Live data from Hacker News

Second-Order Thinking: What Smart People Use to Outperform (2016)

fs.blog

101–110 of 143 posts

Re: Second-Order Thinking: What Smart People Use to Outperform (2016)

#101
post #21

I think this article is saying: - 1st order thinkers primarily see causes and *direct* effects. - 2nd order thinkers frequently see causes and their *indirect* effects. I guess that seems like a reasonable idea. For what it's worth, the truly exceptional people I've met in life had a different quality. * When most people are presented with a difficult/challenging problem, they soon give up. * The most exceptional peo…

>there was only one guy who would float suggestion-after-suggestion-after-suggestion, long after everyone else had run out of ideas. I don't think he was any "smarter" than anyone else in the room, but he just could not shut himself off. He was relentless. He went on to make some important contributions to the field

Whilst I admire determination, enthusiasm and persistence; if none of the ideas had come to fruition or contributed anything meaningful, it could have been misconstrued as gish gallop. It probably requires second-order thinking just to manage such a scenario, which is not uncommon.

Re: Second-Order Thinking: What Smart People Use to Outperform (2016)

#102

1st order thinking dominates our politics and economics. And worse, there's no incentive for 2nd order thinking from our politicians, since the electorate doesn't go beyond 1st order. Further, pre-existing assumptions are usually backed by 1st order thinking, but not 2nd. Not a bad little book promoting 2nd order thinking in economics: https://fee.org/resources/economics-in-one-lesson/

> 1st order thinking dominates our politics and economics.

At least in U.S. politics, we have a surplus of second order thinking. We can't get mundane immediate compromises made because people are worried about identities, factions, and trust issues, which are all second order concerns.

For instance, it's not controversial to think that H1B visas are a mess, but legislation on specific immigration reform tends to get stymied by the desire for comprehensive immigration reform. Why not just fix one immigration problem? Because immigration proponents and restrictionists do not trust each other that the piecemeal reforms they want will be passed the next time around.

The same pattern comes up in plenty of other controversial issues such as abortion, tax reform, and lately judicial appointments.

Re: Second-Order Thinking: What Smart People Use to Outperform (2016)

#103
post #85

I am not against "higher-order thinking" but in my experience it often leads to wishful thinking and self-deception. Especially political arguments are prone to disagreements on higher order effects (as opposed to effects that are directly observable and measurable). For example, take basic income. Opponents of basic income argue that it will lead to inflation (second-order effect) and it will have no effect. Propone…

Yes, there is this common reverse problem: If we allow X to speak, his ideas will spread and Y will be harmed. So banning X is best. But why not: Banning X will cause a back reaction in X supporters and spread X's message leading Y to be harmed. Or any other of a number of possibilities. There is a fallacy of "hypothetical higher order danger justifies first order violence (/action)" -- where the higher order thinkin…

Often that fallacy is argued on the basis of artificially reduced complexity.

"Some first order actions can be justified by higher order danger" is often transliterated as "this first order action is justified by higher order danger" precisely because it drops all the subtlety and pretense for higher-order reasoning that the original speaker intended as an unspoken follow-up.

People often seem to allow others only the luxury of starting a thought, but never finishing it.

Re: Second-Order Thinking: What Smart People Use to Outperform (2016)

#104
post #9

The best way to exercise second order thinking is to play turn based games like chess or even magic the gathering. You can’t be good at those games without considering actions several turns ahead and aggregating a tremendous amount of knowledge about the game, and you get almost immediate feedback on how good your thought process actually was.

turn based games like chess or even magic the gathering

Risk -> Risk 2210.

Re: Second-Order Thinking: What Smart People Use to Outperform (2016)

#106
post #21

I think this article is saying: - 1st order thinkers primarily see causes and *direct* effects. - 2nd order thinkers frequently see causes and their *indirect* effects. I guess that seems like a reasonable idea. For what it's worth, the truly exceptional people I've met in life had a different quality. * When most people are presented with a difficult/challenging problem, they soon give up. * The most exceptional peo…

You have to split the title, which is marketing mumbo jumbo, from the article, which is fundamentally talking about decision making. Smart decision making and persistent work is the X and Y axis of achievement. Decision making (which broadly includes subjects like efficiency, policy, systems, problem solving, and design thinking) is the heart of efficiency gains for large organizations (not necessarily individuals, a…

Agreed with ignoramous' reply - interested in reading more literature here around what you're describing.

Re: Second-Order Thinking: What Smart People Use to Outperform (2016)

#107
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm an environmental studies major. It's been very helpful in trying to develop mental models for thinking about my health issues.

This is interesting: can you provide some examples?

I've had a class in Hydrology and also read "Salt Dreams" (about water in Southern California) and a book about the history of water development in Fresno County.

Modern people often seem to have mental models of the world where a river has a set place, similar to a road. This is not accurate.

Water percolates down into the soil. Rivers meander. The amount and type of plants impacts rain patterns.

Water is constantly moving and cycles through the air and moves through the ground, both largely invisible to the naked eye, but critical to the pieces we can readily see. Plus, its movement occurs in a larger context, such as the Moon causing ocean tides.

The human body's relationship to water is similar. It isn't just limited to how much you drink, how much you sweat and how much you pee.

Like the Earth's crust, your skin takes in water. aso, for example, you can get hydrated with a bath, especially a salt water bath. This is helpful to understand if you are so sick that you are having trouble taking anything by mouth.

