Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Sunday May 03 2020, @11:09AM   Printer-friendly
from the taking-the-time-to-understand-why dept.

Chesterton's Fence: A Lesson in Second Order Thinking:

A core component of making great decisions is understanding the rationale behind previous decisions. If we don't understand how we got "here," we run the risk of making things much worse.

When we seek to intervene in any system created by someone, it's not enough to view their decisions and choices simply as the consequences of first-order thinking because we can inadvertently create serious problems. Before changing anything, we should wonder whether they were using second-order thinking. Their reasons for making certain choices might be more complex than they seem at first. It's best to assume they knew things we don't or had experience we can't fathom, so we don't go for quick fixes and end up making things worse.

Second-order thinking is the practice of not just considering the consequences of our decisions but also the consequences of those consequences. Everyone can manage first-order thinking, which is just considering the immediate anticipated result of an action. It's simple and quick, usually requiring little effort. By comparison, second-order thinking is more complex and time-consuming. The fact that it is difficult and unusual is what makes the ability to do it such a powerful advantage.

Second-order thinking will get you extraordinary results, and so will learning to recognize when other people are using second-order thinking. To understand exactly why this is the case, let's consider Chesterton's Fence, described by G. K. Chesterton himself as follows:

There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, "I don't see the use of this; let us clear it away." To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: "If you don't see the use of it, I certainly won't let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it."

Chesterton's Fence is a heuristic inspired by a quote from the writer and polymath G. K. Chesterton's 1929 book, The Thing. It's best known as being one of John F. Kennedy's favored sayings, as well as a principle Wikipedia encourages its editors to follow. In the book, Chesterton describes the classic case of the reformer who notices something, such as a fence, and fails to see the reason for its existence. However, before they decide to remove it, they must figure out why it exists in the first place. If they do not do this, they are likely to do more harm than good with its removal. In its most concise version, Chesterton's Fence states the following:

Do not remove a fence until you know why it was put up in the first place.

Chesterton went on to explain why this principle holds true, writing that fences don't grow out of the ground, nor do people build them in their sleep or during a fit of madness. He explained that fences are built by people who carefully planned them out and "had some reason for thinking [the fence] would be a good thing for somebody." Until we establish that reason, we have no business taking an ax to it. The reason might not be a good or relevant one; we just need to be aware of what the reason is. Otherwise, we may end up with unintended consequences: second- and third-order effects we don't want, spreading like ripples on a pond and causing damage for years.

[...] Chesterton's Fence is not an admonishment of anyone who tries to make improvements; it is a call to be aware of second-order thinking before intervening. It reminds us that we don't always know better than those who made decisions before us, and we can't see all the nuances to a situation until we're intimate with it. Unless we know why someone made a decision, we can't safely change it or conclude that they were wrong.

The first step before modifying an aspect of a system is to understand it. Observe it in full. Note how it interconnects with other aspects, including ones that might not be linked to you personally. Learn how it works, and then propose your change.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Booga1 on Sunday May 03 2020, @06:11PM (3 children)

    by Booga1 (6333) on Sunday May 03 2020, @06:11PM (#989856)

    Not sure why someone modded you troll. I wish people would use "disagree" instead unless there's something substantial wrong with a post.

    Personally, I feel that one must try to consider the whole picture to come to a decision, which is what the article was all about. What I find interesting is that you seem to agree with that. yet also seem to think that it's easier than a game of chess. From my perspective, I feel the problems with the cats are considerably more difficult than chess because of the vast array of choices, trade offs, costs, and other factors that aren't even controllable before or after you start exercising those choices. At least in chess your pieces don't move unless you move them and your opponent isn't allowed to move until you've had your turn(even if you play by the clock).

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Disagree=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday May 04 2020, @01:06AM

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday May 04 2020, @01:06AM (#990000) Journal

    because of the vast array of choices, trade offs, costs, and other factors that aren't even controllable before or after you start exercising those choices.

    Which let us note, is vast only in comparison to the information content of a chess board. The model of predator-prey dynamics isn't that complicated even with multiple species. With chess every move you try to look ahead increases the cost crudely by an exponential amount and you have an adversary trying to make you fail.

  • (Score: 3, Informative) by The Vocal Minority on Monday May 04 2020, @06:17AM (1 child)

    by The Vocal Minority (2765) on Monday May 04 2020, @06:17AM (#990083) Journal

    Not sure why someone modded you troll.

    The idiot mods seem to have been rather busy today. As obviously wrong as the op was, it certainly wasn't a troll post.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 04 2020, @08:44PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 04 2020, @08:44PM (#990419)

      I was not a modder, but khallow repeats the same lies and ignores cited reality all the time. At a certain point it becomes clear he doesn't give two shits about anything except keeping the rich in power. He is a corporate shill, whether he is paid to do so or just personally motivated.