I always thought I was dumb. More precisely, I am dumb.
It manifested itself simply: at meetings and discussions, I could not quickly come up with a solution to the problem. Everyone says something, sometimes smart, and I sit and keep silent. Even somehow it was uncomfortable.
Everyone else thought I was stupid too. So they stopped calling me to meetings. Those who say something without delay were called.
And I, leaving the meeting, continued to think about the problem. And, as the enduring idiom says, a good thought comes after. I found a normal, sometimes interesting, and sometimes - as an awesome solution. But no one needed it anymore. They don't wave their fists after a fight.
It's just that the culture in those companies where I started working was modern. Well, as it happens there - "the meeting should end with a decision." That's what they came up with at the meeting, and then it is accepted. Even if the solution is complete bullshit.
And then I got to the factory. They wanted to spit on newfangled trends. No issue is resolved in one meeting. First, a meeting-setting, then a meeting-discussion of options, then a meeting-again discussing options, then a meeting-decision-making, a meeting-discussion of the decision, etc.
And then it started. At the first meeting, as expected, I am silent. To the second I bring the decision. And my decisions began to be made! Including because no one but me continued to think about the problem after leaving the meeting.
The owner noticed this oddity in my behavior, and officially allowed me to keep silent in a rag at meetings. Yes, I also noticed that I listen better when I play Beleweled Classic on my phone. So we decided.
Everyone sits, discusses, speaks out, argues, and I play on the phone. And after the meeting - in an hour, a day or a week - I send solutions. Well, or come on foot and tell.
I also noticed that if at the first meeting I am not silent, but say - well, there, I participate in the discussion - then the result is worse. So I forced myself to be silent.
Once the approach worked, I just used it. Keep thinking I'm dumb. And the rest are smart, they just donβt want to think about solving problems after leaving the meeting. Those. the only difference is that they are lazy and not proactive.
Exactly for the same reason I do not like to talk with clients, especially on the phone. Because I will not help in such a conversation - I need to think. In a personal meeting, all right, you can shut up for at least a few minutes, saying "so, I'll think about it right now." In a telephone or Skype conversation, such a pause will look strange.
Well, that's how it's been for the past few years. And then I started reading books on how the brain works. And it turned out that I was doing everything right.
Rule number one: the brain can't do two complex things at the same time. For example, think and speak. More precisely, maybe, but with a sharp loss of quality. If you speak well, then you do not think. If you're thinking, you won't be able to speak properly.
Rule number two: in order to start thinking normally, the brain needs ~23 minutes to βdownloadβ information into itself. This time is spent on building the so-called. complex intellectual objects - roughly speaking, a certain multidimensional model of the problem appears in the head, with all the connections, features, etc.
Only after 23 minutes, in fact, βthinkingβ, high-quality work begins. Interestingly, it can run asynchronously. Those. you can, for example, sit and solve another problem, and the brain continues to look for a solution to the βpreviously loadedβ problem.
You know how it happens - you sit, for example, watch TV, or smoke, or have dinner, and - bam! - came the decision. Although, right at that moment I was thinking in general about what Pesto sauce is made of. This is the work of an asynchronous βthinkerβ. In terms of programmers - it worked out a background job that started a few days ago, or a very belated promise returned.
Rule number three: having solved the problem, the brain remembers the solution in RAM, and can issue it quickly. Accordingly, the more tasks you solve, the more quick answers you know.
Well, then it's simple. For any question or problem, the brain first gives a quick solution, from the pool already known to it. But this solution can be clumsy. It just seems to be suitable, but may not be appropriate for the task.
Unfortunately, the brain does not like to think. Therefore, it tends to respond with automatisms in order to avoid thinking.
Any quick answer is automatism, a template based on accumulated experience. Trust this answer or not - you decide. Roughly speaking, know: if a person answered quickly, then he did not think about your question.
Again, if you yourself demand a quick answer, then you are simply dooming yourself to receive a tax-free solution. It's like you're saying, hey dude, give me some bullshit, I'm fine, and I'll fuck off.
If you want a quality answer, then do not demand it right away. Give me all the information you need, and fuck off.
But automatisms are not evil. The more of them, the better, they save time when solving problems. The more automatisms and ready-made answers, the more tasks you solve quickly.
You just need to understand and use both streams - both fast and slow. And not to be confused, choosing the right one for a specific task - to issue an automatic machine or to think.
As Maxim Dorofeev wrote in his book, in any incomprehensible situation - think. An incomprehensible situation is when the brain did not give out any automatism in response.
Source: habr.com