that book is about some of the most successful companies in human history.

Moving fast isn’t ideal since it most likely means making more mistakes, but it’s better than moving too slow to ever cross the finish line.  This might be why overconfidence is such a tendency in the human spirit and mind - we push ourselves faster toward that cold slap of reality…. If indeed it ever comes.  

The big problem regarding the Dunning Kruger effect really has to do with those overconfident people who turn out to be stubbornly immune to the cold hard slap of reality.  If an overconfident person is incapable of being humbled, then they really are set up for mounting disaster.  On the other hand, is overconfidence so much of a problem if an individual is susceptible to being humbled?  Probably not.  It’s only really a problem for other people who get annoyed by unsubstantiated overconfidence.  And while annoying things are certainly unfortunate, is it really that much of an issue that we have to castigate the entire species for this common trait?  Or is such sensitivity to such annoyances perhaps evidence that the real problem is a lot closer to home.  Perhaps instead of huffing and puffing about someone else’s undeserved overconfidence, our attention and effort would be better redirected toward an ability to be at ease with the world no matter how annoying other people seem.  Identifying problems in others may likely identify two problems, the counterintuitive one being that we’re so predisposed to pointing out problems in the first place, especially when it’s a problem like overconfidence which comes with a built in fix.  Perhaps it’s a mistake to be so confident about someone else’s overconfidence being such a problem.

EXPIRATION OF BELIEF

February 2nd, 2021

Imagine if beliefs had expiration dates.  Imagine if it was a little difficult, maybe even painful to renew a belief after it had expired.  Say completely novel beliefs were painless to try on for a while.  How would this system work out in the long run?

At first it’s likely that renewing a belief is just too costly, and simply adopting new beliefs is easier, since renewing is painful or difficult.  Just move on, right?  However, after some time to try out a bunch of beliefs and shed them, it’s likely we realize life in general was much easier or fruitful with certain beliefs and because of this it’s worth renewing.  The difficulty of living without that beneficial belief is greater than the difficulty of renewing it.

This sort of system would create a constantly evolving set of beliefs.  There’s enough pain in the system to stress it and keep it healthy, and by default it is susceptible to change.  One way to think about it is to swap out beliefs for food.  It’s certainly more difficult to go without food for very long than it is to pony up some cash and head to the grocery store.  And we can easily imagine what would happen if all food had absolutely no taste.  If we could only register the effect of food by the way it effects the body, then all our diets would very quickly iterate to an extremely healthy make up.  But because that little demon of taste sits right on top of the experience of renewing the food in our experience, a huge disconnect is created between the lasting effects of food on the body and the cost of renewing it.

With beliefs, our masochism seems to run even deeper, and perhaps for even dummer reasons.  Either we have to locate the pleasure principle around a belief, or we have to throw up our hands at the stupidity of the human race.  Instead of sugary goodness, the pleasure of a belief is often social: it’s the feeling of comfort that comes when you know people you respect believe the same things you do.  Or it’s that feeling of certainty and perhaps superiority that comes with the feeling of being right.  Each bad belief must have a pleasure principle attached to it in some way, otherwise the difficulty of living with a bad belief just doesn’t make sense.  That pleasure principle could also just be habit.  Since beliefs don’t automatically expire, it simple seems as though it’s less trouble to hold on to what’s already made an insidious home in the head.

With bad beliefs, we have the worst of both worlds, with only laziness or a bit of social pleasure to show for it.  Worse still, many beliefs exclude new ones that they conflict with.  This happens even simply by association.  Beliefs are often shared and held in groups, even if the beliefs aren’t explicitly or logically related.  The beliefs define a group or people, and in order to enjoy a sense of belonging with that group we are goaded to accept and defend the beliefs of the group en masse.  The social pleasure principle comes with a high cost because these beliefs don’t just live rent free in the mind, they often preclude better beliefs from setting up shop and helping to improve our lives.

The death of a belief is an unnatural thing.  Beliefs are extremely durable.  They simply don’t die.  They don’t have a ‘natural’ lifespan like we do.  No, they persist until WE die.  Beliefs only die in one way, and that’s murder.  Self-improvement, or really any sort of progress in one’s life is generally a painful one because it requires killing off beliefs that don’t serve a new way of life which is better.  As strange as it may sound, we are better served to be suspicious of our own minds, and look for opportunities to root out beliefs that aren’t improving life and the lives of those around us.  Now notice this.  If you were to adopt that belief - the belief that we should actively try to kill off our own beliefs to generate an evolving mind, then we are now operating on that belief.  In some sense it’s an anti-belief.  It enters a mind and kills off other beliefs.  The point is, it can be hard to even locate the root of a belief because we are often operating on them, and they operate through us.  The connection is so subtle that we can even swing at a belief and end up hitting our own self.  What this points at is that identity is a fairly dangerous concept if we take it too seriously, because once identity is upheld as the be-all of personhood, it becomes impossible to update beliefs because that’s exactly what an identity is made of.