Theory, Intuition, and the Praxis of Mastery
From Zanecorpwiki
In game theory, one describes a set of choices (discrete or continuous) which lead to a set of outcomes (discrete or continuous) combined with a set of actors and rules for when and how those actors get to make decisions. This defines a model. The idea is that by analyzing the model, one can predict what actors will do, and thus, if the model is correct, one can optimize one's own position in the end-game.
For a certain kind of mind, this analytic approach to decision making is attractive, even seductive. Other's see game theory--and it's close cousin systems theory--as over analytical bullshit. The new hotness is intuition: perception of truth... independent of any reasoning process.refhttp://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=intuition retrieved February 18th, 2009; based on Random House Unabridged Dictionary, 2006./ref. From business to economics to politics, reasoning is out and intuition is in.
Contents |
Intuition
Intuition in the most positive sense is a trained ability learned through experience. We've known--at least intuitively--that this is how the brain works in the physical realm for quite awhile. It's quite obvious that a (successful) football player is not using the thinking, reasoning brain as he pivots to get open, catches the ball, and then twists to break tackle. Most American adults drive with literally no thought as to what they're doing or they're doing it--and it turns out that's exactly what we want. If we thought about these things, we'd be hopelessly slow and clumsy about it.refSee Malcom Gladwell's Blink, Gary Klein's Sources of Power./ref
What's new (at least in terms of the vogue) is applying this intuitive thought to areas that used to be the realm of the rational, such as business decisions. Should I buy this stock? Not so long ago, the answer might be to analyze P/E ratios, look at the debt to equity, and maybe take note of significant events. Now-a-days, the answer is much more likely to be Go with your gut!
To the rationalist, this sounds foolhardy, and it would be except that what I'll call the deliberate intuitive crowd assumes quite a bit of context. The fuller answer would be practice buying and selling stocks for years, and then go with your gut. It's a praxicalref group=notesPraxical thinking is marked by the dissolution of the theory/practice dichotomy and by an emphasis on the connection between agency and social change.[1] To my mind, this is a rather fundamental, naturalistic notion. Much of the modern formulation and perhaps overly reductive thought around the idea of praxis is grounded in the works of Martin Heidegger and the phenomenological movement. For myself, the utility of praxis and phenomenology are largely pragmatic. For the philosopher, it's an existential question of ontology--which from certain perspectives is the same thing./ref view of the world.refFor an interesting dissection of technology cultures and the modern age as they relate to praxis and phenomology, see Richard Coyne's Technoromanticism./ref Malcom Gladwell even goes so far as to put a hard number of mastery: 10,000 hours--or about 10 years of directed practice.refDecember 19th edition of Charlie Rose: A Conversation with Malcolm Gladwell, though I'm sure it's also in one of his books too, probably Blink./ref
To be honest, I quiet like this. It's how our minds are meant to work, and when applied deliberately, it's very effective. The absolute critical key, however, is that intuition is deliberately honed. Once achieved, however, mastery means the extinguishing of conscious, rational thought.
Theory in General
Jumping cold into day trading and following one's gut is going to be no less disastrous than trying to bang away on a piano with no training or practice. What the rationalists find distasteful in all this It's your gut! stuff is when it becomes an excuse for noisily banging away while exclaiming, I'm going with my instinct! I personally cringe at the thought of yet another wave of dilettantes wielding intuition as yet-another-excuse to do sloppy work.
I'm a huge fan of the idea of mastery, which--no matter our innate abilities--is always achieved. Mozart practiced, he just had a lot of natural talent and was immersed in his craft from a very early age. Theory, at it's best, is nothing more than guided practice. It says, Here's a way to think of something which gets you thinking about it so that you can begin to master the thing.
For the
It's true that when we've achieved mastery, the problem often becomes over thinking, but to achieve mastery we must think, and we must do so in a deliberate way. The interesting thing is that it doesn't really matter whether we're right or not, and I suspect the form of the theory is not all that important. Why? Because the point is to practice deliberately so that the practice can lead to mastery.ref group=notesIt is certainly true that how we practice makes a difference as well, but the most important thing is to practice deliberately. We also need to be careful about what practice is best because that's going to be very different for different people./ref
In short, theory is not understanding, but it leads to understanding.
Intuitive thinking is much in vogue now-a-days. Whereas the dominant metaphor for the brain used to be computer, it's now pattern recognizer.
Notes
references group=notes /
References/Bibliography
references /
Unused References
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/DyeHard/story?id=6905370page=1