My condition predisposes me to retain fluids. I've made progress on reducing the chronic bloat in part because I have mental models for how water moves through the environment.

Invasive species disrupt ecosystems. This is not unlike infection.

Trying to fix a thing like that is far more complicated than our current medical mental model of just giving out antibiotics for infection.

On some island, someone wanted to eradicate mosquitoes. They poisoned the mosquitoes, which all died. Small animals ate they poisoned mosquitoes and they died too. This went through several layers, almost like the Biblical plagues (deconstructed and analyzed by modern science on some TV show).

Those sorts of things influence my concept of the body's relationship to disease. I don't accept the mental model that "Well, just add antibiotics to the mix and voila! All better now!"

We know antibiotics kill gut flora. We know gut flora are critical to our digestion and even help provide certain nutrients. We know that killing gut flora not only screws up digestion, it also promotes the overgrowth of Invaders like E. Coli.

Yet we currently do not have a policy of making sure to remediate what antibiotics do to the body. We assume the gut will just repair itself over time without active intervention.

Some individuals know to at least eat yogurt, but doctors do not give out handouts with recommendations for "The Post Antibiotics Diet."

And then we kind of shrug if someone "mysteriously" develops serious and chronic gut issues. Broader society also seems to fail to understand the gut as the foundation of the immune system.

Re: Second-Order Thinking: What Smart People Use to Outperform (2016)

#108
OK, so to follow up with the author of the piece and to maybe throw in a little 2nd order thinking into this equation:

“Second-Order Thinking: What Smart People Use to Outperform” - the author makes a broad claim that all smart people use second order thinking to outperform those who aren’t smart.

Questions: What makes the author credible, and what data / research does he/she have in order to support the claim? He/she cites Howard Marks as an example, but is Howard Marks really enough to support the claim for such a broad and generalized statement? What about the fact that even people who try to think deeply tend to get it wrong often-times, which has been shown to be true over and over again? Example:

https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/23/magazine/dont-blink-the-h...

That’s not to say that I disagree with the premise – I think that in general, this piece puts forward a hypothesis that smart people are deep thinkers who think critically and deeply about the effects of their decisions, while those that aren’t so smart might not put such an effort in. There is some truth to the statement the author puts forward, but by no means is this the differentiating factor between smart people and the not-so-smart. I’m not an expert in this field either, but I’ve read a lot of stuff from Feynman, Einstein, and the geniuses of the field, and I find that some of the things which differentiate them from the rest are:

1. Deep curiosity. They were incredibly interested in finding out how things work / solving a problem. 2. Persistence: They worked hard to achieve what they wanted to achieve and didn’t give up. 3. They used their visual cortex / visual systems a lot. Tesla for example would have live simulated conversations with other people and build things inside of his head. Einstein is in the same boat - he would spend hours trying to visualize concepts. This makes total sense from my perspective. We have a heck of a lot more capacity to process information using our visual cortex than other areas in out brains. We can process something like 10 million bits per second vs. a much lower capacity in other brain areas. When you read silently for example, you're only processing around 45 bits per second.

Apologies for the long write up here – I guess I might be over-analyzing things a bit, but I just don’t really see the point of this article, nor do I see it pointing out the real differentiating factors between those that are ‘smart’ and those that aren’t, and I think the author is making a very broad statement and doesn’t have any data to support his/her claim. Howard Marks also by the way is not a class above other investors. He still uses a value-based approach in a time where the value based strategy doesn’t really guarantee maximum returns. It doesn’t mean that he isn’t bright – he definitely is. I just don’t think that this presents enough evidence or data to support the generally broad claim made in the article.

Re: Second-Order Thinking: What Smart People Use to Outperform (2016)

#109

The lack of second order thinking seems to be the essence of what ails modern medicine. "I have an infection!" "Time for antibiotics!" Don't bother to ask "And then what?" Some populations are given antibiotics so regularly that it isn't uncommon for them to develop antibiotic resistant infections and even lose their colon to E. Coli. We are given drugs with a multi page handout covering side effects, the doctors tak…

Or if someone is an overweight, depressed shut-in, the treatment will be antidepressants and gastric bypass - when what they really need is a therapist/PT/buddy who plays sports and drags them out of the house to play squash. The medical system is not currently equipped to handle solutions like that.

The inability to account for second-order effects seems to be a chronic failure of the large-scale systems we build. I wonder if it's because specialization means that nobody understands or is in charge of the big picture. A old-fashioned generalist "village doctor" would understand the context of your existence because they were also in your social circle, while a modern GP's role in your life is highly abstracted. Or take capitalism - if you're mono-focused on making Widgets, then you neither know nor care that Widgets are causing trouble somewhere else in the world, and you will fight viciously against anyone telling you to make fewer Widgets.

Re: Second-Order Thinking: What Smart People Use to Outperform (2016)

#110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to split the title, which is marketing mumbo jumbo, from the article, which is fundamentally talking about decision making. Smart decision making and persistent work is the X and Y axis of achievement. Decision making (which broadly includes subjects like efficiency, policy, systems, problem solving, and design thinking) is the heart of efficiency gains for large organizations (not necessarily individuals, a…

I humbly presume that you are familiar with topic at hand, and so, if you please, can you elaborate more on 'scratching the surface' part? I'm genuinely curious about other aspects of policy/systems-building, as it were. Pointers to blog posts or books should be enough, as well. Thanks.

+1, really would love to learn more
Post reply on HN